3 ms·

Superior Functionality? That is subjective POV.

spartanatreyu 3y ago
Hardly. Apple made their app store incredibly restrictive and took a massive cut of any profits that anyone was making. Not just app sales, any profits. (This happened to hey.com, they wanted a cut of the subscription that users were getting outside of their app). Sometimes apple would just outright steal developer's apps by making their own version, then blocking the original developers by claiming that they were making rip offs of Apple's apps (you'll find a few stories of that happening here on HN). Then to really rub salt in the wound, they started telling developers in essence: "If you don't like the way we run our app store then you can always make a web app", despite the fact that they had purposefully hampered web functionality on their devices to force developers to use the app store. It's really strange how their browser only started getting better all of a sudden when they were getting sued for their anticompetitive behaviour and the EU said they were drafting up legislation to break their monopoly. It is directly due to the efforts of the EU that Apple has been dragged kicking and screaming to add functionality to their own ecosystem that is objectively demonstrably superior to what was available before.
- philistine 3y ago
  sideloading will not mean sidestepping the 30% cut for developers. Mark my words. If you need an example, look at what happened with the Netherlands and dating apps.
  - spartanatreyu 3y ago
    How so? As soon as you have sideloading, you have developers who can't get kicked off the app store for not giving a 30% cut because they're not on the app store.
    - lttlrck 3y ago
      Let's see what restrictions there are on side-loaded apps first. No Apple is going to cave in completely during the first round.
      - stale2002 3y ago
        If they don't cave now then they will be forced to follow the law eventually, but this time they will get 10s of billions of dollars of additional fines. The amount of fines that Apple wants to choose to pay is up to them. Either they cave, or they pay as large of a fine as for however long they keep fighting.
- snehk 3y ago
  Am I the only one who loves the way Apple handles subscriptions and the fact that they manage them and make the rules? I don't know a single other store or offering where getting rid of a subscription is easy. Not one. Netflix, Amazon, every newspaper, it's all complete crap. With Apple you have all subscriptions in one place and there's exactly one way to cancel the subscription and it takes five seconds. It's amazing for the customer. It's easily one of my favorite iOS feature.
  - dd36 3y ago
    Banks are starting to do that but it doesn’t cost 30%.

Hardly. Apple made their app store incredibly restrictive and took a massive cut of any profits that anyone was making. Not just app sales, any profits. (This happened to hey.com, they wanted a cut of the subscription that users were getting outside of their app). Sometimes apple would just outright steal developer's apps by making their own version, then blocking the original developers by claiming that they were making rip offs of Apple's apps (you'll find a few stories of that happening here on HN). Then to really rub salt in the wound, they started telling developers in essence: "If you don't like the way we run our app store then you can always make a web app", despite the fact that they had purposefully hampered web functionality on their devices to force developers to use the app store. It's really strange how their browser only started getting better all of a sudden when they were getting sued for their anticompetitive behaviour and the EU said they were drafting up legislation to break their monopoly. It is directly due to the efforts of the EU that Apple has been dragged kicking and screaming to add functionality to their own ecosystem that is objectively demonstrably superior to what was available before.

philistine 3y ago
sideloading will not mean sidestepping the 30% cut for developers. Mark my words. If you need an example, look at what happened with the Netherlands and dating apps.
- spartanatreyu 3y ago
  How so? As soon as you have sideloading, you have developers who can't get kicked off the app store for not giving a 30% cut because they're not on the app store.
  - lttlrck 3y ago
    Let's see what restrictions there are on side-loaded apps first. No Apple is going to cave in completely during the first round.
    - stale2002 3y ago
      If they don't cave now then they will be forced to follow the law eventually, but this time they will get 10s of billions of dollars of additional fines. The amount of fines that Apple wants to choose to pay is up to them. Either they cave, or they pay as large of a fine as for however long they keep fighting.
snehk 3y ago
Am I the only one who loves the way Apple handles subscriptions and the fact that they manage them and make the rules? I don't know a single other store or offering where getting rid of a subscription is easy. Not one. Netflix, Amazon, every newspaper, it's all complete crap. With Apple you have all subscriptions in one place and there's exactly one way to cancel the subscription and it takes five seconds. It's amazing for the customer. It's easily one of my favorite iOS feature.
- dd36 3y ago
  Banks are starting to do that but it doesn’t cost 30%.