3 ms·

While I sympathize with feeling disappointed in having to pay for apps for use with such an expensive headset, I believe that its price would have severely rest

While I sympathize with feeling disappointed in having to pay for apps for use with such an expensive headset, I believe that its price would have severely restricted the number of free apps available for it in the first place. Developers are going to want to recuperate their investment, and that'd remain true even if it were possible to install whatever one pleased on it. It's technically possible to develop on the simulator alone, but given that the simulator is confined to a 2D window on a computer screen I can't imagine that apps developed in this manner would be able to stand up to competition developed without such limitations.

samstave 3y ago
Yeah, I understand both sides of the Coin. I appreciate your response, and it deepens my concern is that there will be an entirely new DLC-ish content model whereby you have one price for an ios app - and then a different price for the "Apple Headset AR *EXPERIENCE*" version of all the apps - and certain features will be lock-outs to non AR-paying-premium customers... Its just FN financially-dystopian --- @scarface_74 ; "*May you please ELI5 expand on your comment - as I am OOTL and would like to understand what you mean, precisely. (because I want to learn, kthxbai)*" /as-i-am-posting-too-fast....
dndn1 3y ago
Surprisingly the GP didn't include price of the device as a reason, but the 30% Apple cut/likely uplift in price that developers need to charge to recuperate development costs - which are far more significant than developer hardware costs. A non-Apple device without the moat would be better. GP also didn't ask for free apps.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Yes that must be why there is a thriving profitable market for apps on Android that don’t go through the Play Store. Almost every non game app on the iPhone/iPad of note require a subscription and most outside of the App Store.

samstave 3y ago

Yeah, I understand both sides of the Coin. I appreciate your response, and it deepens my concern is that there will be an entirely new DLC-ish content model whereby you have one price for an ios app - and then a different price for the "Apple Headset AR *EXPERIENCE*" version of all the apps - and certain features will be lock-outs to non AR-paying-premium customers... Its just FN financially-dystopian --- @scarface_74 ; "*May you please ELI5 expand on your comment - as I am OOTL and would like to understand what you mean, precisely. (because I want to learn, kthxbai)*" /as-i-am-posting-too-fast....

dndn1 3y ago

Surprisingly the GP didn't include price of the device as a reason, but the 30% Apple cut/likely uplift in price that developers need to charge to recuperate development costs - which are far more significant than developer hardware costs. A non-Apple device without the moat would be better. GP also didn't ask for free apps.

scarface_74 3y ago
Yes that must be why there is a thriving profitable market for apps on Android that don’t go through the Play Store. Almost every non game app on the iPhone/iPad of note require a subscription and most outside of the App Store.