4 ms·

This author seems confused about something that he, himself explains. The reason that Apple doesn't care about developers is that they have created such a walle

This author seems confused about something that he, himself explains. The reason that Apple doesn't care about developers is that they have created such a walled garden cult w/ users that developers are forced to produce products for their platform or they lose half their market -- or more. At my day job in mobile game development (for a small studio inside a large company), we have to fight Apple constantly -- not only on tech issues but on policies and approvals, too. But offering a mobile game without a way to run it on iOS would be unthinkable, so we comply. In many ways, Microsoft's original strategy for the PC was the exact opposite. It catered to developers and provided copious documentation, examples, and tooling for devs. The companies behind those devs were, themselves, motivated to make software for MS and, in turn, to promote and sell it. The tidal wave of individual developers making Windows software (think back to the shelves at computer stores) is what created the desktop OS that still rules the roost.

ahmedfromtunis 3y ago
I think this is because Apple is a hardware company, that uses software to attract consumers. While Microsoft is a software company, that uses hardware to attract consumers.
- coffeebeqn 3y ago
  Apple is a vertically integrated company. They offer you (in theory) everything you need for computing
  - dtagames 3y ago
    Except cloud services for business, which are increasingly vital. And without AI, also a big deal now.
  - steve1977 3y ago
    If you are a consumer or for example a creative pro. If you are a big enterprise, not so much.
- clarkmoreno 3y ago
  Re-read that. Microsoft uses hardware to attract customers?
  - ysavir 3y ago
    I don't know the GP's intention, but I'm guessing it's that MS's actual products are all software (Windows, Office, etc) and the allure is that they can be sold on/come packaged with relatively cheap and available computing. Compare to Apple, where they primarily sell hardware, and use software (whether their own or 3rd party) to make that hardware desirable, especially at high price points.
  - yoav 3y ago
    Everyone universally loved the zoon and the windows phone.
    - generalpf 3y ago
      You dropped this: /s
  - rplst8 3y ago
    Yeah I don't agree with that assertion either. Microsoft will produce hardware to show the art of the possible with their software. It largely comes out of a situation where the PC/device manufacturers were doing a sh* job of it.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      Hardware manufacturers that aren't Microsoft have little reason to take speculative risks that might prove that there's a market for a new configuration of commodity hardware to sell Microsoft’s latest non-commodity software; it's all potential downside with very little potential upside.
- medstrom 3y ago
  That's an old saying. It's not so clear-cut now.
- oneplane 3y ago
  A better way to describe their differences is that Apple started as an end-user company (and became a services company while at it) where hardware was a means to an end. The products they sell are based around an experience rather than just a bag of components/parts, as those are just the means to an end. It's why their design envelope is the way it is, and why the kept vertically integrating more and more over the decades. In a way, that's where the IWM and SWIM came in so long ago, not because they had to, but because it delivered a better solution to that specific experience than anyone else. (granted, back then using a computer had a very different meaning than it does today but the reasoning still applies) Microsoft on the other hand is a typical SKU-mover, their business relies on selling 'parts' of someone else's workflow, but later on realised the only way to have a consistent experience is to also start making the hardware. Later on, they tacked on services, but because they kept the "spray the market with SKUs" business strategy it mostly just became 'more', rather than better integrated products for people. It's still "move as much stuff", even if it's not well-integrated. Heck, sometimes it is less-integrated because it enables moving more stuff. At the end of the day, most large tech multinationals end up manufacturing a lot of stuff over the various layers (hardware, software, firmware, entire devices, individual components etc), but that no longer describes what the company actually "is". (just like it doesn't really describe much to group them together as "commercial money makers", it isn't very specific or useful)
  - jsjohnst 3y ago
    > In a way, that's where the IWM and SWIM came in so long ago I’m going to assume based on minimal context you are meaning the 40 year old floppy controllers? Since these acronyms are fairly obtuse / not well known… IWM - integrated woz machine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Woz_Machine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Woz_Machine SWIM - replacement for IWM which supported the SuperDrive
  - mlhpdx 3y ago
    > Microsoft on the other hand is a typical SKU-mover As far as I can tell there is nothing typical about Microsoft. The sophisticated, deeply-root long game they’ve executed extremely well puts them in a very different place. As a contrast to Apple, the differences are striking - not because of the difference between “bing” and “bling”.
ip26 3y ago
Your description is basically aggregation theory in practice.
WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> This author seems confused about something that he, himself explains... they have created such a walled garden cult w/ users that developers are forced to produce ... In the presence of a cultish relationship, I think a persistent sense of puzzlement is reasonable.
dpkirchner 3y ago
What sort of mobile gaming related things have you seen Apple push back on?
ysavir 3y ago
This feels like a different situation than the article author. My impression is that they were concentrating on services where mobile is just one point of access, but make sense in any scenario. Stuff like social networks, dating apps, reddit, stackoverflow, etc. Services that don't depend on the mobile experience whatsoever, unlike, say, Uber, that requires location tracking, or mobile games, which are often designed to be played on the go. If a business doesn't depend on the mobile experience, then they are still able to offer their services without offering a native app. People on mobile can still access the service through a mobile browser--perhaps not the ideal experience on mobile, but it is still an option. And I think that is the author's point: If there isn't a necessity or dependency on the mobile platform, don't build for it.
LibrePenguin 3y ago
[flagged]
LibrePenguin 3y ago
[flagged]
- skydhash 3y ago
  I take more abuse from developers than Apple in the majority of cases. But I agree that some of their decisions is overreaching. But most developers have bad intentions especially with telemetry, privacy invading measures and dark patterns. Apple offers a safe place for those with simpler computing needs. Other ecosystems are worse for them.
mvdtnz 3y ago
I have been writing software professionally for 15 years and I have never written a single line of code for an Apple device, and I never would. Contributing to the Apple ecosystem is a choice, no one is forced to do it. Any developer who contributes to the Apple ecosystem is taking an active part in the situation.
- Rohansi 3y ago
  Unfortunately for mobile games iOS tends to be where the majority of the money is.
  - criddell 3y ago
    I don’t think it’s just games. iOS users in general are more willing to pay for software than Android users and Android users are more willing to pay than web users.
    - raydev 3y ago
      This was my experience doing consulting/contracting for most of the 2010s. Clients would want both iOS and Android, and we’d release with full feature parity. In every instance the iOS apps brought in 2x-5x the revenue, even when our Android apps had more active users.
      - criddell 3y ago
        I’ve always wondered why that is. I’ve had both Android and iOS phones and I’ve spent far, far more on iOS apps. I don’t think I’ve ever paid for a web app. There’s something about the platforms themselves then encourage or discourage spending.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    Where are all the good iOS games? I don’t know if I’d be able to name more than a handful[0]. How many people are making -- and similarly monetizing: upfront cost sans micro-transactions -- things like Mindustry? 0: Mindustry https://apps.apple.com/us/app/mindustry/id1385258906 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/mindustry/id1385258906 and two more which are available with an Apple Arcade subscription, maybe also for individual purchase: Dandara https://apps.apple.com/us/app/dandara-trials-of-fear/id1576164868 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/dandara-trials-of-fear/id15761... and Fantasian https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fantasian/id1517339045 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fantasian/id1517339045.
asimpletune 3y ago
Apple doesn't make developers do anything. Developers write apps for their platform because it is the one where consumers want to spend their money. They do this by being mean to developers, or, rather, not allowing developers to be mean to customers. It's the same way that apple leans hard on their suppliers but at the end of the day it has led to creating a healthy and wealthy ecosystem that those developers and suppliers still seem to contribute apps to.
- 5350-uiop-1130 3y ago
  > not allowing developers to be mean to customers. apple has a history of denying apps for monopolistic reasons & collusion price fixing : https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Restriction_of_apps_that_compete_with_OS_features https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Restriction... > t's the same way that apple leans hard on their suppliers but at the end of the day it has led to creating a healthy and wealthy ecosystem yes, like using child labour and working environments that require suicide nets: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Student_and_child_labor_abuses https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Student_and...
  - viktorcode 3y ago
    Not protecting Foxconn, but I suggest you to compare their work conditions with other Chinese companies, where the competing mobile devices are manufactured. Problem is China and its borderline slavery labor conditions. Thankfully, Apple started moving out to India and Vietnam.

ahmedfromtunis 3y ago

I think this is because Apple is a hardware company, that uses software to attract consumers. While Microsoft is a software company, that uses hardware to attract consumers.

coffeebeqn 3y ago
Apple is a vertically integrated company. They offer you (in theory) everything you need for computing
- dtagames 3y ago
  Except cloud services for business, which are increasingly vital. And without AI, also a big deal now.
- steve1977 3y ago
  If you are a consumer or for example a creative pro. If you are a big enterprise, not so much.
clarkmoreno 3y ago
Re-read that. Microsoft uses hardware to attract customers?
- ysavir 3y ago
  I don't know the GP's intention, but I'm guessing it's that MS's actual products are all software (Windows, Office, etc) and the allure is that they can be sold on/come packaged with relatively cheap and available computing. Compare to Apple, where they primarily sell hardware, and use software (whether their own or 3rd party) to make that hardware desirable, especially at high price points.
- yoav 3y ago
  Everyone universally loved the zoon and the windows phone.
  - generalpf 3y ago
    You dropped this: /s
- rplst8 3y ago
  Yeah I don't agree with that assertion either. Microsoft will produce hardware to show the art of the possible with their software. It largely comes out of a situation where the PC/device manufacturers were doing a sh* job of it.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    Hardware manufacturers that aren't Microsoft have little reason to take speculative risks that might prove that there's a market for a new configuration of commodity hardware to sell Microsoft’s latest non-commodity software; it's all potential downside with very little potential upside.
medstrom 3y ago
That's an old saying. It's not so clear-cut now.
oneplane 3y ago
A better way to describe their differences is that Apple started as an end-user company (and became a services company while at it) where hardware was a means to an end. The products they sell are based around an experience rather than just a bag of components/parts, as those are just the means to an end. It's why their design envelope is the way it is, and why the kept vertically integrating more and more over the decades. In a way, that's where the IWM and SWIM came in so long ago, not because they had to, but because it delivered a better solution to that specific experience than anyone else. (granted, back then using a computer had a very different meaning than it does today but the reasoning still applies) Microsoft on the other hand is a typical SKU-mover, their business relies on selling 'parts' of someone else's workflow, but later on realised the only way to have a consistent experience is to also start making the hardware. Later on, they tacked on services, but because they kept the "spray the market with SKUs" business strategy it mostly just became 'more', rather than better integrated products for people. It's still "move as much stuff", even if it's not well-integrated. Heck, sometimes it is less-integrated because it enables moving more stuff. At the end of the day, most large tech multinationals end up manufacturing a lot of stuff over the various layers (hardware, software, firmware, entire devices, individual components etc), but that no longer describes what the company actually "is". (just like it doesn't really describe much to group them together as "commercial money makers", it isn't very specific or useful)
- jsjohnst 3y ago
  > In a way, that's where the IWM and SWIM came in so long ago I’m going to assume based on minimal context you are meaning the 40 year old floppy controllers? Since these acronyms are fairly obtuse / not well known… IWM - integrated woz machine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Woz_Machine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Woz_Machine SWIM - replacement for IWM which supported the SuperDrive
- mlhpdx 3y ago
  > Microsoft on the other hand is a typical SKU-mover As far as I can tell there is nothing typical about Microsoft. The sophisticated, deeply-root long game they’ve executed extremely well puts them in a very different place. As a contrast to Apple, the differences are striking - not because of the difference between “bing” and “bling”.

ip26 3y ago

Your description is basically aggregation theory in practice.

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago

> This author seems confused about something that he, himself explains... they have created such a walled garden cult w/ users that developers are forced to produce ... In the presence of a cultish relationship, I think a persistent sense of puzzlement is reasonable.

dpkirchner 3y ago

What sort of mobile gaming related things have you seen Apple push back on?

ysavir 3y ago

This feels like a different situation than the article author. My impression is that they were concentrating on services where mobile is just one point of access, but make sense in any scenario. Stuff like social networks, dating apps, reddit, stackoverflow, etc. Services that don't depend on the mobile experience whatsoever, unlike, say, Uber, that requires location tracking, or mobile games, which are often designed to be played on the go. If a business doesn't depend on the mobile experience, then they are still able to offer their services without offering a native app. People on mobile can still access the service through a mobile browser--perhaps not the ideal experience on mobile, but it is still an option. And I think that is the author's point: If there isn't a necessity or dependency on the mobile platform, don't build for it.

LibrePenguin 3y ago

[flagged]

LibrePenguin 3y ago

[flagged]

skydhash 3y ago
I take more abuse from developers than Apple in the majority of cases. But I agree that some of their decisions is overreaching. But most developers have bad intentions especially with telemetry, privacy invading measures and dark patterns. Apple offers a safe place for those with simpler computing needs. Other ecosystems are worse for them.

mvdtnz 3y ago

I have been writing software professionally for 15 years and I have never written a single line of code for an Apple device, and I never would. Contributing to the Apple ecosystem is a choice, no one is forced to do it. Any developer who contributes to the Apple ecosystem is taking an active part in the situation.

Rohansi 3y ago
Unfortunately for mobile games iOS tends to be where the majority of the money is.
- criddell 3y ago
  I don’t think it’s just games. iOS users in general are more willing to pay for software than Android users and Android users are more willing to pay than web users.
  - raydev 3y ago
    This was my experience doing consulting/contracting for most of the 2010s. Clients would want both iOS and Android, and we’d release with full feature parity. In every instance the iOS apps brought in 2x-5x the revenue, even when our Android apps had more active users.
    - criddell 3y ago
      I’ve always wondered why that is. I’ve had both Android and iOS phones and I’ve spent far, far more on iOS apps. I don’t think I’ve ever paid for a web app. There’s something about the platforms themselves then encourage or discourage spending.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  Where are all the good iOS games? I don’t know if I’d be able to name more than a handful[0]. How many people are making -- and similarly monetizing: upfront cost sans micro-transactions -- things like Mindustry? 0: Mindustry https://apps.apple.com/us/app/mindustry/id1385258906 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/mindustry/id1385258906 and two more which are available with an Apple Arcade subscription, maybe also for individual purchase: Dandara https://apps.apple.com/us/app/dandara-trials-of-fear/id1576164868 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/dandara-trials-of-fear/id15761... and Fantasian https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fantasian/id1517339045 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fantasian/id1517339045.

asimpletune 3y ago

Apple doesn't make developers do anything. Developers write apps for their platform because it is the one where consumers want to spend their money. They do this by being mean to developers, or, rather, not allowing developers to be mean to customers. It's the same way that apple leans hard on their suppliers but at the end of the day it has led to creating a healthy and wealthy ecosystem that those developers and suppliers still seem to contribute apps to.

5350-uiop-1130 3y ago
> not allowing developers to be mean to customers. apple has a history of denying apps for monopolistic reasons & collusion price fixing : https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Restriction_of_apps_that_compete_with_OS_features https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Restriction... > t's the same way that apple leans hard on their suppliers but at the end of the day it has led to creating a healthy and wealthy ecosystem yes, like using child labour and working environments that require suicide nets: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Student_and_child_labor_abuses https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple#Student_and...
- viktorcode 3y ago
  Not protecting Foxconn, but I suggest you to compare their work conditions with other Chinese companies, where the competing mobile devices are manufactured. Problem is China and its borderline slavery labor conditions. Thankfully, Apple started moving out to India and Vietnam.