3 ms·

I was 13 when I started developing for my android phone. I did not have $100 to spend, or if I did, I was not willing to spend it on this. Developing for my and

I was 13 when I started developing for my android phone. I did not have $100 to spend, or if I did, I was not willing to spend it on this. Developing for my android phone was 100% free with no restrictions. Putting my app on the play store was a one-time fee of $20. So, android development, for one. Also Windows development. And Linux development. Web development, too. Pretty much any platform other than Apple. And I suppose we should just ignore those who live in poorer countries, right?

mingus88 2y ago
Not willing to pay the $100 is a choice you can make, absolutely But to frame this, again, as some steep expense that prices out young talent is very weird. Developing for android or Linux is not free. You need to have a lot of resources already to get started here, too. In fact there is an argument here that if you want to test on any variety of supported android or Linux hardware you can easily spend a ton of money here too, far more than the limited number of apple configurations I started coding on the Commodore 64 and that was a massive expense for my family. I suspect at 13 years old you had a lot of resources at your disposal also. Again, it’s fine to say that a developer account is not worth $100 for you personally. But let be real about it. Nothing is free.
- beeboobaa3 2y ago
  You might be the weird & privileged one if you think that $100/year is not a lot of money for some people, certainly those who are not chasing profit (i.e. 13 year olds who later grow up to be valuable developers). > Developing for android or Linux is not free. You need to have a lot of resources already to get started here, too It absolutely is, if you already have the device, which can be a hand-me-down from a parent or sibling like it was in my case. > But let be real about it. Nothing is free It's an objective fact that other platforms do not have this barrier in place. It is a fact that Apple is the special one here, demanding a repeated payment that is significantly higher than the one-off payment of their direct competitor ($100/year vs $20 one time, and that $20 is only necessary if you want to use their store). You can stick your head in the sand all you want, but that doesn't change the facts. By the way, that app of mine? Wound up making me $5k which was huge for a young child, and Google made $800. Easy money for them. Apple, of course, got nothing because of their barriers. And I never would've gotten the chance at all if Google had had similar policies in place.

mingus88 2y ago

Not willing to pay the $100 is a choice you can make, absolutely But to frame this, again, as some steep expense that prices out young talent is very weird. Developing for android or Linux is not free. You need to have a lot of resources already to get started here, too. In fact there is an argument here that if you want to test on any variety of supported android or Linux hardware you can easily spend a ton of money here too, far more than the limited number of apple configurations I started coding on the Commodore 64 and that was a massive expense for my family. I suspect at 13 years old you had a lot of resources at your disposal also. Again, it’s fine to say that a developer account is not worth $100 for you personally. But let be real about it. Nothing is free.

beeboobaa3 2y ago
You might be the weird & privileged one if you think that $100/year is not a lot of money for some people, certainly those who are not chasing profit (i.e. 13 year olds who later grow up to be valuable developers). > Developing for android or Linux is not free. You need to have a lot of resources already to get started here, too It absolutely is, if you already have the device, which can be a hand-me-down from a parent or sibling like it was in my case. > But let be real about it. Nothing is free It's an objective fact that other platforms do not have this barrier in place. It is a fact that Apple is the special one here, demanding a repeated payment that is significantly higher than the one-off payment of their direct competitor ($100/year vs $20 one time, and that $20 is only necessary if you want to use their store). You can stick your head in the sand all you want, but that doesn't change the facts. By the way, that app of mine? Wound up making me $5k which was huge for a young child, and Google made $800. Easy money for them. Apple, of course, got nothing because of their barriers. And I never would've gotten the chance at all if Google had had similar policies in place.