4 ms·

Please entertain my crazy analogous thought processes for a minute... Imagine you were eating out at KFC one night, and using taste alone, you managed to work

Please entertain my crazy analogous thought processes for a minute... Imagine you were eating out at KFC one night, and using taste alone, you managed to work out their secret recipe. You then decided you wanted to get into the fried chicken business, but you didn't want the overhead of renting commercial space, or buying the kitchen/service equipment you need to run your own business. So you choose to walk into your local KFC, use their kitchen to fry your chickens, wrap them up in all the KFC packaging and branding, and begin to sell them at their counter. This goes unnoticed for a few hours, but then the manager notices what you're doing, and points you towards the exit. Surely you'd understand why KFC wouldn't let this behaviour continue. You didn't steal their recipe; you worked it out on your own. You're perfectly within your right to sell chicken based on this recipe, but you'd better do it at your store, and put your own label on it. If KFC don't want you selling products based on their recipe (however legally you discovered it), you can't wrap them in KFC packaging, and you certainly can't sell them at KFC.

AngryParsley 14y ago
The analogy doesn't work. iPhone users can only get apps from the Apple store.* Also, Rogue Amoeba isn't deceiving users. People who buy Airfoil know that it's not made by Apple. *I know someone will bring up jailbreaking. Jailbreaking is not a solution. It's difficult, voids the warranty, and can cause issues with stability and software updates. It's a non-starter for the vast majority of users. By limiting Airfoil to jailbroken phones, Apple kills 90% of Rogue Amoeba's revenue.
- collypops 14y ago
  The analogy still fits. I was suggesting that they don't build apps for iPhones, Apple TVs, Macs, etc. You can't put your chicken in a KFC bucket, even though you worked out the secret recipe. You can't put your app in an iPhone, just because you reverse-engineered a piece of technology. > By limiting Airfoil to jailbroken phones, Apple kills 90% of Rogue Amoeba's revenue. Although you're right in saying this, it's only because 100% of Airfoil's revenue comes from the App Store. If they had revenue streams outside of the App Store (by choosing a different platform or devices), Apple wouldn't be able to block a cent of that income.
- stonemetal 14y ago
  While I agree his analogy stretches it way to far, being in the app store says Apple approves of what you are doing(you know that whole approval process thing.) Apple doesn't approve so it isn't there anymore.
shenberg 14y ago
Note: Just to make things clear, I support Apple's decision here. You're ignoring the fact that according to your analogy, our hypothetical KFC is already allowing people to make and sell different sorts of food with KFC branding from within their store (as long as you give them some of the proceeds and pay an annual fee, which was the case). In fact, a lot of people come to KFC precisely because they have an unmatched breadth of delicious and affordable dishes, and many people want to sell their wares at KFC because of their large clientele - KFC has successfully transformed into a food-court. The hero of your post devised a delicious dish that would lose its flavor without the KFC secret sauce, but unfortunately for him, KFC only allows condiment manufacturers to use their secret sauce, and then only after a certification process to make sure they get the unique taste just right. Of course, they could, say, taste the delicious dish, realize that it's providing them with direct revenue, as well as satisfying consumers and increasing the odds they'll return to the food-court and spend more money. Analogies aside, I understand why Apple does these sorts of things - first of all, they want consistency in UX since there really was no certification process. Also, keeping the ecosystem tightly under their control is much easier when you're very consistent about being draconian from the moment the platform was created (you go to the app-store, you play by their rules). As a side-note, I'm surprised that there's so much support for Apple with these sorts of things when 15-20 years ago the same crowd would have been up in arms if Microsoft were to, say, send cease & desists to Samba or Wine (and still is criticizing Microsoft for disallowing other OSes in WinRT ARM devices).
- collypops 14y ago
  I thought hard about the point you raised when I was putting together my original post. I tried to think about the hero as someone standing on the same footing as condiment/drinks manufacturers, who unlike the hero, play by the rules. They can sell their wares in KFC without needing to know the secret recipe. Airfoil used the secret recipe, and was punished for it. Perhaps I got a bit lost when I chose to have the hero sneaking around, using equipment and service counters without the knowledge of the management, as that doesn't exactly parallel the App Store approval process. Although, seeing as Apple regularly approve apps only to pull them at a later date because of undetected features/activities, our hero's actions aren't too far-fetched. P.S. I love that you played along with the analogy. In hindsight, KFC was a terrible choice, but I'm glad it opened up a bit of discussion.

AngryParsley 14y ago

The analogy doesn't work. iPhone users can only get apps from the Apple store.* Also, Rogue Amoeba isn't deceiving users. People who buy Airfoil know that it's not made by Apple. *I know someone will bring up jailbreaking. Jailbreaking is not a solution. It's difficult, voids the warranty, and can cause issues with stability and software updates. It's a non-starter for the vast majority of users. By limiting Airfoil to jailbroken phones, Apple kills 90% of Rogue Amoeba's revenue.

collypops 14y ago
The analogy still fits. I was suggesting that they don't build apps for iPhones, Apple TVs, Macs, etc. You can't put your chicken in a KFC bucket, even though you worked out the secret recipe. You can't put your app in an iPhone, just because you reverse-engineered a piece of technology. > By limiting Airfoil to jailbroken phones, Apple kills 90% of Rogue Amoeba's revenue. Although you're right in saying this, it's only because 100% of Airfoil's revenue comes from the App Store. If they had revenue streams outside of the App Store (by choosing a different platform or devices), Apple wouldn't be able to block a cent of that income.
stonemetal 14y ago
While I agree his analogy stretches it way to far, being in the app store says Apple approves of what you are doing(you know that whole approval process thing.) Apple doesn't approve so it isn't there anymore.

shenberg 14y ago

Note: Just to make things clear, I support Apple's decision here. You're ignoring the fact that according to your analogy, our hypothetical KFC is already allowing people to make and sell different sorts of food with KFC branding from within their store (as long as you give them some of the proceeds and pay an annual fee, which was the case). In fact, a lot of people come to KFC precisely because they have an unmatched breadth of delicious and affordable dishes, and many people want to sell their wares at KFC because of their large clientele - KFC has successfully transformed into a food-court. The hero of your post devised a delicious dish that would lose its flavor without the KFC secret sauce, but unfortunately for him, KFC only allows condiment manufacturers to use their secret sauce, and then only after a certification process to make sure they get the unique taste just right. Of course, they could, say, taste the delicious dish, realize that it's providing them with direct revenue, as well as satisfying consumers and increasing the odds they'll return to the food-court and spend more money. Analogies aside, I understand why Apple does these sorts of things - first of all, they want consistency in UX since there really was no certification process. Also, keeping the ecosystem tightly under their control is much easier when you're very consistent about being draconian from the moment the platform was created (you go to the app-store, you play by their rules). As a side-note, I'm surprised that there's so much support for Apple with these sorts of things when 15-20 years ago the same crowd would have been up in arms if Microsoft were to, say, send cease & desists to Samba or Wine (and still is criticizing Microsoft for disallowing other OSes in WinRT ARM devices).

collypops 14y ago
I thought hard about the point you raised when I was putting together my original post. I tried to think about the hero as someone standing on the same footing as condiment/drinks manufacturers, who unlike the hero, play by the rules. They can sell their wares in KFC without needing to know the secret recipe. Airfoil used the secret recipe, and was punished for it. Perhaps I got a bit lost when I chose to have the hero sneaking around, using equipment and service counters without the knowledge of the management, as that doesn't exactly parallel the App Store approval process. Although, seeing as Apple regularly approve apps only to pull them at a later date because of undetected features/activities, our hero's actions aren't too far-fetched. P.S. I love that you played along with the analogy. In hindsight, KFC was a terrible choice, but I'm glad it opened up a bit of discussion.