3 ms·

Do iOS users care about sideloading yet? No.

by em3rgent0rdr 2y ago

kernal 2y ago
Give them the option and let’s find out how many really care.
Wowfunhappy 2y ago
I'm an iOS user and I care.
- em3rgent0rdr 2y ago
  Do more than 1% or so of non-hackernews iOS users care about sideloading?
  - do_not_redeem 2y ago
    If they knew every app/subscription they bought would be 30% cheaper I think they would care. But, conveniently for Apple's shareholders, the app store rules forbid developers from providing honest information about those costs to their users.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      As if every developer that releases a side loaded app will lower their prices by 30%. that's total poppycock. The whole point of these devs is to keep that 30% and not give it to Apple. That's some funny shit that you think devs will all lower their prices the consumer sees. Do you have a 2 drink minimum for your set?
      - jmholla 2y ago
        > As if every developer that releases a side loaded app will lower their prices by 30%. That is literally already the case for many apps. Many offer a better price outside of the iOS ecosystem. And why are you drawing the goalposts at EVERY developer?
        gjsman-1000 2y ago
        I have never seen this on Android, and it definitely seems like developers don’t care about the 30% cut on Steam, even though sideloading is fairly easy on Windows. How many Steam games can you buy direct, let alone get a discount for?
        AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The majority of PC games aren't sold through Steam even though it has a large installed base and provides some level of promotion. Meanwhile many of the popular Steam games are made by Valve itself or are free games paying Valve 30% of nothing, implying that the large majority of third party paid game developers didn't think the 30% was worth it when given a choice.
      - do_not_redeem 2y ago
        It's not that everyone will lower their prices... it's that in the past they already raised them. In 2023, if you calculated that you need to make $3 per install to be profitable, you'd have to raise that number by 43%* to account for Apple's cut. And if you don't think users will pay 43% more, then the app will just never get made. Who knows whether or not current apps will have their prices lowered, but it would be better if in the future, new apps are not priced 43% higher than they would have been, like all the current ones. * 1/(1-0.30) = 1.43
        what 2y ago
        More like 18% higher because the fee is 15% on the first million per year.
    - scarface_74 2y ago
      Well seeing that most mainstream subscription services don’t allow you to purchase through the App Store including Netflix, Spotify, YouTube etc…
  - zaik 2y ago
    1% of iPhone users is a lot of people.
    - Jotalea 2y ago
      Just like Linux's 4.5% market share, it's a lot of people. What does it have to do with iOS? Nothing.
  - makeitdouble 2y ago
    How many iOS user would want to play Fortnite again ? Would people want a Netflix app that handles subscription inside the app ? Who would care about a Kindle app where you can buy the books and read them without leaving the app ? An awful lot of people do care about these issues, even if they never heard of sideloading they'll jump on it if offered the opportunity.
  - ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
    Apple has made it against the rules for apps to notify users of the benefits of not going through the app store. Many subscription services don't allow you to subscribe from your iPhone. Why? Because if they did they'd have to pay Apple 30% for the privilege. And Apple has made it against their rules to notify users of this. And for the ones that eat it, they're not allowed to give users a 25% discount for going to their website. This is what Epic did to prove user harm, they made it cheaper to buy currency through their processor than Apple's. Of course they were banned for it.
    - egypturnash 2y ago
      Patreon is letting me bump my prices up for people who subscribe to my work via the iOS app. I don't know if this is because they are simply ignoring the "you have to have the same price through apple" rule or if they worked out some kind of deal.
- jisnsm 2y ago
  If you cared you wouldn’t have bought an iOS device.
  - brewtide 2y ago
    This is a bit , okay, very unrelated to the main point, but I care. But I want a new laptop. Really eyeballing a MacBook. But I fear the locking down of osx is likely to continue. But seems great hardware. The other side of the coin I see is framework. Hardware maybe not as wow whiz bang, but future freedoms in all the ways. Am I correct to worry about osx lock in, and 'sideloading' on osx being fully removed vs pain in the ass? I can't seem to find the darn sweet spot.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      Serious question, but is this an age thing? When I was young, I was all about building boxes, tweaking settings, pushing to get every last drop out of the gear. That's because I had a lot of free time living a much more carefree life while still living with parental units. Eventually, I was able to parlay those skills into gaining some advantage for small companies I worked. Now, I have a full life outside of work, and just cannot be bothered with all of that now. As long as the device does what I need it to do, that's all I care about. I don't even change the desktop or any other personalization for sake of if it doesn't actively make me any more efficient. Once I'm done, I push back from the keyboard and continue on with other aspects of life.
      - brewtide 2y ago
        I hear you. I'm 43 with 2 school age kids. And work for myself. And 3 of us. So it's uh, busy, always. It's more of a resource question. I tend to keep my hardware around for a long while. I like to repurpose it for various little things. A have a netbook grabbing sdr data in an outbuilding and shuffling data to living room server to be processed (goes weather). Server is an old Dell workstation. Etc. My worry is the 2 i5 iMacs I have upstairs. Old, yes. Upgraded to the extent they can be? Yes! Useful hardware? Honestly, yeah. Except they can't get newer versions of osx, this the cricut machine will not work on them. This I have to use parallels z with windows , to make the 27" iMac use the cricut because... Osx can't be upgraded. (Brave browser has hit its point too). With the old stuff it's fine because I figure I'll eventually put some sort of Linux on it and have a useful thing, still. The new m* looks so nice. And quick. And sleek. And I just fear 5 years down the road, when it's still nice, and fast and sleek but you can't even open a webpage because safari will not upgrade, and the world slowly crumbles around the hardware, which becomes. . Useless. So it's not so much personalization but being able to just continue using that of which was purchased. I've been buying pixels because of the same reason. Maybe I won't keep it for forever, but I upgraded from a pixel 3 last year and that's only because I broke a BMS wire behind the battery and said "well, a new phone is cheaper than a new house when it burns down because I'm a cheap ass". So, does one sacrifice some new shiney to have a device that you still can use if the apple gods (or whomever gods, it all seems to be forced obsolete). Huge blabber rant, but it's such a weird market now it seems like. No problem going ARM on apple, just wish Linux efforts seemed to be heading in a more positive direction (hector, quit? Future? Unknown?). ARM on 'wondows' seems like a not great idea, expecting weird sdr software to not work ,etc. So that leaves paying decent $ for perhaps a lesser product..like a framework, but one that may last a longer time. Or at least work as long as the hardware works. What do people do when faced with such (first world) things.

Do iOS users care about sideloading yet? No.

kernal 2y ago

Give them the option and let’s find out how many really care.

Wowfunhappy 2y ago

I'm an iOS user and I care.

em3rgent0rdr 2y ago
Do more than 1% or so of non-hackernews iOS users care about sideloading?
- do_not_redeem 2y ago
  If they knew every app/subscription they bought would be 30% cheaper I think they would care. But, conveniently for Apple's shareholders, the app store rules forbid developers from providing honest information about those costs to their users.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    As if every developer that releases a side loaded app will lower their prices by 30%. that's total poppycock. The whole point of these devs is to keep that 30% and not give it to Apple. That's some funny shit that you think devs will all lower their prices the consumer sees. Do you have a 2 drink minimum for your set?
    - jmholla 2y ago
      > As if every developer that releases a side loaded app will lower their prices by 30%. That is literally already the case for many apps. Many offer a better price outside of the iOS ecosystem. And why are you drawing the goalposts at EVERY developer?
      - gjsman-1000 2y ago
        I have never seen this on Android, and it definitely seems like developers don’t care about the 30% cut on Steam, even though sideloading is fairly easy on Windows. How many Steam games can you buy direct, let alone get a discount for?
        AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The majority of PC games aren't sold through Steam even though it has a large installed base and provides some level of promotion. Meanwhile many of the popular Steam games are made by Valve itself or are free games paying Valve 30% of nothing, implying that the large majority of third party paid game developers didn't think the 30% was worth it when given a choice.
    - do_not_redeem 2y ago
      It's not that everyone will lower their prices... it's that in the past they already raised them. In 2023, if you calculated that you need to make $3 per install to be profitable, you'd have to raise that number by 43%* to account for Apple's cut. And if you don't think users will pay 43% more, then the app will just never get made. Who knows whether or not current apps will have their prices lowered, but it would be better if in the future, new apps are not priced 43% higher than they would have been, like all the current ones. * 1/(1-0.30) = 1.43
      - what 2y ago
        More like 18% higher because the fee is 15% on the first million per year.
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    Well seeing that most mainstream subscription services don’t allow you to purchase through the App Store including Netflix, Spotify, YouTube etc…
- zaik 2y ago
  1% of iPhone users is a lot of people.
  - Jotalea 2y ago
    Just like Linux's 4.5% market share, it's a lot of people. What does it have to do with iOS? Nothing.
- makeitdouble 2y ago
  How many iOS user would want to play Fortnite again ? Would people want a Netflix app that handles subscription inside the app ? Who would care about a Kindle app where you can buy the books and read them without leaving the app ? An awful lot of people do care about these issues, even if they never heard of sideloading they'll jump on it if offered the opportunity.
- ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
  Apple has made it against the rules for apps to notify users of the benefits of not going through the app store. Many subscription services don't allow you to subscribe from your iPhone. Why? Because if they did they'd have to pay Apple 30% for the privilege. And Apple has made it against their rules to notify users of this. And for the ones that eat it, they're not allowed to give users a 25% discount for going to their website. This is what Epic did to prove user harm, they made it cheaper to buy currency through their processor than Apple's. Of course they were banned for it.
  - egypturnash 2y ago
    Patreon is letting me bump my prices up for people who subscribe to my work via the iOS app. I don't know if this is because they are simply ignoring the "you have to have the same price through apple" rule or if they worked out some kind of deal.
jisnsm 2y ago
If you cared you wouldn’t have bought an iOS device.
- brewtide 2y ago
  This is a bit , okay, very unrelated to the main point, but I care. But I want a new laptop. Really eyeballing a MacBook. But I fear the locking down of osx is likely to continue. But seems great hardware. The other side of the coin I see is framework. Hardware maybe not as wow whiz bang, but future freedoms in all the ways. Am I correct to worry about osx lock in, and 'sideloading' on osx being fully removed vs pain in the ass? I can't seem to find the darn sweet spot.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Serious question, but is this an age thing? When I was young, I was all about building boxes, tweaking settings, pushing to get every last drop out of the gear. That's because I had a lot of free time living a much more carefree life while still living with parental units. Eventually, I was able to parlay those skills into gaining some advantage for small companies I worked. Now, I have a full life outside of work, and just cannot be bothered with all of that now. As long as the device does what I need it to do, that's all I care about. I don't even change the desktop or any other personalization for sake of if it doesn't actively make me any more efficient. Once I'm done, I push back from the keyboard and continue on with other aspects of life.
    - brewtide 2y ago
      I hear you. I'm 43 with 2 school age kids. And work for myself. And 3 of us. So it's uh, busy, always. It's more of a resource question. I tend to keep my hardware around for a long while. I like to repurpose it for various little things. A have a netbook grabbing sdr data in an outbuilding and shuffling data to living room server to be processed (goes weather). Server is an old Dell workstation. Etc. My worry is the 2 i5 iMacs I have upstairs. Old, yes. Upgraded to the extent they can be? Yes! Useful hardware? Honestly, yeah. Except they can't get newer versions of osx, this the cricut machine will not work on them. This I have to use parallels z with windows , to make the 27" iMac use the cricut because... Osx can't be upgraded. (Brave browser has hit its point too). With the old stuff it's fine because I figure I'll eventually put some sort of Linux on it and have a useful thing, still. The new m* looks so nice. And quick. And sleek. And I just fear 5 years down the road, when it's still nice, and fast and sleek but you can't even open a webpage because safari will not upgrade, and the world slowly crumbles around the hardware, which becomes. . Useless. So it's not so much personalization but being able to just continue using that of which was purchased. I've been buying pixels because of the same reason. Maybe I won't keep it for forever, but I upgraded from a pixel 3 last year and that's only because I broke a BMS wire behind the battery and said "well, a new phone is cheaper than a new house when it burns down because I'm a cheap ass". So, does one sacrifice some new shiney to have a device that you still can use if the apple gods (or whomever gods, it all seems to be forced obsolete). Huge blabber rant, but it's such a weird market now it seems like. No problem going ARM on apple, just wish Linux efforts seemed to be heading in a more positive direction (hector, quit? Future? Unknown?). ARM on 'wondows' seems like a not great idea, expecting weird sdr software to not work ,etc. So that leaves paying decent $ for perhaps a lesser product..like a framework, but one that may last a longer time. Or at least work as long as the hardware works. What do people do when faced with such (first world) things.