4 ms·

Developers walked into their walled garden with joy. It's no where near what this article describes.

by fny 3mo ago

bigyabai 3mo ago
Developers didn't get a choice. It was either "pay for Apple's development services" or "don't publish apps" which isn't a very competitive or fair option when the App Store can arbitrarily reject you.
- fny 3mo ago
  Of course they did: they could have just chosen to not publish apps which would have crippled iOS. The only reason it feels existential is because developers made a Faustian bargain from the beginnning.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - bigyabai 3mo ago
    That's the thing - even when you choose to pay for Apple's developer program, they can kick you out. This is why Fortnite kickstarted an important discussion around App Store centralization. Today, Apple removes apps like ICEBlock and Navalny's voting guide; they're directly complicit in using the App Store to steer political agendas. This is what developers were unhappy with, and we're seeing this type of censorship specifically because iOS has no App Store alternative. On macOS, for example, there is no way for Apple to be strongarmed into censorship because users can install any valid binary they choose. On iOS, developers and users do not have that same choice. There is no natural competition.
- hiworld6543 3mo ago
  Apple Developers could have developed the skills and expertise to create their own products. App development tools and coding is within the skill set of a smart 10 year old child. “Apple Developer” is a job title for those at entry level. If any want to grow up, there’s a whole world of opportunities for them that don’t require permission from Apple, including development for government, academia, and crowdsourced machines.
  - bigyabai 3mo ago
    All the same, that attitude towards developers sucks. We're now viscerally living through the consequences of centralized software distribution, because people ignored developer discontent.

Developers walked into their walled garden with joy. It's no where near what this article describes.

by fny 3mo ago

Developers walked into their walled garden with joy. It's no where near what this article describes.

Developers didn't get a choice. It was either "pay for Apple's development services" or "don't publish apps" which isn't a very competitive or fair option when the App Store can arbitrarily reject you.

fny 3mo ago
Of course they did: they could have just chosen to not publish apps which would have crippled iOS. The only reason it feels existential is because developers made a Faustian bargain from the beginnning.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- bigyabai 3mo ago
  That's the thing - even when you choose to pay for Apple's developer program, they can kick you out. This is why Fortnite kickstarted an important discussion around App Store centralization. Today, Apple removes apps like ICEBlock and Navalny's voting guide; they're directly complicit in using the App Store to steer political agendas. This is what developers were unhappy with, and we're seeing this type of censorship specifically because iOS has no App Store alternative. On macOS, for example, there is no way for Apple to be strongarmed into censorship because users can install any valid binary they choose. On iOS, developers and users do not have that same choice. There is no natural competition.
hiworld6543 3mo ago
Apple Developers could have developed the skills and expertise to create their own products. App development tools and coding is within the skill set of a smart 10 year old child. “Apple Developer” is a job title for those at entry level. If any want to grow up, there’s a whole world of opportunities for them that don’t require permission from Apple, including development for government, academia, and crowdsourced machines.
- bigyabai 3mo ago
  All the same, that attitude towards developers sucks. We're now viscerally living through the consequences of centralized software distribution, because people ignored developer discontent.