4 ms·

Interesting take. I'm curious how you respond to the counterpoints I usually hear to this argument: 1) Apple is creating a quality filter for $99, one that see

by bsirkia 13y ago

Interesting take. I'm curious how you respond to the counterpoints I usually hear to this argument: 1) Apple is creating a quality filter for $99, one that seems to be successful comparing the aggregate quality of apps on iOS vs. Android. 2) Yes, to test on your own device it's $99, but XCode is free and has all the simulators you need. If you're willing to build an entire app from scratch and invest that much time, $99 doesn't seem like a terrible investment to publish all the apps you want for a year. 3) In terms of their nitpicking your apps, again, that seems to just be basic quality filtering that isn't in the Android space.

bobbles 13y ago
They also provide extensive WWDC documentation and videos https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/ https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/
- canweriotnow 13y ago
  ^ I hope to Eris you're trolling. Apple developer documentation? comp.os.linux was better documentation, in 1996.
hammerandtongs 13y ago
1 - That's the guy's entire point. That "quality" tier is filtering out your 12 year old kid's coding efforts? 2 - So "free" XCode runs on Windows, Linux and commodity PC hardware or perhaps it only runs on expensive Apple hardware (3-6x the price usually)? 3 - I think "quality" filtering is very much in the eye of the beholder.
brudgers 13y ago
The quality filter argument is bullshit. The criticism isn't that Apple should allow Mom's recipe database written in GwBasic into the app store. It's that Apple prohibits GwBasic on the phone. Irrespective of robustness or user experience quality, Apple doesn't allow end users access to scripting languages, even though the only person who would suffer for bad code is the person who wrote it.
amartya916 13y ago
Apple can do a lot better, in fact all these counterpoints you mention are tripe, let me elaborate: a. $100 (this 99 bullshit annoys me) is a pretty big investment for a student. A common argument is that if one is able to afford Apple hardware -- i.e. the Mac and a mobile device -- this $100 fee is puny in comparison. Not true. One can get an iPod touch for $200 and a Mac for $600 (Mac Mini). With a little more effort, e.g. trawling classifieds, one can get second hand hardware for cheaper. So the developer fee ends up being north of 12.5% of cost of ownership, and that's just for a year, it doubles to 25% if you use the hardware for 2 years, and so on. N.B. Even when parents buy kids their computers, this percentage argument stands. The simple point is, if someone wants to program their own device, why not let them do it? Why should they have to pay a 100 bucks? b. The owner of the device (talking mobile here), should have the right to install whatever the fuck he or she wishes to install. Okay, do not open the door for people to do so by mistake, and have basic authentication. It should be trivial for Apple. Any device with an apple id tied to it, can and should allow the owner to plug in a cable to install a custom app. Make people enter Apple id's twice, once on XCode and once on the device itself, if that's what it takes (I bet there are easier solutions, but this came to mind first) c. Now, for someone wishing to sell an App in the App Store, charge the $99. I think taking care of App distribution, developer documentation/videos, app vetting by App Store employees etc. would then justify the $99 fee and perhaps act as a filter. P.S. I don't buy the filter thing either. Over time, the Android App store now has the same high quality popular apps as the Apple App Store (hold on, I know that tablet apps are still better on the iOS platform, but the big names are getting there)
- bsirkia 13y ago
  a) $100 is steep, but $25 on Android seems percentage-wise much higher, considering you can get Android devices for so little (you can probably get an old device for less than $25 on classifieds). I don't think the device-to-development percentage fee really holds up. Absolutely, yes, $100 is more than $25, and I think Apple should lower it just to encourage more people to try it out. But then again, free XCode with all simulators isn't enough to try it out? b) I totally agree with this point, this does really bother me. If I'm willing to take the chance of bricking my iPhone, that should be my right. I've also been trying to do some testing with the new Bluetooth Low Energy tech, and not being able to unplug my phone from Xcode is pretty damn annoying. c) I can dig it.

by bsirkia 13y ago

bobbles 13y ago

They also provide extensive WWDC documentation and videos https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/ https://developer.apple.com/wwdc/videos/

canweriotnow 13y ago
^ I hope to Eris you're trolling. Apple developer documentation? comp.os.linux was better documentation, in 1996.

hammerandtongs 13y ago

1 - That's the guy's entire point. That "quality" tier is filtering out your 12 year old kid's coding efforts? 2 - So "free" XCode runs on Windows, Linux and commodity PC hardware or perhaps it only runs on expensive Apple hardware (3-6x the price usually)? 3 - I think "quality" filtering is very much in the eye of the beholder.

brudgers 13y ago

The quality filter argument is bullshit. The criticism isn't that Apple should allow Mom's recipe database written in GwBasic into the app store. It's that Apple prohibits GwBasic on the phone. Irrespective of robustness or user experience quality, Apple doesn't allow end users access to scripting languages, even though the only person who would suffer for bad code is the person who wrote it.

amartya916 13y ago

Apple can do a lot better, in fact all these counterpoints you mention are tripe, let me elaborate: a. $100 (this 99 bullshit annoys me) is a pretty big investment for a student. A common argument is that if one is able to afford Apple hardware -- i.e. the Mac and a mobile device -- this $100 fee is puny in comparison. Not true. One can get an iPod touch for $200 and a Mac for $600 (Mac Mini). With a little more effort, e.g. trawling classifieds, one can get second hand hardware for cheaper. So the developer fee ends up being north of 12.5% of cost of ownership, and that's just for a year, it doubles to 25% if you use the hardware for 2 years, and so on. N.B. Even when parents buy kids their computers, this percentage argument stands. The simple point is, if someone wants to program their own device, why not let them do it? Why should they have to pay a 100 bucks? b. The owner of the device (talking mobile here), should have the right to install whatever the fuck he or she wishes to install. Okay, do not open the door for people to do so by mistake, and have basic authentication. It should be trivial for Apple. Any device with an apple id tied to it, can and should allow the owner to plug in a cable to install a custom app. Make people enter Apple id's twice, once on XCode and once on the device itself, if that's what it takes (I bet there are easier solutions, but this came to mind first) c. Now, for someone wishing to sell an App in the App Store, charge the $99. I think taking care of App distribution, developer documentation/videos, app vetting by App Store employees etc. would then justify the $99 fee and perhaps act as a filter. P.S. I don't buy the filter thing either. Over time, the Android App store now has the same high quality popular apps as the Apple App Store (hold on, I know that tablet apps are still better on the iOS platform, but the big names are getting there)

bsirkia 13y ago
a) $100 is steep, but $25 on Android seems percentage-wise much higher, considering you can get Android devices for so little (you can probably get an old device for less than $25 on classifieds). I don't think the device-to-development percentage fee really holds up. Absolutely, yes, $100 is more than $25, and I think Apple should lower it just to encourage more people to try it out. But then again, free XCode with all simulators isn't enough to try it out? b) I totally agree with this point, this does really bother me. If I'm willing to take the chance of bricking my iPhone, that should be my right. I've also been trying to do some testing with the new Bluetooth Low Energy tech, and not being able to unplug my phone from Xcode is pretty damn annoying. c) I can dig it.