Developers and the Fear of Apple 269
An anonymous reader writes: UI designer Eli Schiff has posted an article about the "climate of fear" surrounding Apple in the software development community. He points out how developers who express criticism in an informal setting often recant when their words are being recorded, and how even moderate public criticism is often prefaced by flattery and endorsements.
Beyond that, the industry has learned that they can't rely on Apple's walled garden to make a profit. The opaque app review process, the race to the bottom on pricing, and Apple's resistance to curation of the App Store are driving "independent app developers into larger organizations and venture-backed startups." Apple is also known to cut contact with developers if they release for Android first. The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting, but also a brigade of Apple fans and even other journalists trying to paint them as anti-Apple.
Beyond that, the industry has learned that they can't rely on Apple's walled garden to make a profit. The opaque app review process, the race to the bottom on pricing, and Apple's resistance to curation of the App Store are driving "independent app developers into larger organizations and venture-backed startups." Apple is also known to cut contact with developers if they release for Android first. The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting, but also a brigade of Apple fans and even other journalists trying to paint them as anti-Apple.
Journalists being stonewalled by Apple? (Score:2, Insightful)
So what? Let them stonewall everyone, soon enough there won't be anyone left to talk about them.
And that can only be a good thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So what?
The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting
So a journalist becomes persona non grata with Apple, can't get information about The New Big Thing until long after their competitors have published articles about it, so they get a reputation for being slow to publish about new stuff and probably end up with a reputation for recycling other peoples information because they can't get anything from Apple.
I get what you mean, in the long run that attitude will only harm Apple, but in the short term it'll require a bunch of journalists who aren't concerned ab
Re: (Score:2)
So a journalist becomes persona non grata with Apple, can't get information about The New Big Thing until long after their competitors have published articles about it, so they get a reputation for being slow to publish about new stuff and probably end up with a reputation for recycling other peoples information because they can't get anything from Apple.
The famous example was El Reg [theregister.co.uk].
Re:Journalists being stonewalled by Apple? (Score:5, Informative)
The famous example was El Reg [theregister.co.uk].
IMO, The Register hasn't been hurt by much (if at all) from it, truth be told.
They've gained a solid reputation as a site that pulls no punches in the IT industry, meaning that if you want real news, you go there as one of your first sources of information. It's been around for a very long time, and readers still flock to it based on that more than anything else. It's still (IIRC) one of the premiere tech news sites in the UK, in spite of any love lost from Apple. Hell, I'm (admittedly) generally pro-Apple on a technical level (I put 'em 2nd behind Linux), but I still stop there first out of sheer respect for their reporting on tech.
I think many people underestimate the value of a site's reputation. If I want rah-rah Cupertino-flavored cheerleading, I'd go to appleinsider.com. If I want breathless vapid bullshit that's not much more than a regurgitation of $tech_corp PR releases, I'd go read ZDNet, CNET, Gizmodo, or their ilk. That said, I want real news and insight, so I hit up El Reg as one of my first stops**.
I know that I'm not alone... I can usually tell who has an effing clue in tech by the sites they recommend for getting tech news or analysis, and I calibrate my respect for that person's abilities accordingly.
There's another aspect that TFA ignores: big tech corps rely as much on the news sites as the news sites rely on them. If a company is petty and vendetta-happy towards the press, they will quickly find their attitude reciprocated, and then find themselves awash in bad press the moment they stumble.
** ...well, that and to see if they have a new BOFH up. :)
Re: (Score:2)
So what?
The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting
So a journalist becomes persona non grata with Apple, can't get information about The New Big Thing until long after their competitors have published articles about it, so they get a reputation for being slow to publish about new stuff and probably end up with a reputation for recycling other peoples information because they can't get anything from Apple.
I get what you mean, in the long run that attitude will only harm Apple, but in the short term it'll require a bunch of journalists who aren't concerned about falling behind their competitors.
Bullshit, in that regard a reporter might not get invited to apple events, but that doesn't stop them reporting on real actual news, such as the winner of Bumsville, Idaho Annual Pie eating contest or just reading what all the apple approved writers put down, rewording and posting with a ten minute lag.
Re:Journalists being stonewalled by Apple? (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't seem to have hurt this site. Not even doing it poorly.
Yeah, but this site doesn't need to be on Apple's good side to get information, /. scrapes it from other people who do that and essentially republishes other peoples articles after the fact. If you're trying to be a breaking-primary news source then being denied information from a company many people are interested in means you lag behind your competitors. For a tech news site that can be a major problem, whereas /. is an aggregator, so being behind the curve is a given and the attraction is community-filtered news, not being the first to publish big stories.
You imply apple give different information to each reporter, they don't. they make an announcement with very few pieces of actual information and every apple shill goes and writes 1000 words on it. All of them saying the same basic exact same thing surrounded by fluff.
Re: (Score:2)
Pipes have gotten bigger. It's harder to unintentionally DDoS a site any more, unless it's running out of someone's basement. And even then, I've got like 5Mbps upload on DSL... that's enough for a decent load. The market and commodity hardware wasn't that way when I first joined and sites got slashdotted semi-regularly.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately for Apple, they're not Microsoft! They don't have the market share on anything to dictate.
That's not unfortunate for Apple. Their business model is built on selling things at a profit when they don't have market share dominance. Thus the don't face the same disaster as is happening to Microsoft who's business model IS based on having near-monopoly market share.
So don't sweat about it. Give it a few years, and the "Apple difference" won't really be so different, and they'll be seen as perhaps a Sony or Toshiba.
It's theirs to lose. Companies like Sony and Nintendo lost it. Apple could too. But provided they keep the quality up, they'll stay where they are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's price/earnings ratio is under 17. They're still tremendously undervalued.
I don't think so. Apple has had success upon success. They are the most profitable company in the history of the world. There are a LOT of ways for them to go down from where they are now. But there is almost no way for them to go up. Nearly everyone in the world that can afford a iPhone, already has one. They will continue to sell upgrades, but probably not much more volume than they sell now. Android phones are getter better and cheaper. Apple will need to reduce prices to compete, and that will c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sibling is right... marketshare means little to Apple's business model. That said, they do have dominance in the mobiles market, and are gaining enough marketshare otherwise that Microsoft panicked and claimed that iPads weren't "real computers" (in spite of the fact that the things do what the majority of computer owners actually do with a computer).
Either way, assuming TFA is true (is it?), I do wonder how much of it is a nefarious design, and how much of it is actually letting the App Store run free-mark
my experience: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:my experience: (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure Apple doesn't give a crap about what 99% of developers do or say.
Not a bad estimate. I'd go as far as saying that no one should give a crap about what 99% of developers say or do.
Honestly, given 100 apps in any store, do you honestly expect more than one of them to have any value?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
When most mobile developers make 1/5th or 1/10th minimum wage, you can treat them like panhandlers -- no respect. Even though the millions of 99 cent/free apps are the main and only reason Apple has sold hundreds of millions of iPhones/iPads. If desktops and laptops had such a vast array of apps created by modern-day slave labor, I doubt people would use the inferior, small screen phones or tablets.
Re: (Score:3)
> When most mobile developers make 1/5th or 1/10th minimum wage
Are you quoting any particular study? I was wondering how much an independent mobile developer, working alone, fulltime, makes on average, per month.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously? No one is forced to release shovelware for mobile. The devs choose to. They're mostly kids and amateurs, professionals expect to be paid for work. Slave labor, sheesh, you're just a racist!
Re:my experience: (Score:5, Insightful)
I have an app on the app store, which I sell for $4.99. It sells reasonably well at that price, but if I look at the income it generates versus the hours I put in developing it, I should charge something closer to $39.99 at the same sales volume, in order to arrive at a decent hourly rate. At the same time, customers ask me why I don't shell out for professional artwork, a UX designer, and better support. Other apps offer all that for *free* or for a buck, so why not expect the same from my more expensive app? Simple: the outlay will never cover the little bit of extra revenue it might generate. Those numbers work if you sell a $.99 (or ad supported) game to 50 million people, not if you sell an app to serve a niche-within-a-niche. But both apps are judged the same, and anything over say $1.99 is perceived as "expensive" (which is a joke if you're willing to spend $899 on a phone).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? No one is forced to release shovelware for mobile. The devs choose to. They're mostly kids and amateurs, professionals expect to be paid for work. Slave labor, sheesh, you're just a racist!
The waters are muddied by the "Apple as the gatekeeper" thing. An app developer only gets to sell if Apple says so, which makes things tricky.
Re: (Score:3)
That's a big consideration for me. As near as I can tell, the only way to find out if you're wasting your time or not is to go ahead and waste it. After spending time writing your app, it may or may not be allowed at all. If not, you will be quite lucky to learn why and if you fix that, it may not change anything as you'll get rejected for something that was said to be acceptable the first time. If rejected you might later see another app that does exactly what yours was rejected for.
If you do get the app i
Re: (Score:2)
>> If desktops and laptops had such a vast array of apps created by modern-day slave labor, I doubt people would use the inferior, small screen phones or tablets.
Duh, they do. Look at the millions of apps available for Windows machines (including Flash-based games)...and that's a big reason why Microsoft has prospered over the years.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me you aren't actually this silly anywhere else but when posting on the Internet.
There were millions of apps for Windows available online for a decade before Microsoft's "me-too" app store and Windows 8. And a lot of them are terrible.
Re: (Score:2)
*two* of them, you mean one wasn't plenty? :)
Re: (Score:3)
If desktops and laptops had such a vast array of apps created by modern-day slave labor, I doubt people would use the inferior, small screen phones or tablets.
Um, what? Are you seriously suggesting that this entire mobile revolution/craze is all about 99-cent and freemium apps made by independent developers?
My experience is different; I only have a couple of apps that aren't made by huge companies. But mainly I use a phone because it is convenient. I have plenty of desktop and laptop screens at my house, but I don't have those in my pocket.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just a mater of convenience of having a computer in your pocket when you''re not at work. There's a Venn diagram of apps, some of which are interchangeable between mobile and desktop, but others which only make practical sense on one or the other.
e.g. Car and pedestrian navigation apps are phone territory. They make no sense on the desktop.
Spreadsheets and word-processing are desktop territory, then make little sense on a phone. Social media makes sense on both.
(What some here will miss is that ava
Re: (Score:2)
What some here will miss is that availability of apps doesn't contradict this. Yes, I can buy a GPS that connects to a PC, and get some arcane navigation app for a laptop. But it makes no sense to do so.
WhatsApp is exclusive to phones. What sense does not allowing its use on laptops make? Chase Bank's check deposit app is exclusive to phones. What sense does not allowing its use on PCs with a flatbed scanner make?
Likewise with office apps for phones - they allow viewing and changing the odd item. You wouldn't create or do extensive editing there.
Unless you pair a Bluetooth keyboard and plug in an external monitor. What sense does forbidding this make, other than to make iPhone users buy more Macs?
Re: (Score:2)
I have plenty of desktop and laptop screens at my house, but I don't have those in my pocket.
We just thought you were happy to see us!
Re: (Score:2)
It's an Apple Watch. He carries it there since the band broke.
I wonder if it has a vibrate function?
Re: (Score:2)
When most mobile developers make an app that isn't complete garbage that they want money for, maybe it will sell. Just like on any other platform.
See, I can make general statements that aren't backed up by any information too.
Re: (Score:2)
When most mobile developers make 1/5th or 1/10th minimum wage, you can treat them like panhandlers -- no respect. Even though the millions of 99 cent/free apps are the main and only reason Apple has sold hundreds of millions of iPhones/iPads. If desktops and laptops had such a vast array of apps created by modern-day slave labor, I doubt people would use the inferior, small screen phones or tablets.
For what it is worth I have bought over a hundred apps on the iTunes and very few of them were in the 99 cent/free category. There have actually been a few moments when I went looking for a specific type of app and was so inundated with crappy 99 cent/free crap that I had trouble finding the handful of better quality apps whose developers demanded a bit more money for their product leading me to wish there was a filter in iTunes that allowed me to search only for apps over a certain price range just to filt
Re: (Score:2)
A few categories tend to be underrepresented in a repository that contains only free software, such as games with substantial production values, players for legit copies of notable movies, software to deposit paper checks through a camera, and software to prepare this year's income tax return.
Re: (Score:3)
If things get bad enough there's an actual 'revolt' against the platform, that would be something.
Apple want people to develop for iOS, after all.
Am I right in thinking the iPhone market-share is decreasing?
No revolt in evidence (Score:2)
If things get bad enough there's an actual 'revolt' against the platform, that would be something.
Agreed though there is no evidence I can see that such an event has happened or is likely in the near term.
Am I right in thinking the iPhone market-share is decreasing?
No. Apple's marketshare has been remarkably consistent [geekwire.com] for about 5 years. Apple also gets >50% of the smartphone industry profits which is arguably more important.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember selling direct to customers, back in the Symbian days, before iOS or Android existed. The market was tiny and it was a pain in the arse.
As a matter of interest how many Android developers are selling from their own website, rather than an app store. Not many I guess.
Selling software is expensive (Score:2)
In an article about 'developer fears of Apple' it probably isn't tactful to boast about the loot Apple rakes off the top.
Who'se boasting? I have no affiliation and no particular affinity with regard to Apple. The fact that a few developers are terrified of Apple is not evidence of a widespread problem and the fact that Apple is hugely profitable is pretty much the worst kept secret on the planet.
It isn't expensive anymore to use an eCommerce framework to sell direct to your customers.
Care to wager on that? (Disclosure: I'm a certified cost accountant.) Just because you can set up some software to do ecommerce does NOT mean that it is cheap to reach consumers. In virtually any software company you care to men
Re: (Score:3)
Yep android are far and away the largest single platform.
http://9to5mac.com/2014/10/31/... [9to5mac.com]
of course if you include the fragmentation of the android versions and vendor specific versions may show a different picture.
The #1 reason why I would fear developing for apple is they have a tendency to block and steal the really good ideas.
http://www.pcworld.com/article... [pcworld.com]
Re: (Score:3)
They don't need to give a crap about how developers feel about the platform - they're printing money and the fanbase will bounce anyone critical of what they're doing.
Seriously; try voicing any sort of well-reasoned logical criticism of the brand - in short order some kool-aid guzzler is going to try like hell to make you feel like your problems with OS X or iOS or Final Cut Pro or QuickTime codecs ("using Apple products for more than five years," basically) are your fault and not Apple's.
Why are Millennials afraid of negativity? (Score:3, Interesting)
The article says,
Why do Millennials tend to get so worked up about negativity? Why do they see it as a bad thing, even in cases when it's perfectly relevant and appropriate?
Typical Hacker News discussion is a great example of this. If anyone isn't gushingly positive about somebody else's work, even when this work is total crap, they'll be torn a new one and likely downvoted. They'll be labeled as "detractors" or as being "disingenuous", and basically shunned.
It's like Millennials can't handle any sort of criticism, even when it's completely correct and deserved.
Why are Millennials so often so thin-skinned?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they just want to be liked...in the Facebook sense...not in the real world sense.
Re: (Score:2)
A groupthink fog engendered by conforming to the whims of "social", instead of thinking for themselves.
However, I must point out, anyone who would be under the 24/7 influence of the smartphone/app/FB/twitter/texting paradigm they have been brought up in would end up the same way.
Interesting times indeed.
Re:Why are Millennials afraid of negativity? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do Millennials tend to get so worked up about negativity? Why do they see it as a bad thing, even in cases when it's perfectly relevant and appropriate?
Negativity == Troll.
We have an overall climate where disagreeing, dissent, saying negative things, criticism and any other negative feedback is becoming wrong. One is immediately labeled a Troll, flamebait or some other nonsense if one doesn't toe the group think line.
I am not saying that one should take knee-jerk insults as valid criticisms or dissent (ex. Linux Sucks!) but when someone raises something valid but against the groupthink, it gets rejected and the author insulted. People are sensitive to that and when you are on a site that has moderation, going against the norm gets you negative karma. You are thrown out.
And there's the double standard of feedback. A person making an initial claim, even with all the cites and data to back himself up, has to deal with the "you're an idiot" type of feedback with nothing to back it up - that is acceptable many times even here on Slashdot.
I also think social media and the web overall has made it too easy to take things out of context and distort a person's statements. So what happens, something that is perfectly valid in context gets trimmed down into a twitter post to be passed all over the World and the person who made the original statement is forever defending himself over something he never really said. Like criticizing the USA's Mid-East policy turns into "He hates America!" or in regards to Robert Reich and his work on income disparity, "He's a Communist!"
It's just getting to the point that having a rational discussion anywhere is becoming impossible and who really needs it.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why reddit is very popular.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you know who takes criticism great? Baby Boomers.
Oh wait, no, they're narcissists completely full of their own shit.
But those Gen-Xers!
No wait, they're precious snowflakes, too.
Really, can you show me a group of people who does handle criticism well?
The App Store stuff is more interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
At least in the fourth article, the one posted. I read the first three and found them to be largely unconvincing. I think you can like the flat look or not, like Material Design (barely mentioned, but brought up a few times) or not, and that's cool. But one of the main thrusts of his argument in the first three articles was that the defense of these designs was riddled with 'artspeak', a nonsense language used to dissuade criticism. I don't dispute it; I like Material Design (Android user here) but having watched the Material Design sessions from I/O 2014, I definitely got annoyed at all the 'artspeak' going on from the lead guy at Google (Duarte I think his name is). What's funny is that what rubbed me the wrong way about him was how 'Apple-ish' he sounded, so go figure.
But back to the first three articles -- they seemed riddled with a different kind of 'artspeak'. Churlishing comparing the simplish people imagery from Google with Children's books and comparing Apple's design to the child who can paint like Pollock didn't feel particularly high-brow.
Still, the over-arching point that I felt was useful was that criticism is not well-received at Apple (or Google from the sounds of it). That's a point worth dwelling on, especially since Apple in particular has the reputation of having the 'zealots' come out in force whenever anyone says anything ill of Apple. It was quite interesting to hear in the fourth article that -- unless I misunderstood it? -- there's someone at Apple whose job is to rile up the crazies when they get wind of that kind of thing on the interwebz.
But ultimately, the discussion about the problems of the App Store is more interesting. The 'race to the bottom' is something anyone with half a brain can see, and anyone who's a developer looks at that and must feel some gnawing fear. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like we're all pushed to mobile (if you're not on mobile, you're out of touch!) and when I look at the market, it gives me the willies. I don't think the Google Play Store is doing any better in that regard either. Worse, I don't have the foggiest idea of how to correct the problem, not even one that would take Herculean effort from either company to employ.
Race to the bottom... (Score:5, Insightful)
The 'race to the bottom' is just utterly normal for any market with lots of competition. The only way to escape then is setting yourself apart enough to command higher prices instead of trying to undercut the cheapest offers and this in itself is a highly competitive field (as in: works only for a few apps, not for all).
Face it, apps are like cups of coffee: Either you sell just coffee and people will buy the cheapest one or you manage to add some (real or subjective) value to your cups of coffee so you can sell with better margins.
But yes, it's almost impossible to make a living from $0.99 apps.
Re: (Score:2)
You missed a perfect opportunity for a car analogy:
The "race to the bottom" is because everyone is competing on price, when they don't have to. Mercedes and BMW are doing just fine without having to undercut Kia on price. At the end of the day, they're all cars; but sometimes people pay more money for more features.
Re: (Score:3)
> Still, the over-arching point that I felt was useful was that criticism is not well-received at Apple
But what proof? The examples in the article were all about *end users* complaining about his posts. Fanbois. Just tune them out.
The evidence that *Apple* takes action (or even gives a crap) about these articles is tenuous, at best. I think Laporte at least has a claim, but this seems largely handwaving.
Re: (Score:2)
The evidence that *Apple* takes action (or even gives a crap) about these articles is tenuous, at best.
The Wicked Witch doesn't have to care, as long as the Flying Monkeys, keep doing their stuff reliably. Just sprinkle a little monkey food from time to time to keep them living.
Re: (Score:3)
To be honest, I just don't know if most apps are worth paying for.
I recently switched to Android and wanted to make an app, mostly for fun. But I wasn't sure what I wanted to make. I can't think of any needs I have from my phone that I don't already have met, and I don't want to make a game. I browsed through the Play store looking for inspiration. Maybe I'd see something that would spark an idea, or would make me think "it would be fun to develop a free version of that."
Nothing. I scrolled through hundreds
Re: (Score:2)
The "race to the bottom" is a reality when developers flood the market with cheap knock-off versions of other apps and there is no enforcement to check that behavior (i.e copyright law). This results in a large number of non-original, low quality apps. being created by a developer sitting in a hovel and with no original ideas of their own prospering from a lack of integrity. There are ways large corporations, such as Google or Apple, could address this problem just as they go after clones of their product
Re: (Score:2)
I think the 47% you're thinking of is sales last quarter or the North American breakdown. I remember seeing the 47% vs 46% cited, but only recently, and I remember it was not the overall figure. Worldwide, Android is sitting at something like 76.6% (it dropped 2% after the iPhone 6, and that translated into a 2% jump for Apple to 19.7%). The mobile profit numbers are inverted and wider though ;)
Beyond that, I agree with the rest of your post. I think one of the points the article was trying to make though w
Re: (Score:3)
The 'race to the bottom' is something anyone with half a brain can see, and anyone who's a developer looks at that and must feel some gnawing fear. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like we're all pushed to mobile (if you're not on mobile, you're out of touch!) and when I look at the market, it gives me the willies. I don't think the Google Play Store is doing any better in that regard either. Worse, I don't have the foggiest idea of how to correct the problem, not even one that would take Herculean effort from either company to employ.
I'm not sure that this is as much of an issue as people are making it out to be. I do agree that developers should get paid for their work and curation needs to be a bit better (though I find that is somewhat at odds with the complaint that the Review Board rejects stuff...should Apple be more hands on or more hands-off?)
After reading through the article, I checked out the apps that the folk made and used some left-over freebie money from when I last bought a Mac to get their product. They're absolutely rig
Re: (Score:2)
Overblown bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Marco's comments, and other valid criticisms of Apple get taken way to seriously by the mainstream press and distort the intent and strength of the criticisms. Apple does many things right, they do some things wrong; in trying to correct behaviour you need to have it be correctible, not merely a bitch session of unaddressable issues without resolution.
If you criticize your child for making a poor decision you don't subsequently publish that criticism in national newspapers...
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. I listen to Accidental Tech Podcast that Marco Arment puts on with John Siracusa and Casey Liss, and after that article of his [marco.org] went viral, he talked a bit about it. He pointed out that none of the opinions he shared in the blog post were ones he had been keeping to himself. Quite the contrary, he had been sharing them in public, recorded formats for quite some time (i.e. the podcast, Twitter, etc.), so he wasn't expecting them to grow out of proportion like they did.
What he realized was different th
Loose the FTC (Score:2)
If they are being arseholes on this kind of level surely the FTC should get involved the way the did when MS were being arseholes.
The difference between MS & Apple is MS just want your money Apple seem to want your soul too.
Re: (Score:3)
And every time antitrust laws and Apple are mentionned, the regulators will look down at their iphone/ipad, think "No....we can't hurt my PRECIOUS!!" and look the other way.
Re: (Score:3)
More likely, they'll look at Apple's market share numbers (You know, the same numbers that, in other posts, you lot would be citing to show that Android is completely dominating and Apple is obviously doomed... or even "beleaguered".). And seeing that Apple has no monopoly, they'll shrug and move on.
I'm not afraid (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll diss Apple publicly anywhere, anytime. Their walled garden represents easily one of the top 3 threats to computing freedom, and if you're a developer they're nothing but bad news - a nasty middleman who will dictate what your app can do and take your money for the privilege of doing it. For developers, the app store is a microcosm of the American dream, they'll tell you that you can make it on merit, but only a tiny minority will, the rest will just tread water and only enrich Apple in the process.
For users, it's the worst of '90s computing powered by the latest technology - a store full of shitty shovelware that you have to pay for or be annoyed by ads or restricted by a "trial version." And now you can suffer the latest shovelware technologies such as "freemium" gaming and rampant privacy violation! But because it's on a tablet this time, they think it's OK for some reason...the dumb fucks.
Sturgeon's law (Score:5, Insightful)
Their walled garden represents easily one of the top 3 threats to computing freedom,
How do you figure? Not saying you are right or wrong but I'm not seeing a credible argument backing up this assertion.
and if you're a developer they're nothing but bad news - a nasty middleman who will dictate what your app can do and take your money for the privilege of doing it.
"Nasty middleman"? As if Apple provides no value here. Apple created the f-ing platform, both hardware and software as well as the distribution system. It is WILDLY successful and popular. If you don't like how they do it, go somewhere else. Android or Blackberry or Microsoft are all options. Whether you like it or not, Apple reviewing apps does keep malware and other shitty or problematic apps out of the ecosystem. Are there downsides to this? Absolutely. Is Apple sometimes unfair? No doubt about it. But let's not pretend that there is no benefit either. Apple has created something that a huge number of people value very highly and are willing to pay for. There is nothing wrong with being a middleman as long as you are providing value and Apple clearly does to a lot of people. Maybe you don't value what they are selling (and that's totally fine) but many others do.
For developers, the app store is a microcosm of the American dream, they'll tell you that you can make it on merit, but only a tiny minority will, the rest will just tread water and only enrich Apple in the process.
Let's be frank. 99.999% of the apps on the app store are crap (see Sturgeon's law [wikipedia.org]) and do not deserve any of our money. Just because you put something out there doesn't mean it is automatically valuable to anyone else. If someone is delusional enough to think that developing a crappy piece of software entitles them to anything then I have no sympathy.
For users, it's the worst of '90s computing powered by the latest technology - a store full of shitty shovelware that you have to pay for or be annoyed by ads or restricted by a "trial version."
So every developer is supposed to live the dream and somehow be part of the 1% and they all develop undiscovered gems but you admit that most of the software is actually crap not worthy of purchase. So which is it? You're contradicting yourself. If the developers develop something worth buying, people tend to buy it. If they make shovelware then they deserve to lose money. Neither is Apple's fault or responsibility. Apple just makes both possibilities available. It's up to the developer to make something people will actually give a shit about.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple created the f-ing platform, both hardware and software as well as the distribution system. It is WILDLY successful and popular. If you don't like how they do it, go somewhere else.
Seriously? If I disagree with something, if I consider it harmful to society, I will say why I disagree with it and why I think it is harmful, which is exactly what the article and the OP are doing. I think it can be assumed that people with concerns like this will, as you say, go somewhere else. There's a subtle implication in your post, however, that people with such concerns should shut up about them.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Apple is one of the top threats to computing freedom simply because their walled garden was the first to be successful on a general-purpose computer and has created a trend toward more curation and less freedom. All previous attempts at walled gardens on anything but dedicated videogame consoles failed horribly, and such attempts were considered a suicide plan for any business. The trend in computing before the iPhone came out was toward greater openness and freedom, and the success of the iThings m
Re: (Score:2)
Apple "permitted" Swype and other third parties keyboards as soon as they built a framework for extensible keyboards.
Do you have the same complaint about Android not giving users the freedom to selectively disable permissions after an app is installed?
Re: (Score:2)
My phone runs a GNU/Linux-based OS. I got an Android tablet as a gift last year, but I only use it as a "carputer" and it has no Google account connected. I get my apps for it from the F-droid store, which is a thing I was free to install after changing a few options. That was nice wasn't it?
Apple UI is annoying (Score:2)
Have been for years.
I was going to get an iPhone after my BB became annoying...
I got a Galaxy instead.
Yes, they are both very tied into their respective "camps". And I understand the evil ways of Google too well...
However, I cannot stand Apples UI.
I have never understood the appeal of being forced to do things a certain way, when there are other devices that allow multiple ways to achieve things on a device.
Never understood t
Where is Groklaw when we need them? (Score:3)
IMO this is an example of exclusive dealing arrangements and restricting free trade.
15 USC Code 1 Trusts.. [cornell.edu]
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
From that, $100 mil is a slap on the wrist, wait, a mosquito bite for Apple.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/we... [cornell.edu]
Exclusive dealing agreements require a retailer or distributor to purchase exclusively from the manufacturer. These arrangements make it difficult for new sellers to enter the market and find prospective buyers, thus depressing competition. However, because companies widely-use requirements contracts, which essentially are exclusive dealing agreements, for purposes that promote competition, exclusive dealing arrangements only face rule of reason scrutiny..
Section 2 makes illegal a firm's refusal to deal with another firm if the refusing firm refuses for the purpose of trying to monopolize the market. Meanwhile, section 1 prohibits a group from refusing to deal with a particular firm. A group refusal to deal is known as a group boycott. Because of seemingly contradictory Supreme Court decisions over the years, the question of whether group boycotts are subject to the rule of reason or a per se rule has been left murky.
Apple with it's walled garden can certainly dictate who's allowed in but I think there could be legal grounds for challenging that in court. Sure Apple can say "we're protecting our customers" but at the same time they're restricting competition and free access to markets, namely the app store.
Anti-apple and proud of it (Score:2)
Sounds mostly like sour grapes.... (Score:3)
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:5, Interesting)
Yep, yep, sorry... Apple (as an organization) has consistently delivered hardware that we could count on, met or surpassed our needs (and alternative vendors)
Devils Advocate here, look what Apple did by gutting the hardware specs of the latest release of the Mac Mini. In addition they had slowly been morphing their hardware into something that is pure commodity - no user changeable RAM, Flash etc so you have to pay the full Apple price for those items when you buy the complete system, and you are limited by what they offer on the Apple store. As a result their hardware offerings are becoming less desirable every year to the point that I am considering that my next apple computer will be a hackintosh.
And I say that with 2 Apple computers, an iPad, an iPod touch and an iPod nano on my desk (and a Mac Mini in the other room)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is that those things are actually becoming less important for the consumer market. I hate to be of the '8GB should be enough for anybody' ilk, but for the kind of things that people are actually doing, that's probably true.
Think of it this way: the Macbook is the laptop you should be recommending to MOST people that ask you for advice. You only deviate from that advice if they have some sort of restriction or requirement. There are times where you might want to recommend the air, and for nerds y
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:5, Interesting)
I could buy Apple being more robust or more reliable (because it's probably WinDOS we're talking about here) but the idea of the PC being less powerful just sounds like you swimming in the kool-aid.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I could buy Apple being more robust or more reliable (because it's probably WinDOS we're talking about here) but the idea of the PC being less powerful just sounds like you swimming in the kool-aid.
As someone who did tech support for Macs many years ago, I cant buy them being more robust or reliable.
And this was back in the early 00's where suggesting a Mac had a problem meant Apple sent hired goons to your office. You didn't complain that it took two weeks to get a PSU for an Imac... because it was just better (TM).
Pretty much anything you can get from a Mac these days can be gotten from another manufacturer for less money... Except the wank factor of course.
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:4, Insightful)
As a developer, I understand that the race to the bottom is even worse on the Play store, at least it was a while ago, perhaps the App Store has caught up by now.
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:4, Insightful)
Considering my macbook pro has outlasted the top of the line HP laptops I owned at only about 15% of a premium? Yeah, it's just all status.
Hate on Apple all you want to for whatever irrational reasons but Apple hardware is fantastic. That, in itself, makes it worth the price.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I had to get a new battery for it, but my 2010 HP Envy 15 Macbook competitor is still running fine, and has a faster GPU than they ever had. And I've even been able to upgrade the RAM and replace the hard drive in it, hauled it with me on an airplane twice a week for over a year, and generally used the hell out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Hate on Apple all you want to for whatever irrational reasons but Apple hardware is fantastic. That, in itself, makes it worth the price.
"better than HP" does not mean "fantastic". You've got to be better than the high-end Toshibas and Lenovos of the world, not just HPs. HPs have never been known for being particularly good, only for HP being willing to pack the highest-end parts into the machines. Their case design is usually beyond awful. That's one place Apple shines, but they're not the only ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky you. I guess you weren't affected by the GPU failures in that line of laptops. Overheating is pretty common.
Re:Easy as 1-2-3 (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, way to paint hundreds of millions of people with a brush that is appropriate for maybe 500 people.
For every one person who stands in a line, there are 100 that think that guy is an idiot, but still prefer to use Apple products to the competition. But go on trying to paint the picture that everyone that uses their stuff is some zealot that kneels facing Cupertino five times a day. That grew old in the late 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So does half of all US smart phone consumers belong to a cult?
Samsung spends far more on marketing than Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Crap !!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
They are worth 700billion dollars. What would you consider a not dead company?
Re: (Score:2)
RadioShack's new CFO was touting money in the bank numbering in tens of Billions and several tens of Billions above that worth in assets when the new CEO took over 2 or 3 years ago. Guess where RadioShack will be at the end of the week? Any RS that remains open will either be converted into a Sprint Store with an electronics section or possibly a GameStop. The rest will be gone.
Another take would be: How long does it take for depleted Star to go from stable, to Gas Super Giant to (Super)Nova? Just becau
Re: (Score:2)
Dude...By the end of March RadioShack is dead. D-E-D - dead. They've filed chapter 11 bankruptcy and are liquidating. On Saturday, Sunday, and Monday the local RS stores near me will be having a grab-bag event where you can fill a small bag for $5, a medium bag for $15, and a large bag for $50. Anything that fits is yours. My local store has a crap ton of R-Pi's and Arduino Kits and shields left, and no one around me wants them. I'll be able to buy out the entire stock with a $15 bag or two... that's
Re:Crap !!!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The whole Apple ecosystem is built, designed and operated like a cult. People on both sides of debate frequently refer to it as a "Church". It funnels more and more money from the fanatical congregation into the pockets of the leadership through convincing them that they absolutely, positively *need* to upgrade to the next Operating Thetan, erm, I mean "version". Seriously, Scientology could take lessons from them. WTF did you expect?
Forget to put on our tinfoil hat and take our medication this morning did we?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Competitors gonna compete! I built my app for a competitor first and now they won't talk to me? Oh noes!
That's some grade-A whining right there.
Most devs build our apps for our customers, not for OS manufacturers.