MplayerX Leaving Mac App Store 225
New submitter technonono writes "MplayerX, a popular and free video player app on Mac OSX, is now leaving Mac App Store 'after arguing with Apple for three months.' The developer claims that Apple's sandboxing policies would strip the app into 'another lame Quicktime X,' which is unacceptable. The app is releasing updates on its own site, where users who bought it from the App Store would most likely never notice them. The situation was 'foretold' by Marco Arment, at least for one app."
Procrastination (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
They said they were arguing back and forth for 3 months, not that they only had 3 months to attempt to implement changes.
Re: (Score:3)
Android is a desktop OS? (We're talking about Mac OS and the Mac App Store, not iOS)
Re: (Score:3)
The Mac OS has an App Store? Do people actually use that? Forgive my ignorance, I do not actually have a Mac.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, Apple has created a Mac App Store to sell apps, and showcase some "Best of" apps. It is not exclusive, and you can still download and install apps the normal way. Apple has gotten stricter, requiring anyone who wants their app listed in the store to use sandboxing to prevent security holes in the OS. That's what this story is about.
Re: (Score:2)
In a way, it's a ray of common sense -- trust the user to know what's best, after adequate warnings have been given. The biggest suck here, though, is that indy developers who are hoping to get compensated through Apple app's store are at a severe disadvantage.
Why?
They learn the APIs and they're good to go. How does sandboxing put them in any greater disadvantage?
Oh, and the slang abbreviation for "independent" is "indie", not "indy", which is the slang abbreviation for the city of "Indianapolis".
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, the solution to every problem Apple developers face is, as always, bend over a little further.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, the solution to every problem Apple developers face is, as always, bend over a little further.
So, of course you'd rather the Linuxtards have a field day about how "OS X doesn't even support sandboxing", right? Or, not put any incentive behind developers learning and using the sandboxing API?
Apple has moved and moved and moved the "drop dead date" for enforcement of sandboxing. And they don't even make it mandatory unless you want to sell your warez in the Mac Apple Store.
So now the devs that continually bitched about how restrictive Apple's "Walled Garden" is, are bitching that they are only abl
Re: (Score:2)
BAD sandboxing is worse than none at all. It's better to have a dangerous powersaw than a useless door stop. There are plenty of doorstops available. You don't need to turn the Mac into that.
This seems more like an attempt to control the user rather than to actually protect the user from themselves.
Restricting read access to non-critical user data? Really? That's just retarded. It adds nothing to user security and just serves to encourage people to not bother at all.
This is Apple's answer to Vista UAC.
Re: (Score:3)
The alarmist predictions that OSX will go the way of iOS are off base. iOS is consumption oriented, whereas OSX is productio
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your post highlights how little you understand Apple, their hardware and their userbase.
and I think your post highlights how your understanding of apple hw and userbase is a decade out of date.
sure they know what pro's need. they just don't give a fuck since that's not where their money comes from.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So I really wouldn't be surprised if this next refresh is probably the last for the pro line, Apple doesn't really need them and they cost Apple more than any other division on hardware. Its just good business sense to bail out of a niche that doesn't bring in the sales and the Apple pros simply don't move like the Macbooks and iMacs.
First off, do you REALLY think the Pro line isn't profitable for Apple? Have you seen the list prices [apple.com] for Mac Pros? If you listen to the Linux fanbois, they could build TEN systems with TWICE THE SPECS for these prices (but I digress...) ;-)
And then there's this little email [anandtech.com] from Tim Cook, that seems to affirmatively put to bed your meme...
Re: (Score:2)
Typing this on a Mac right now, Macs aren't a professional machine, they're a vanity item. Windows software support has been better for maybe 15 years.
MplayerX was in the App Store? (Score:4)
I have it installed, but never even thought to look for it there. Nothing to do with sandboxing requirements - I just would've figured their developers would object to the concept of the App Store on principle.
I predict, for the moment, only.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would put forward that this conclusion is actually only true right now, but I expect over the coming years that is liable to change.
As an increasing number of applications *DO* become available on the app store, I would suggest that a growing number of people are going to increasingly rely upon it. Eventually, I expect that a critical mass will be reached (I predict about 2 years from now), and Apple will shut the door to external sales on the Mac outside of jailbroken devices forever.
This will probably be cause for a lot of people to abandon the mac platform, but I expect that the remaining userbase will be sufficiently large by that point in time that other developers will eventually be drawn to writing for the platform, attracted by the promise of what will seem to them, initially at least, to be a largely untapped market.
And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would Apple alienate their professional customers, including developers? They're the ones who, along with graphic artists, movie editors, radiologists, etc, who pay top dollar for the most expensive Macs?
If developers can't install Apps like Eclipse, Mac Ports, various command-line tools, etc, then they'll switch platforms. Apple can't afford to lose those sales.
Besides, many game developers don't distribute on the Mac App Store, including EA and Blizzard (and Steam still runs separate from the App
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.
Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?
Re: (Score:3)
Apparently they don't.
A quick google search will turn up article after article about the "royal clusterfuck" that was the release of Final Cut Pro X. Hell, I have no interest in the app at all and even I'm familiar with that mess of a release.
Anyhow, the biggest complaint seems to be that Apple removed a shit-ton of essential features from the program, turning a once professional tool in to a play-toy. See for yourself. Apple, once again, fails to understand working professionals and their needs.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.
One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.
The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that a
Re: (Score:2)
One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.
One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.
The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that any sensible alternative is provided by the software. Of course, "updating" your workflow isn't helpful if that workflow doesn't jive with your other applications. As I understand it, FCPX doesn't support OMF transfers which appears to be a common feature. Given that solutions to many of the missing features in FCPX include the use of third-party software, this kind of omission, well, makes the software somewhat less than professional.
I don't know enough about video editing or the software to give a through critique -- all I can do is report on the problems. That FCPX was anything but a professional tool seems to be the consensus.
All of those were legitimate gripes. However I believe ALL of them [geniusdv.com] have been [apple.com], or are currently being [electronista.com], addressed [x2pro.net], either by Apple, or by others. In one case (FCP 7 import), the 3rd party plugin/add-on is a whopping $10, and in the case of the other, more expensive one (AAF export), there is now a FREE [premiumbeat.com] solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that make the point though? If you need to rely extensively on third-party software to make up for features missing in the new release, which were present in the old release, it's not difficult to argue that the new software is no longer the professional tool it was in previous incarnations. That these features are in other professional tools from Avid and Adobe just kind of cements it, yeah?
I'm sure you can think of other instances where Apple has misunderstood the professional market in some of
Re: (Score:3)
You're being deliberately obtuse. The $10 addon is, as you know, a bit dishonest. Some of the more popular addons to restore lost functionality cost close to $500.
Sure, it added some new features, but was, at release, quite obviously not a professional tool -- as professionals tell it. I don't get the bits in all caps -- Project Backups? Yeah ... if that was missing in the first few releases of FCPX, it was quite clearly not ready for prime-time.
Still, if you want to list features, you'll need to compar
Re: (Score:2)
Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?
The point is not that they do not know, but that they do not care.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?
The point is not that they do not know, but that they do not care.
Not according to Tim Cook [gizmodo.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Not according to Tim Cook [gizmodo.com].
I seriously doubt that the anonymous you were answering too is Tim Cook.
Professionals Don't Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
he Mac App Store is about consumers, just like the iOS App Store. Not creators or 'professionals'. Even if you estimate that 10% of Mac's desktop/laptop hardware sales were 'professionals' (an extremely high estimate) and every single one of them abandoned Mac as a result of these changes (unlikely), that's still only $493 million. 1.4% of Apple's revenue
There is one group of professionals they can't drive off though; the people that write those lovely profitable apps that go in the app stores.
If people can
Why would that be? (Score:2)
"If people can't get their dev environment running, they won't dev apps"
Why wouldn't they be able to get their dev environment running? I understand what you are trying to say but realistically Apple does supply Xcode and any other tools needed to make apps on it's platform. If you don't like it Apple will just tell you to piss off like they do on everything else. It's not fair but then again Apple has never been about fair.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.
... Apple will continue making loads of money selling other people's software, and developers will mostly stay on board because the App Store is a much bigger market than you usually get to tap as an indie?
You say it like it's something that Apple somehow should regret. I don't like it, but it seems to be working out pretty well for them.
Re: (Score:2)
I say it like it's something *I* regret.
It will be a boon for Apple... and will probably keep them relevant for at least another decade, if not two.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As an increasing number of applications *DO* become available on the app store, I would suggest that a growing number of people are going to increasingly rely upon it. Eventually, I expect that a critical mass will be reached (I predict about 2 years from now), and Apple will shut the door to external sales on the Mac outside of jailbroken devices forever.
This will probably be cause for a lot of people to abandon the mac platform, but I expect that the remaining userbase will be sufficiently large by that point in time that other developers will eventually be drawn to writing for the platform, attracted by the promise of what will seem to them, initially at least, to be a largely untapped market.
And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.
This is a steaming pile of bullcrap hyperbole topped with +1 We Like It When Someone Says They Will Do Bad Things and +1 If We Wish Hard Enough It Will Come True
It amounts to "I think Apple will sandbox their entire desktop OS because iOS"
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple faithful said "Never going to Intel!" and it happened. So, hyperbole or not, Apple is closing off their once semi-open OS so they can maintain control over the "experience." If that's what people want when they buy a Mac or iPhone, that's fine. It's just not what some of the older converts (who started with 10.0 via a coupon in their Macs) want.
It is what it is. Evil megacorp references aside... these things have been brewing in the applesphere for a while now. It's not a new plan. Apple's never
Re: (Score:3)
The Apple faithful said "Never going to Intel!" and it happened. So, hyperbole or not, Apple is closing off their once semi-open OS so they can maintain control over the "experience."
Let me get this straight. By Apple faithful, I presume you're referring to users - not the company itself. If I'm wrong there, who was it who said this? With that presumption, I'd like to parse what you wrote.
You claim that Apple is going to do x because their fans in the past said that Apple would not do y, yet Apple did do y. What?
Re: (Score:2)
The apple users, lovers, people who owned Powermacs... said on forums, in editorial print magazines, and just about everywhere else "No, Apple's not going to Intel"... and gave a myriad of practical reasons (they thought) why it wouldn't occur. What that means in context is everyone who says "OS X is never going to be iOS" and "OS X will always be what it is today..." etc... are more than likely incorrect in their predictions.
Given Apple's past performance is it not unreasonable to assume that Apple won't j
Re: (Score:2)
The apple users, lovers, people who owned Powermacs... said on forums, in editorial print magazines, and just about everywhere else "No, Apple's not going to Intel"... and gave a myriad of practical reasons (they thought) why it wouldn't occur. What that means in context is everyone who says "OS X is never going to be iOS" and "OS X will always be what it is today..." etc... are more than likely incorrect in their predictions.
Heh, a possible tl;dr coming your way.
Ah, I get you. Still, it doesn't follow that they're probably incorrect, and this whole lock-down thing is pretty subjective. I agree that the battery thing could be a pain, and 12 years ago I'd have thought it crazy if my PowerBook G3 came that way. No way I'd be getting much work done if I had to rely on a single battery, but these days battery life is way better. Still, when this thing gets old, I'm going to have to send the entire thing off. That part could be pain.
Re: (Score:2)
Oops.. I should've mentioned this in the previous post.. (sorry!) but you can see even in my posting history (I'll spare you the tedium) where I stated "if Apple goes Intel, I'll eat my hat." (I gave a bunch of now inconsequential reasons for the claim too... but at the time they seemed relevant)
My hat tasted like shit. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I argue its already hit critical mass, and the masses are starting to wake up to the idea that one store does not have all that they may want
Re: (Score:2)
Ignoring your pointless attempt to hit Kentucky with a pussy swing...
"It may come as a surprise to you but developers like to make money."
And holy fuck, what better place to make money than on a store with the narrowest market possible with some dictator that removes your product from market at a whim without justification, were not talking IOS here, its Mac OS, ya know that computer thing apple does which is getting smaller every year?
Re: (Score:3)
And how do developers develop apps then?
Right now, gatekeeper only applies to apps downloaded from the Internet. If you acquire the app some other way (c
Re: (Score:2)
They will be built on Mac, of course. The limitation hasn't hurt iOS development any.
Absolutely nothing is stopping them from writing their
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They lost me when Stanza stopped working (Score:3, Interesting)
For all their much vaunted backwards compatibility or large collection of apps the reality is that either the app developer keeps updating their app or it breaks. That was what happened with Stanza. It was probably a mere coincidence that it broke around the time iBooks was released.
Or was it?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple absolutely hates its customers! (Score:2, Interesting)
I got off of the Apple bandwagon a long time ago after I realised how much Apple's ecosystem is like a prison. I'd rather have my freedom. Microsoft and other companies are moving more and more in the direction of Apple (and Apple just keeps moving in the wrong directions). Even Canonical, Red Hat, System76, ZaReason, and quite a few others have really annoyed me in recent years. Not so much because they have taken drastic steps towards imprisoning you although more for their ignorance and complacency. Cano
MPlayer? (Score:2)
The Real Deal (Score:2, Insightful)
Some of this is just a learning curve on the part of developers. As has been pointed out, a lot of the issues surround access to the file system but as long as the user selects a folder (via the OS' built-in privileged process proxy that presents the selection UI for your app) or drags it to your app, you can store a link to it that is part of your sandbox, including across reboots.
In this App's case, it would mean reworking his UI slightly to have users select folders with content in them, not individual m
Re: (Score:3)
In this App's case, it would mean reworking his UI slightly to have users select folders with content in them, not individual movies.
Except that I play movies by finding them in finder, and double clicking them. I can't remember the last time I opened a movie from -within- an application's user interface.
So, no, reworking he UI would be pretty irrelevant.
Audio sync bug (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Alternative App Store (Score:2)
Maybe there is à market for a non-Apple app store? If someone gets in the act now, and Apple pulls the rug, then it would be possible to apply anti-trust laws.
With regards to sandboxing, I can understand why Apple is doing this, but have they gone too far with their sand boxing model? What needs to be improved and does a better model exist elsewhere?
Fuck it. (Score:2)
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Informative)
From Apple's design guide:
It seems like the simplest solution is to have the user choose the folder the videos are in, not the video itself.
You could just have the user pick the folder their video library is stored in, and the player can even create a 'bookmark' so the app can access that folder (and its contents) persistently across restarts.
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:4, Insightful)
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Re: (Score:3)
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.
Oh, you mean the FREE one?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Funny)
QuickTime Player is sandboxed in 10.8 (and possibly earlier), so it should have the same issues as MPlayerX... And I havn't experienced any difficulties as a power user.
What does it mean to be a power user of QuickTime Player? That you managed to find the full-screen button?
Re: (Score:3)
The app working correctly should not be dependent on where I keep my media.
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't stand all these anti-sandboxing stories that make it sound like selling software over the Internet is so horrible.
I would hazard a guess that the MplayerX folks have more of a clue about the situation than you.
The subtext of this story is: it's walled garden time boys and girls, suck it down and like it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't the problem that with the iOS app store that developers have no choice but to use the app store? The developer doesn't want to or can't use the app store for his app so he is free to distribute it on his own site. Isn't this the way it is suppose to work?
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Funny)
Fortunately, he did throw in a good argument which you probably missed while you were masturbating over the latest fart app.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, he didn't. Apple being control freaks has noting to do with making apps in the app store make use of sandboxing.
Re: (Score:2)
And the sub-sub-text is that the number of "how to hack" sites and people who are getting surprisingly good at reverse-engineering stuff seems to be increasing, while Apple products seem to be an ever-increasing target.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's Apple's 1984-esque bullshit like this which is the primary reason why I will never waste my money on an apple product until they change their ways. I don't want to buy a glorified media playe
Re: (Score:2)
It also doesn't include double clicking on a movie file to open the player - it would get permission to the clicked file, but not to the associated subtitle file.
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Funny)
I was wondering how long it'd take before we arrived at "you're holding it wrong".
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that I as a user am dealing with the video files that are already there, in a popular and widespread format that splits them in two files. I don't care about what is the "right answer" from the technical perspective, I just want to watch the videos.
And, by the way, no, it's not actually the right answer in all cases. For example, as a foreigner, back in the day when I didn't know English well, I had to watch foreign videos with translated subtitles. In many cases there were no such official s
Re: (Score:2)
I normally open files by double clicking on them in the file manager of the OS in question, not by launching an app and then activating its file open dialog - the latter is too many extra steps, especially when I already have the directory in question open in the file manager.
I'd wager that most users also do the same - i.e. that double clicking on a file is by far the most common way to launch an app associated with that file.
Re: (Score:2)
I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.
That includes dragging a file or a folder to the app, and keeping bookmarks of files that can be opened. What doesn't work is letting the user type in a path, which is not a good user interface anyway.
Especially on a Mac.
The only time I ever have to type in a path is in Terminal, for obvious reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, just because you want to replace "/usb1" or "g:" with several clicks, that's your prerogative. I love my keyboard shortcuts -- they're infinitely faster than moving my hand to the mouse to position the cursor over some small line of text somewhere on my high resolution display.
...And, conversely, just because you want to feel superior every time you type in some 1,000 character CLI incantation, doesn't mean that 99.995% of the computer-using public agrees with you.
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect he's not talking about subtitle tracks - he's talking about standalone subtitle files. MplayerX wouldn't be allowed to open that second file, unasked by the user.
Re:Is this a genuine case? (Score:5, Insightful)
The app can only open files in specifically defined (and Apple approved) locations. Outside these locations, you need express permission (via a file open dialog) to access files. So all would be OK for ~/Movies or ~/Downloads.
But while you could open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.avi" via a file dialog to play it back, the software could not automatically also open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.srt" to show you subtitles.
That's the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you could create your own sandbox files and apple merely provides default ones. They bothered to make a whole file format and command line tools a little some documentation that got me started playing around with it at least a year ago. I'm running my firefox in a sandbox I built right now - I had to do a ton of tweaking as firefox ran into errors. I'm not upgraded the OS yet. I might never...
I like the sandbox system its what OpenBSD needed many many years ago when they were the first ones to p
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, I know it sucks, but couldn't they just ask the user to select _all_ files related to the movie? And then figure out which one is the movie and which one is the subtitles?
Re: (Score:2)
But while you could open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.avi" via a file dialog to play it back, the software could not automatically also open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.srt" to show you subtitles.
So you have the user select the directory '/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies', as a movie repository. The app then has full access to everything underneath it.
It is an extra step for the user- they have to choose all of their movie directories (top level only). Hell you may even ge
Re: (Score:3)
the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files
The user is likely downloading the movie which is split over several files, and doesn't know how to join them. You are blaming the victim.
IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.
Filesystems work. Otherwise we wouldn't have them. We'd just have object stores.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised it took you iCultists so long to start slandering everyone who isn't a part of the iCult and can think outside the box.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. The real problem is that the user has figured out a way to use his computer in a way that YOU didn't expect. It's a general purpose device. THAT is kind of the point.
THIS is precisely the lame brained Apple mentality that I like to complain about.
"You're holding it wrong."
Re: (Score:2)
When Apple closes the gate on the walled garden, we'll all skip that OS update, or leave for another OS. Until then, Macs remain nicely useable even for people who write their own programs and generally don't want to play inside the garden.
Re: (Score:2)
You know you won't.
Re: (Score:3)
And Linux might mean *gasp* learning something new.
The only way out is to make Linux better than OSX. So, start coding...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You mean daemons? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is funny that the system that claims to be "where movies are made", even if the movies are made on linux, is the system with the worst media support.
it doesn't need updates. (Score:2)
Perhaps not, but it never hurts to plan ahead.
Or does apple forbid something like that, pointing you away from the store ?
Re: (Score:2)
The priciple (sic) being what? That we should decide how much is enough, and take the rest for the common good ?
Wrong country. Unless you're trying to make America into something else. You will understand if I don't agree.
Re: (Score:3)
I obviously am. I'm trying to make America a more equal place. The reason why the higher income people should pay more taxes is exactly that reason, a way to level the field. The thing is, they are very good at dodging taxes. And say they pay 13% and feel proud about it...
Re: (Score:2)
America is not and never has been the land of equal results. It is the land of opportunity. You write that you want to make American a more equal place. Levelling the field. Personally, I am not nearly so interested in levelling the field as I am in having an opportunity, and those two things are not the same.
But more to the point, I think, I don't believe the government should take a dollar more in taxes than it needs to do what needs to be done.
Any more than that is taking from me without giving me eve