Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Apple To Developers: Fuck You

1246729

Posts

  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    They're being anti-competitive, but it's on their own little platform to which there are many, many alternatives.

    This and I'm mostly annoyed at fan boys who think apple can do no wrong. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why they need to lock down developers even more.

    Enlarged the explanation for you. This is in addition to what has been covered already, that Atomic Ross summarized above.

    It is their platform. They can restrict it as much as they want.

    Also nice ad hom/strawman with the "fanboys who think apple can do no wrong", since no one said that.

    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    They're being anti-competitive, but it's on their own little platform to which there are many, many alternatives.

    This and I'm mostly annoyed at fan boys who think apple can do no wrong. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why they need to lock down developers even more.

    Enlarged the explanation for you. This is in addition to what has been covered already, that Atomic Ross summarized above.

    It is their platform. They can restrict it as much as they want.

    Also nice ad hom/strawman with the "fanboys who think apple can do no wrong", since no one said that.

    Thats great. They can do what they want with THEIR PLATFORM and I can bitch about it being dumb.

    Also how does restricting to those languages ensure quality? Why not ensure performance standards through performance standards instead of restricting languages. Unless they can prove that anything written in a specific language even if coded efficiently on their platform is going to suck resources or be too slow.

    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong Warning: Donkey Kong is not a real doctor Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I definitely think Apple is making a wrong move that is at once antagonistic to users and developers while catering to their business interests and the business interests of the wireless carriers they've partnered with.

    But it's neither evil or illegal because we have the option to walk away disgusted at any time. When the iPhone becomes the dominant handset and other companies can't even get a foothold on the market due to crazy binding contracts with developers and retailers and lots of industry collusion, let me know and I'll reconsider my assessment.

    easy_tetris_sig.gifbubbulon3_sig.png
  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I definitely think Apple is making a wrong move that is at once antagonistic to users and developers while catering to their business interests and the business interests of the wireless carriers they've partnered with.

    But it's neither evil or illegal because we have the option to walk away disgusted at any time. When the iPhone becomes the dominant handset and other companies can't even get a foothold on the market due to crazy binding contracts with developers and retailers and lots of industry collusion, let me know and I'll reconsider my assessment.

    Basically this.

    A lot of people are freaking out because Apple is imposing development restrictions, but so what?

    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement, and in this case isn't even necessary. Developers can make money either way, it's just a bit more polarized now.

    Again, Apple doesn't control the market, and no one's putting a gun to your head.

  • BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    They're being anti-competitive, but it's on their own little platform to which there are many, many alternatives.

    This and I'm mostly annoyed at fan boys who think apple can do no wrong. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why they need to lock down developers even more.

    Ensuring quality control? Maintaining performance standards? Encouraging development of system-friendly software? A'cause they wanna?

    Take your pick, really.

    The last point isn't what I consider reasonable, and you'd have quite a time actually proving that the practices that the new agreement prohibits really conflicts with the remaining points.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    They're being anti-competitive, but it's on their own little platform to which there are many, many alternatives.

    This and I'm mostly annoyed at fan boys who think apple can do no wrong. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why they need to lock down developers even more.

    Ensuring quality control? Maintaining performance standards? Encouraging development of system-friendly software? A'cause they wanna?

    Take your pick, really.

    The last point isn't what I consider reasonable, and you'd have quite a time actually proving that the practices that the new agreement prohibits really conflicts with the remaining points.

    I'm not sure what answer you're looking for.


    Did you know certain universities won't admit students whose SAT scores are under 1300, despite the legal minimum being 820?

    Craziness.

  • edited April 2010
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    They're being anti-competitive, but it's on their own little platform to which there are many, many alternatives.

    This and I'm mostly annoyed at fan boys who think apple can do no wrong. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why they need to lock down developers even more.

    Ensuring quality control? Maintaining performance standards? Encouraging development of system-friendly software? A'cause they wanna?

    Take your pick, really.

    The last point isn't what I consider reasonable, and you'd have quite a time actually proving that the practices that the new agreement prohibits really conflicts with the remaining points.

    If you disagree with Apple's practise, do not buy the phone.

  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong Warning: Donkey Kong is not a real doctor Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Apple Blocked Flash because:

    Flash sucks - Maybe not now, maybe not on the iPhone, but Jobs holds a grudge mostly from its past performance on Macs.

    Flash eliminates Apple's lock-in - It offers a non-iPhone target for apps, making it too easy for developers to target multiple platforms or just pack up and leave without losing their investment

    Flash apps are inconsistent - They won't have that iPhone look and feel that Apple thinks is important to users.

    Because they can - Apple designed the iPhone OS so they could control every aspect on a whim. Imagine how intoxicating that idea must be to any platform maker.

    And that's pretty much it. A summary of the thread. Did I miss anything?

    easy_tetris_sig.gifbubbulon3_sig.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2010
    Because it only applies if you want to use their store.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Yeah, i don't know what you're expecting from us.

    Should I burn my iPod?

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    shryke wrote: »
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

    I guess it's because it's really just Business 101 to do what you can to decrease your competition. I'm not supporting it, I just don't really care, because market entry is still possible and relatively easy.

    That's like saying I support the killing of baby antelopes just because I don't support shooting lions.

  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    shryke wrote: »
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

    Because it is anti-competitive within the Apple brand. They are not saying: if you release Android apps we won't approve you in our app store. That would be inter-brand anti-competitive.

    There are certain situations where intra-brand anti-competitive behavior enhances inter-brand competition. Case in point, the sales price of a new Scion vehicle is set by Toyota for all Scion dealers. This eliminates intra-brand dealer competition. However, it allows them to compete better against other brands, by making dealers compete on service rather than price.

    Apple is betting that apps required to be written exclusively for the iPhone will be better than those written for multiple platforms. If this raises the costs of developers too much, the iPhone will lose sales relative to other smartphones.

    Now, if Apple controlled the smartphone market, the picture would be different. Monopolies deserve really special scrutiny when it comes to this sort of behavior. But Apple is no monopoly, not even in music sales let alone smartphones.

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    shryke wrote: »
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

    I guess it's because it's really just Business 101 to do what you can to decrease your competition. I'm not supporting it, I just don't really care, because market entry is still possible and relatively easy.

    That's like saying I support the killing of baby antelopes just because I don't support shooting lions.

    Or it will increase competition by pissing off developers / making it easier to develop on platforms that aren't as restricted. Thus providing more apps for the competition.

    edit: beat'd by encore who said it much better.

    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong Warning: Donkey Kong is not a real doctor Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    shryke wrote: »
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

    I guess it's because it's really just Business 101 to do what you can to decrease your competition. I'm not supporting it, I just don't really care, because market entry is still possible and relatively easy.

    That's like saying I support the killing of baby antelopes just because I don't support shooting lions.

    Or it will increase competition by pissing off developers / making it easier to develop on platforms that aren't as restricted. Thus providing more apps for the competition.

    And that will punish Apple for this bullshit and maybe they'll reconsider their nonsense. That would be fantastic!

    easy_tetris_sig.gifbubbulon3_sig.png
  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement

    How do you guys say this around here... "limed for motherfucking truth"?

    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    It's stupidly restrictive yes, but Apple's control on programming language isn't anti-competitive in the least.

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2010
    True freedom is forcing other people to do what you want!

    It's like when I see GPL fanboys that think the only way software can be free is for it to be GPL'd.

    You know, instead of allowing programmers to license software how they want to.

    Realistically though, if you want to do anything to your iPhone, you've jailbroken it, and therefore aren't following Apple's TOS in the first place. You have a homebrew store, toolchains, anything you want. It's kinda like how people wanted to be able to homebrew their 360s but still get on Live, even though homebrew can replace all the features they would lose by not updating anyway.

  • His CorkinessHis Corkiness Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement

    How do you guys say this around here... "limed for motherfucking truth"?
    I don't think you guys know what "open source" is.

  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sam wrote: »
    Opera Mini in its entirety is best described as WTF?

    It's really, really not good compared to Safari. I'll keep it around though, for when I go places with terrible reception.

    Im on opera mini right now and have no idea what you guys are talking about. The speed is amazing, and while i do miss being able to zoom properly, it works more than well enough. The sliding isnt hard to control at all. Seriously the only dosadvantage is not being able to frame things exactly the way you want to, but that effectively only means you have to pan horozontally a bit more. The speed more than makes up for this minor issue.

    There is the whole "if you get a weblink in an email and you want to view it in Opera you have to manually copy the link, open Opera, and manually paste the URL in, instead of just clicking the link" thing, since Apple won't let any other app besides Safari be the default web browser.

  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Apple should let the free market decide which programming standards to use!

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement

    How do you guys say this around here... "limed for motherfucking truth"?
    I don't think you guys know what "open source" is.

    Um, from the context it's quite clear what he means. Let's not get into dumb semantic games, yeah?

    Or here, let me rephrase this so you stop whining: a platform being fully open is not an entitlement.

    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    True freedom is forcing other people to do what you want!

    It's like when I see GPL fanboys that think the only way software can be free is for it to be GPL'd.

    You know, instead of allowing programmers to license software how they want to.

    None of these statements are in any way related to each other.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement

    How do you guys say this around here... "limed for motherfucking truth"?
    I don't think you guys know what "open source" is.

    Um, from the context it's quite clear what he means. Let's not get into dumb semantic games, yeah?

    Or here, let me rephrase this so you stop whining: a platform being fully open is not an entitlement.

    Depends on the platform.

  • His CorkinessHis Corkiness Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Open sourcing isn't an entitlement

    How do you guys say this around here... "limed for motherfucking truth"?
    I don't think you guys know what "open source" is.

    Um, from the context it's quite clear what he means. Let's not get into dumb semantic games, yeah?

    Or here, let me rephrase this so you stop whining: a platform being fully open is not an entitlement.
    Thanks.

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2010
    shryke wrote: »
    Well, people seem to have already agreed it's anti-competitive behavior.

    I think many of us are just trying to figure out why this is OK with you guys.

    Because it's not really anti competitive behavior and this is absolutely nothing new with an Apple product.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • CorlisCorlis Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Out of curiosity, is jailbreaking your iPad illegal?

    But I don't mind, as long as there's a bed beneath the stars that shine,
    I'll be fine, just give me a minute, a man's got a limit, I can't get a life if my heart's not in it.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2010
    Corlis wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, is jailbreaking your iPad illegal?

    Technically, yes, because you agree not to in the EULA.

    But just like with OSX, they don't really enforce it because they understand that suing the hell out of a single individual is really bad fucking press.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • T-boltT-bolt Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sweet, yet another reason for me to stay clear of the Iphone. I hope this bites them in the ass.

    PSN: P-bass [USF4, SF3:3s, MVC3]
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    T-bolt wrote: »
    Sweet, yet another reason for me to stay clear of the Iphone. I hope this bites them in the ass.

    It won't.

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • PerpetualPerpetual Registered User
    edited April 2010
    T-bolt wrote: »
    Sweet, yet another reason for me to stay clear of the Iphone. I hope this bites them in the ass.

    Haters gonna hate.

  • CorbiusCorbius Shepard Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Perpetual wrote: »
    T-bolt wrote: »
    Sweet, yet another reason for me to stay clear of the Iphone. I hope this bites them in the ass.

    1257.jpg

    wrexsig1.jpg
  • mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Because it only applies if you want to use their store.

    So a developer can create apps and I can load them easily (no jailbreaking or anything) onto my iPhone without going through the store?

    Or what are you saying here?

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    mrflippy wrote: »
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Because it only applies if you want to use their store.

    So a developer can create apps and I can load them easily (no jailbreaking or anything) onto my iPhone without going through the store?

    Or what are you saying here?

    Why is that an expectation?

    If I want to play a game on my 360, a developer has to make the game within Microsoft's restrictions and put it up for sale where I can buy it. The iPhone is a platform, not a computer.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    mrflippy wrote: »
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Because it only applies if you want to use their store.

    So a developer can create apps and I can load them easily (no jailbreaking or anything) onto my iPhone without going through the store?

    Or what are you saying here?

    Why is that an expectation?

    If I want to play a game on my 360, a developer has to make the game within Microsoft's restrictions and put it up for sale where I can buy it. The iPhone is a platform, not a computer.

    But you can buy that 360 game anywhere, not just at the Microsoft store.

    Android allows you to buy and install apps from other sources. I've seen a bit of price differentiation come out of this. That is GOOD for the consumer.

    georgersig.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sheep wrote: »
    Corlis wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, is jailbreaking your iPad illegal?

    Technically, yes, because you agree not to in the EULA.

    But just like with OSX, they don't really enforce it because they understand that suing the hell out of a single individual is really bad fucking press.

    Breaking a EULA is not illegal, it is a breach of contract, at most.

    There is a pretty serious difference. There is nothing about jail breaking your iphone that is AGAINST THE LAW.

    georgersig.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    But you can buy that 360 game anywhere, not just at the Microsoft store.

    Android allows you to buy and install apps from other sources. I've seen a bit of price differentiation come out of this. That is GOOD for the consumer.

    I don't see what you're saying.

    You can access the App Store from any Mac or PC, or any iPhone/iPod/iPad with a wi-fi connection.


    That's ubiquity, friend.



    Should we for some reason be able to buy Apple-based Apps via some other outlet?

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    But you can buy that 360 game anywhere, not just at the Microsoft store.

    Android allows you to buy and install apps from other sources. I've seen a bit of price differentiation come out of this. That is GOOD for the consumer.

    I don't see what you're saying.

    You can access the App Store from any Mac or PC, or any iPhone/iPod/iPad with a wi-fi connection.


    That's ubiquity, friend.



    Should we for some reason be able to buy Apple-based Apps via some other outlet?

    Why not?

    To keep with the 360 angle, I can buy a game from Gamestop either in-store, or from any internet enabled device over the web. But I can also go to GameCrazy, or to Walmart. Or to Amazon.com. Each store has the ability to have different prices. Competition is good for the consumer, because it drives prices down.

    On my android phone, I can use the marketplace to buy my apps, or I can buy the file ANYWHERE online that is looking to sell it, and install it by loading the file on to my phone. For example, this got me the microsoft office compatible program that I use for $10, instead of $30, because it was on sale elsewhere. Completely legit (it was a legitimate retailer selling it), and I didn't have to do ANYTHING to my phone to install it, other than check a box in the settings.



    Look, I'm not here to smear Apple. If you are happy with what they do, good for you. My point is only that just because apple does things one way doesn't mean that there are NO OTHER ways for it to be done, some of which might be better to some people if they opened their eyes.



    edit: Windows Smartphone was like this too, only without the centralized marketplace (while I was still using them, they have one now, I believe.) Having a centralized store is nice and convenient, but having ONLY a centralized store is consumer negative, and a step backwards, in my opinion.

    georgersig.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Each store has the ability to have different prices. Competition is good for the consumer, because it drives prices down.

    I see what you're saying now, but I think it may be a bit off.

    In your analogy, Wal-Mart can move more units if they undercut their competition. But Wal-Mart has already paid Microsoft (or whoever) for their product, so the only party Wal-Mart hurts when lowering the price is themselves. Wal-Mart didn't develop the product, and they didn't finance the project. They just sell it to earn money for themselves.

    In the App Store, Apple serves the same role as Wal-Mart, except their profit is tied into pure sales percentage, not up-front purchase orders. This means Apple can offer a wider range of products because it poses no risk to them financially to do so, and it means that the developers are directly responsible for how well or poorly their product is sold.

    In a way, Apple is far more encouraging of competition than a Wal-Mart analog, because Apple can take on all comers. Wal-Mart can't do that; it has limited shelf space, limited advertising budgets, and mandatory up-front purchasing.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Each store has the ability to have different prices. Competition is good for the consumer, because it drives prices down.

    I see what you're saying now, but I think it may be a bit off.

    In your analogy, Wal-Mart can move more units if they undercut their competition. But Wal-Mart has already paid Microsoft (or whoever) for their product, so the only party Wal-Mart hurts when lowering the price is themselves. Wal-Mart didn't develop the product, and they didn't finance the project. They just sell it to earn money for themselves.

    In the App Store, Apple serves the same role as Wal-Mart, except their profit is tied into pure sales percentage, not up-front purchase orders. This means Apple can offer a wider range of products because it poses no risk to them financially to do so, and it means that the developers are directly responsible for how well or poorly their product is sold.

    In a way, Apple is far more encouraging of competition than a Wal-Mart analog, because Apple can take on all comers. Wal-Mart can't do that; it has limited shelf space, limited advertising budgets, and mandatory up-front purchasing.

    Except that you lose price competition COMPLETELY.

    What I am talking about exists currently on other platforms. It is not just a made up idea. It is the system that sustained WinMo software for ages.

    There is no harm in allowing for it. Apple hasn't been a very consumer friendly company in decades, though, so it's not a surprise that they won't allow it. What is upsetting is that other companies who hope to attain iphone level success copy Apple's consumer-negative machinations, throwing out the baby with the bathwater in reverse, as it were (I need a good metaphor for that), so you get things like Win Phone 7 cutting out external installations.

    georgersig.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.