News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by geocar on Sunday April 23, 2023 @02:04AM (#35673743)
It sounds more like you’re upset about apples revshare model on their channel; Why do you care if all your competitors also have to pay it?

I don’t think the world got better because we got more channels on Tv, and I even think some of them might be dangerous and harmful to life…

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by smoldesu on Sunday April 23, 2023 @02:07AM (#35673760)
That's fine. I'm not arguing for more channels, I just want them to let me use it for things other than the pre-approved and Apple-sponsored channels. This is akin to your TV manufacturer removing your HDMI input to force you to pay for cable.
Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by hayst4ck on Sunday April 23, 2023 @02:40AM (#35673918)
Rather than making apple into android. Why not just purchase a phone more aligned with what you want?

It's because you want the consequence of Apple's choices, but to not pay the cost of Apple's choices. You want to benefit from apple's incredible profit, but you don't want to participate in the system that allows their extravagance.

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by geocar on Sunday April 23, 2023 @02:52AM (#35673983)
Erm, Apple shares the cable subscription revenue with the people who make the content.

People like me.

You are literally talking about stealing my money. To me.

And this doesn’t seem strange to you?

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by moonchrome on Sunday April 23, 2023 @03:02AM (#35674038)
> Why do you care if all your competitors also have to pay it?

Did you ever publish to appstore ? The amount of bullshit you have to go through so that an alternative payment method isn't reachable from mobile is insane, and they want % of a lot of things, not just sales/subscription - a lot of business ideas are unviable because of the policy.

Not to mention that your competitors don't have to pay the same, big players get special deals and exemptions, and Apple has first party advantage on the platform.

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by illiarian on Sunday April 23, 2023 @04:16AM (#35674372)
You've described literally every platform and physical store under the sun except desktop OSes.
Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by geocar on Sunday April 23, 2023 @05:07AM (#35674631)
> Did you ever publish to appstore ?

Yes.

> The amount of bullshit you have to go through so that an alternative payment method isn't reachable from mobile is insane, and they want % of a lot of things

You say insane, but you don't say why. Revenue-sharing is the best for content producers; I would definitely not want to go back to the retail model. What exactly are you trying to do?

> a lot of business ideas are unviable because of the policy.

A lot of business ideas are unviable without slavery! So what? I don't want that, and I hope you don't either! So what is it you actually want?

> Not to mention that your competitors don't have to pay the same, big players get special deals and exemptions,

I don't compete with "big players". If Apple didn't make an iPhone and I didn't make an app to put on it, I wouldn't get that money, and pretending otherwise won't make it so. The people I am competing with are in the same situation I'm in, and if they're getting success and I'm not, I think I should worry about what I can do.

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by wiseowise on Sunday April 23, 2023 @05:22AM (#35674698)
> A lot of business ideas are unviable without slavery! So what? I don't want that, and I hope you don't either! So what is it you actually want?

Did you just compare freedom to choose alternative payment method to slavery? What a bizarre world, I don't know why I've even bothered to reply to your comments, lol.

> I don't compete with "big players". If Apple didn't make an iPhone and I didn't make an app to put on it, I wouldn't get that money, and pretending otherwise won't make it so. The people I am competing with are in the same situation I'm in, and if they're getting success and I'm not, I think I should worry about what I can do.

You're dictators wet dream.

"Don't care about unfair system, dig within yourself! If competitor is doing good under dictatorship it means the problem is within you!"

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by geocar on Sunday April 23, 2023 @07:55AM (#35675470)
> Did you just compare freedom to choose alternative payment method to slavery?

Not at all. I said some businesses should not be viable and gave the simplest possible example I could think of.

And you did not agree.

Shame on you.

> You're dictators wet dream. "Don't care about unfair system, dig within yourself! If competitor is doing good under dictatorship it means the problem is within you!"

You're still not saying what you want to do and why it is good for society, just that the "dictator" is stopping you from doing it. "Alternative payments" can mean all sorts of things from money laundering to easier-to-steal, and I can't support those things.

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by wiseowise on Sunday April 23, 2023 @05:17AM (#35674673)
> It sounds more like you’re upset about apples revshare model on their channel; Why do you care if all your competitors also have to pay it?

There's a Ukrainian saying

> Хрін з ним, що своя хата згоріла, головне у сусіда корова здохла

Which literally translates to "Who cares if house is burnt down, the most important is that neighbors' cow is dead" - that's you. Ever thought that maybe you and/or your comptetitor shouldn't have to pay in the first place or that shares are unfair?

Re:iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe by geocar on Sunday April 23, 2023 @07:35AM (#35675354)
> Ever thought that maybe ... shares are unfair?

No actually. I won't ever enter any other kind of business-relationship with a larger company unless they have real competition that affects price because my experience is that larger company will try to mess you up if there's any chance at short-term gain. A joint-venture is ideal protection, but with Apple my size makes that unlikely. Revenue-sharing is a fine alternative to me, and if my product becomes worth more than my share I can always renegotiate, even with a big company like Apple, because we both want the revenue to continue. That's the point.

The pure-play alternative is much harder for small companies and individuals because they need cash up-front to get into the market, but I do understand the advantages for big pockets who don't create value though -- I just don't have any intention of being a company so big that my only purpose in life is to group-together smaller companies that aren't good enough to survive on their own.