Waaah, now even EPIC with Fortnite has been kicked off the appstore, because they found a way to sell things past the appstore. And then Apple don't get 30%....
https://tweakers.net/nieuws/170916/apple-verwijdert-fortnite-uit-app-store.html It's in dutch but you get the message. or this one https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21366438/apple-fortnite-ios-app-store-violations-epic-payments Op zo 9 aug. 2020 om 16:52 schreef Andre Garzia via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>: > > Do Apple's actions and policies monopolistically harm consumers? > > Yes it does. There is a ton of innovation that is user friendly that is > prevented from being present in iOS due to Apples practices. A simple > example is new browser engines, you can't have them. Which means you can't > have more private engines than what Safari uses. This also makes it harder > to bring lots of API innovation to iOS which would benefit users because it > would allow for better and more powerful web apps. > > Since you can't sideload apps, you as a user need to have Apple permission > before installing software on the device you purchased and should own. You > as a developer are allowed to sell software outside of Apple's blessing, > even if you have customers interested in the software you make. Apple is a > gatekeeper and a very picky one. > > Gatekeepers are harmful to consumers and sellers. Since you as a developer > can't simply compile software and sell it own your own page without Apple > double blessing, you're not really in control of your platform and Apple > may exercise the right to cut you out of the platform at any time. This is > harmful. > > > Consumer behavior itself argues against that. Quite the contrary, > consumers are willing to pay a premium for Apple products and services > > That is totally not true because you can't measure it. You can't measure > "iOS with a more open ecosystem" vs "iOS with its current draconian > ecosystem" because that you don't have the more open version to match it > against the current one. The choice here is not between Apple and Android. > Apple could still offer the same software, services, and hardware, and be > more open. People would still choose them. No one chooses the option with > less options and gatekeepers if they have an alternative. The tight > integration between iOS and macOS devices is wonderful and people are happy > to pay a premium for such quality. If you ask any Apple user why they buy > Apple, no one will answer: "Because I like the way they don't allow > developers to compete with Apple itself" which is why the EU and other > companies are crying wolf in the direction of one infinite loop. People > will say they choose Apple because of the attention to detail, the quality > of service, hardware, and software, none of which would be gone if Apple > was more open. > > The key to understand this is that all that you like about Apple can still > be there, including the App store. If you want to stay in an environment > like what we have today, it should be possible to do so. But you should > also have options for when you want to step outside. There should be > alternative stores or alternative ways to distribute software. > > I'm not saying "burn iOS and Apple". I'm saying the current practices > benefit no one but Apple and are harmful to a healthy ecosystem. They could > still be Apple and not be a bully. For example, the need of notarizing apps > is going to make distributing FOSS on macOS a bit harder. Once Apple moves > to its own ARM CPUs, it will be harder for every third-party vendor to > compete with Apple solutions as they'll be able to cram custom silicon like > T2 and lock down the machine in a way that has not been done in ages. > > If I was LC I'd be throwing some more people into making sure LC runs > really well under Linux and Windows, both of which are second class > citizens when compared to macOS. Heck the IDE under windows is horribly > slow, I have no idea how it performs under Linux. When dealing with Apple > you always need a plan b. > > On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 at 22:16, Jim Lambert via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > BrianM wrote: > > > One thing that seems to be missing in this discussion is the point of > > view of the ?client?, the one who downloads the app and pays for it > > > > True. > > In the U.S. the laws against monopoly (the Sherman Act of 1890, the > > Clayton Act of 1914 and the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914) are > there > > to promote competition amongst companies for the benefit of consumers. > Or > > our end users. > > > > Do Apple's actions and policies monopolistically harm consumers? Consumer > > behavior itself argues against that. Quite the contrary, consumers are > > willing to pay a premium for Apple products and services. > > > > Andre notes that Apple exercises a monopoly WITHIN the iOS system. But > > that is a misnomer. Apple has a proprietary system not a monopolistic > one. > > And they strictly control it. It's simply not true that "there is nothing > > iOS users can do about that." Yes, there is. Consumers who don't want to > > buy into Appleās closed system are free to buy elsewhere. Consumers can > > choose Android or any other alternative products. No one is forcing > > consumers to buy and use Apple products, which is what would happen if > > Apple had an actual monopoly. In fact, some consumers prefer Apple's > strict > > proprietary control and are willing to pay mucho dinero for it. > > > > Now look at it from the developers' point of view. Apple makes us jump > > through many more hoops than Android developers do. Apple constantly > > changes these hoops which can seem inexplicably capricious. But is it? Or > > is it a constant effort to assure safe computing for their consumers? > > > > There seems to be an assumption that the 30% cut Apple takes is > > outrageous. But what does a developer get for that Apple %? If you think > > you can replace what Apple offers for less money, then just sell your app > > on Android and rake in the extra bucks. What's stopping you? > > > > The reality is that the vast majority of smartphone apps make little or > no > > money, regardless of OS. > > So is it painful to surrender 30% of nothing? ;) > > > > But back to the purpose of this list, aren't we lucky to have LiveCode, a > > development platform that gives us the power to develop for whatever > > platforms make sense for us? > > > > Jim Lambert > > _______________________________________________ > > use-livecode mailing list > > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > > subscription preferences: > > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > > > > > -- > https://www.andregarzia.com <http://www.andregarzia.com> > Want to support me? Buy me a coffee at https://ko-fi.com/andregarzia > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode