What a stupid argument. Without Apple's App Store, there wouldn't even be that area of startup growth.
poisonborz · 1h ago
It baffles me how in tech folks think "if X wouldn't have been created, there wouldn't be anything comparable created since then".
Software app stores, even mobile app stores existed before, App store's success was mostly a mere consequence of the iPhone's success.
epolanski · 2h ago
30% fees are mental.
Most of my clients don't even bother/care and their competition doesn't bother/care either.
effortment · 1h ago
Then why bother arguing?
epolanski · 1h ago
I argue what I want and added something to the discussion, something you have yet to achieve.
sonofhans · 2h ago
And where do they think startups would be today if the App Store had never existed? They’re complaining that their goose, even though it lays golden eggs, needs to be fed every now and then.
radley · 1h ago
> if the App Store had never existed? ...even though it lays golden eggs
Why is the general rebuttal always binary? Be grateful that it exists at all! It lays golden eggs!
No, they're just eggs. A few of us are lucky to sell a lot of eggs. That doesn't make them golden. The true gold eggs are grown despite the store (Netflix, YouTube, OpenAI).
Imagine an App Store that only lets you make black and white apps, but the store itself can produce full-color apps. Further, if your black and white app is actually successful, they'll copy it and release their version in color.
That's what's hindering us today.
darepublic · 2h ago
Peak app store was doodle jump. It's been all downhill from there
Time to see what the next move for Apple will be if they lose the appeal. Because I doubt Apple will be content to lose money on the ruling and will look to collect the fees elsewhere. Without the ability for developers ship iOS apps with no business relationship to Apple you're still pitching your tent on someone else's land.
politelemon · 2h ago
If there is one thing I've seen Apple do reliably over the past 20 years, it's being able to comply with rulings in the most malicious and hindering way possible. They'll be just fine with no difference to their bottom line.
moomoo11 · 42m ago
Why? Because they can’t push more NFTs and other shit like gambling loot boxes to children?
neilv · 2h ago
> “Y Combinator — and the larger venture capital community — have long been hesitant to back app-based businesses that were poor investments due to the Apple Tax,”
This could be good, if it encourages people to re-learn the value of open standards, like Web is supposed to be, rather than helping to perpetuate the proprietary app stores.
Also, I think it's noteworthy that, once a company gets customers locked into a proprietary app store, they show their true extremely greedy, abusive, and indifferent side to third-party developers. No matter how warm and fuzzy a brand they craft for consumers.
Are Bay Area libertarian techbros ironically going to try to rely on government regulation to keep the awful proprietary app stores tolerable, or will they rediscover what industry has known for decades about the value of open standards, and direct their efforts consistent with that?
Software app stores, even mobile app stores existed before, App store's success was mostly a mere consequence of the iPhone's success.
Most of my clients don't even bother/care and their competition doesn't bother/care either.
Why is the general rebuttal always binary? Be grateful that it exists at all! It lays golden eggs!
No, they're just eggs. A few of us are lucky to sell a lot of eggs. That doesn't make them golden. The true gold eggs are grown despite the store (Netflix, YouTube, OpenAI).
Imagine an App Store that only lets you make black and white apps, but the store itself can produce full-color apps. Further, if your black and white app is actually successful, they'll copy it and release their version in color.
That's what's hindering us today.
No comments yet
This could be good, if it encourages people to re-learn the value of open standards, like Web is supposed to be, rather than helping to perpetuate the proprietary app stores.
Also, I think it's noteworthy that, once a company gets customers locked into a proprietary app store, they show their true extremely greedy, abusive, and indifferent side to third-party developers. No matter how warm and fuzzy a brand they craft for consumers.
Are Bay Area libertarian techbros ironically going to try to rely on government regulation to keep the awful proprietary app stores tolerable, or will they rediscover what industry has known for decades about the value of open standards, and direct their efforts consistent with that?