> To the people who've been in this situation, what would you do in Huffman's shoes?
- Extend the 30 day to apply the pricing to 6 months (at least) to let people figure it out their stuff ;
- Give some leverage for the _existing_ 3 party apps that contributed to reddit till this point on the form of a smaller price;
> Developers already pay Apple & Google 30% for the privilege of being in the app stores. Is it too much for the very service that is powering your entire app to ask for their own cut?
Mind you that price is just part of the problem - the 30-day to start charging, was just as bad. It's absurd and completely made to kill the 3PS. Maybe if they have maintained the price but gave time for apps to discuss/adapt/replan, they could have found other options.
> Vaccines reduce spread because of lower viral load. Also reduces severity.
And yet, case counts have never been higher than now, a year into vaccines and infections.
Ah, but Omicron you may say. Well doesn’t that imply that the vaccine isn’t terribly effective against that strain? Yet the answer seem to be “just keep getting more injections of the same vaccine formulation.”
Perhaps one or more of our fundamental assumptions are wrong. Maybe the vaccines aren’t actually that effective (Israel is on dose number 4 within a calendar year…). Or maybe PCR tests cranked to an absurd number of cycles aren’t actually detecting what we think they are (an actual infection versus some dead cells in the nasal passage).
> Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said.
I'm a bit confused by this article. AFAIK PCR tests are only reporting a positive at 35 cycles. The author of the article is correct that it is run for 40 cycles often, but this is only because a positive between 36-40 cycles indicates "unclear result" and the test is repeated with a different assay targeting a different component of the virus. Positive is only reported at 35 cycles max.
This should not pick up any "dead cells", it will pick up viral mRNA. There is a concern over picking up low loads, but the mRNA is still there.
Even in omicron, vaccinated people are less likely to catch Covid than unvaccinated people. It can be simultaneously true that vaccinated people are less likely to have Covid and that Covid vases are rising due to a highly infectious variant.
I was sick with 101.5F for a week, excruciating headaches, confirmed by a positive PCR after Moderna vaccination. My girlfriend as well, two months after the second dose. How much higher would our viral load be without Moderna?
> how did you work out that the amount apple gets paid (30%) is the "correct" amount? The only way to find out is via competition. But due to the monopolistic powers of apple, there cannot be competition on their platform. Thus, we do not know the true cost of maintaining this platform - only that apple is able to maintain it with at least 30%.
30% is industry standard.
> nobody is forcing you to use the third party app store if it does exist. If you continued to use apple's curated store, you will continue to get the existing benefits. Adding an extra option can't possibly hurt you.
It hurts the ecosystem - and all its users. Splitting the apps in multiple app stores is a nightmare
I don't get the point: the whole idea of Apple is to have everything under their control. Nobody is forcing anyone to use Apple devices
Nobody is going to not put their app on the apple app store. Look at steam for example. Almost every game on steam can be purchased somewhere else, like icth.io or the game's website. 30% is industry standard among monopolistic players (Google play store, Apple app store, Steam). There are many other storefronts that take less of a cut, and don't require IAP to go through a specific payment system that the platform also owns. FDroid, MS Store, Epic Store, Galaxy Store, GOG, the list goes on.
How is Steam a “monopolistic player” when you say “almost every game on steam can be purchased somewhere else” and go on to mention Gog, MS Store, Epic Store, and “the list goes on”?
That Steam, and others you mention, charge 30% categorically undermines the whinging about Apple’s 30% being out of line.
I’m also curious about people’s thoughts on Sony pulling CDPR’s Cyberpunk 2077 from their Playstation store.
> Nobody is going to not put their app on the apple app store.
Epic will, and this is what they want
> Almost every game on steam can be purchased somewhere else, like icth.io or the game's website. 30% is industry standard among monopolistic players (Google play store, Apple app store, Steam).
> Apple competing with third party app stores on iOS is going to be amazing. No computer platform should be allowed to prevent sideloading or other stores from competing.
The walled garden is a selling point, a feature - I don't care about sideloading at all. You want to sideload? Grab and Android.
Some people do at the moment, but that's not completely the point.
This legislation should be about tail risk - protecting the people who increasingly only have an iPhone or iPad as their main computer from either forced obsolescence or restrictions on their behaviours.
Nope. Hurts overall experience. Not only the App's won't be curated the same as the other ones, but now I would have to maybe reach to some webside to download a .ipa file or to download a secondary App store to get a apps that otherwise would be available on App Store.
Then keep using the curated store? It only hurts if Apple's store can't compete with alternative ones. There's no such problem on Android because developers and users are fine with the Play Store.
Epic even tried doing a sideloaded Fortnite for Android and people didn't download it, so they came back.
As I said, they tried and failed because nobody downloaded it. I'm not sure why you're suddenly bringing Epic's motives into a comment chain about the desirability of sideloading though? Epic is obviously looking to skirt store fees and doesn't actually prefer to run their own store, but that has nothing to do with anything above in the chain.
I don't think most people would. I think most sideloading would be by users making things that fall outside of what Apple allows on their store, like on Android. I see no coherent reason at all why things would be any different on iOS, and nobody has presented one here beyond just asserting the premise that it would be different, and I don't think "Epic believes it is" is a convincing argument.
These are not coherent reasons why it would be different, they are assertions that you think it would be. None of them even speak to any difference between the platforms.
Just saying that it will be isn't a reason. None of this has happened. Every attempt at doing this has failed horribly. Most users are not technically capable enough to even go about installing an alternative store.
Why, given that this has not happened in the case of the leading mobile platform, and in fact all attempts to even mildly break with the play store have been resounding failures, would iOS be any different?
> Obviously you must not be aware that Android is not the leading platform in terms of app sales.
Both are still in the range of tens of billions of dollars. If one is worthwhile the other is too. Android is also by far the leader in number of actual users, which is what matters most to companies like Facebook.
The sideloading process is harder than just installing an app. Most users do not know how to do it and have no interest in doing it.
Google does not allow third party app stores to be distributed via their app store, and I assume Apple would do the same.
Why do people move to America when there is crime happening there? Maybe there are good things in America as well. You appreciate the good things and then try to fix the bad things.
Much appreciated, darknessmonk; I didn't realize. Thank you. We're days away from moving to an improved site and hosting (sneak peek: https://dev.rascompanies.com).
- Extend the 30 day to apply the pricing to 6 months (at least) to let people figure it out their stuff ; - Give some leverage for the _existing_ 3 party apps that contributed to reddit till this point on the form of a smaller price;