Hacker News Reader

Comment by alain | Hacker News Reader

The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Microsoft, it's Apple. You're pretty free to develop and distribute software as you want on Windows. On new Apple devices, they control the way the software is distributed, they tax you, they make you obey their rules. Imagine a world with appstore as the main way of distributing software for any kind of devices. This would be hell. This is where Apple is going. Stop using Apple. Use Linux, or if you can't, use Microsoft.

View on HN

Sad to see so logically flawed argument getting upvoted—that means many of us don't bother to think any more and vote purely on "four legs good, two legs bad" mentality.

  The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Microsoft,
  it's Apple.

Makes no sense. Neither MS nor Apple are enemies of freedom of software. Apple is using a lot of OSS, contributes a lot to several projects, pushes for open web.

  You're pretty free to develop and distribute software as you want on Windows.

And? You are just as free on OS X. And OS X kernel is open source. Can you get Windows kernel source?

  On new Apple devices, they control the way the software
  is distributed

Yes. And that's because it's a win for majority of the users of said devices, not because Apple is "the enemy of free software". BTW, how does an Apple App Store compares to Zune marketplace? I guess the latter gives you more freedom?

  they tax you,

Huh?

  they make you obey their rules

And who doesn't? If you don't like the rules, don't buy Apple is as simple as that.

  Imagine a world with appstore as the main way of
  distributing software for any kind of devices.
  This would be hell.

That would be hell because? That would be hell to whom? To those who want to have a convenient way to buy apps, without worries about making backups, with easy way to get upgrades, without a fear of getting malware?

  Stop using Apple.

No, I won't. It gives me the biggest freedom so far.

  Use Linux

Then worry more about making linux more useable to ordinary people, who care about usability, not some fuzzy freedom ideals.

  or if you can't, use Microsoft.

Thank you, but no thank you. You don't need Apple to tell how you use your devices, I don't need you to tell what I should or should not use.

I'm pretty sure he means they tax developers at 30% of each sale, whereas you could just sell your shit independently and save yourself that 30%.

Just say you sell an application for $4.99, this means Apple takes around $1.50. If you sell 100k copies, Apple is gouging you $150,000.

Great, you don't really care because you made $350,000. Not so; You're going to lose a shitload of that to the IRS. In essence we're looking at being double-taxed. It sucks.

I think it sucks too, but the truth is that without the app store you would have to pay a lot to match their billing system and exposure (top app lists, what's new, featured apps, etc). I mean, it's too easy to buy apps on the app store. Customers lined up hungry for apps with their CC on file ready to pay. Also you get to use their CDN. It makes it easy for the little guy to sell 100k apps on the same playing field as the big dev houses. That shouldn't be overlooked.

The downside to the 30% is that a chunk goes to the review process. It's nice when it catches legitimate bugs but sucks that in a way you're paying to be censored.

If you don't like it, you can always develop for another platform though. You might not make as much but if you value ideals over making money, you have options.

70% of 100k sales is better than 100% of 1000 sales.

Considering that the app store is barely profitable, even with that 30% currently, you can hardly call it "gouging". And hey, if you don't like it, umm. Don't develop for the iP[hone/ad].

The 30% is a value proposition you can take or leave (develop somewhere else). I like it since I don't have to pay bandwidth or credit card processing fees. Ignoring bandwidth, it isn't that different from going through other credit card processors or PayPal.

As to taxes, I only get taxed on the portion I receive (Apple gets taxed on their 30%) so I have no idea where this "double-taxed" stuff is coming from.

Heck, if my app is really good, I might get on the front page of iTunes or in a commercial.

... Then worry more about making linux more useable to ordinary people, who care about usability, not some fuzzy freedom ideals.

This has huge potential.

This is only true of the iPad/iPhone ecosystem. For OSX, they give away development tools better than the ones microsoft charges ridiculous amounts of money for. Almost all apple-made software (even the kind they sell) doesn't even make you enter a license key. If you are honestly worried about a closed app store coming to OSX based on what Apple does with phones and devices that they clearly think of as large phones, you are paranoid.

Microsoft's developer tools are free (at the entry level), and I would question the assertion that they are worse than Apple's.

"For OSX, they give away development tools better than the ones microsoft charges ridiculous amounts of money for."

People tend to make this claim and I just don't understand where it comes from. Microsoft has made available the express editions of Visual Studio for the last several years and they are pretty damn good.

The express edition can not be compared to XCode, which has a single edition (the full one).

I've been a windows developer for more than 15 years and I'd be hard pressed to find an app that I couldn't build with the express tools. The components missing are things I wouldn't use anyhow, that being the integration of Microsoft's version of unit testing, source control, etc... Granted I've only used XCode for the last year and a half or so, but I'd choose VS Express over XCode any day. Aside from that fact, I can't believe that any company puts more effort into their development tools than Microsoft and I think it shows, so if they want to charge for a product that is years beyond anything anyone else offers then that's fine by me.

It's all about money - if they start making more money on ipad-type devices, and less on osx-based devices, they'll start making more ipad-type devices. Follow that line of logic and you'd end up in the more restrictive world of the ipad-type devices. But I did say if.

Sorry, but having worked with both, Visual Studio is miles ahead of Xcode. I even did an app for a client in C++/Qt that wanted it running in OS X ... developed 100% in Visual Studio. That's because at the time (at least) Xcode wasn't even having Intellisense (and Visual C++ does have the best intellisense available).

Visual Studio Express is free to use ... and it's enough for almost every need you might have. And before that you could use the #Develop which is an open-source IDE for C#/VB.NET.

And while Xcode doesn't even support intellisense properly, Visual Studio is in a different category altogether considering that you can also develop with it web applications / Silverlight clips, supports many more languages and has a really healthy plugins ecosystem.

Not to nitpick, but Microsoft is endorsing Mono lately as THE Linux/FreeBSD/OS X alternative. On Linux I can have a dotNet app that uses Windows Forms running ... can you do the same with Cocoa?

Of course Mono for Apple would be an abomination that had to be destroyed (considering how they sued Psystar and even Wired on publishing an article about hackitoshes)

(pretty ironic I'm defending Microsoft, since I've been badmouthing them for years, but compared to Apple they start looking like saints)

VS is the best IDE out there, hands down. I read a nice rant about how it causes brain damage (by Intellisense pushing you into bottom-up design), but it's great at what it does.

> Of course Mono for Apple would be an abomination that had to be destroyed (considering how they sued Psystar and even Wired on publishing an article about hackitoshes)

Cocoa is a direct descendent of NEXTStep which is an open spec. Hence the NS prefix on class names. Here's "Mono for Apple":

http://www.cocotron.org/

http://etoileos.com/

http://www.gnustep.org/

You mention MS "endorsing" Mono as if that means something.

Don't forget Cappuccino!

http://cappuccino.org/

Yes, and this recent thread[1] on the Cappuccino mailing list has links to several other Objective-X languages.

[1] http://groups.google.com/group/objectivej/browse_thread/thre...

But the first ones I linked are all Objective-C. Well, Étoilé has implemented a smalltalk-esque syntax now.

Yes it means something ... it shows good will, it shows they are probably not going to sue, and their developers are also contributing/helping out Mono.

> Cocoa is a direct descendent of NEXTStep

Oh please, take any Cocoa app and try running it in Gnustep.

If you are honestly worried about a closed app store coming to OSX based on what Apple does with phones and devices that they clearly think of as large phones, you are paranoid.

Then I'm paranoid. Like Mark Pilgrim (http://diveintomark.org/archives/2010/01/29/tinkerers-sunset), I don't believe Apple will be selling general purpose computers to consumers in 10 years. Remember Steve Jobs's plan for Apple: "milk the Mac for all it's worth and then move on the next big thing". The next big thing is mobile computing, and Apple has made it clear that they want absolute control.

I've seen that argument before, and I have to tell you, it's a bit of overdramatization from someone I respect a lot, who should know better. Apple has to sell unlocked Macs, because that's how you develop software for their closed platforms. Nobody mentions this much, but if you want to develop an iPhone app, you need a Mac, and you need the iPhone SDK, compilers, etc. The average person does not need an unlocked Mac. Developers like us do, and Apple will have to provide that. Choice is great for consumers, and not everyone needs a computer to write code on. We developers do, and we're really the only ones constantly beating this dead horse. Consumers don't want to hack their own devices, they just expect it to work.

Apple isn't the only one doing this. I don't know much C# and I don't run Windows anymore, but I want to write XBOX games. Should I be mad at MS for making me buy Windows, learn Visual Studio + C#, and pay a membership fee to write games for my XBOX? They have a developer program too, and a completely closed system. They take a cut of sales. They don't review your apps though, but honestly I like the fact that through the Appstore on my iPod, stuff isn't gonna trash my iPod like it did when I used to have it jailbroken.

You can freely distribute Mac OS X software. Why are you comparing Windows with iPhone/iPad?

I'm going to compare games on Mac OS X and Xbox, why can't I make Xbox games and distribute them freely, when I can do that on Mac OS X?

I think he means Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile.

Windows 7 isn't out yet (and, if Zune HDs Marketplace for apps is any indication, it will be just as closed as Apple's), and WinMo 6.x has approximately no real app store. Look:

http://client.marketplace.windowsmobile.com/

It's been that way since early 2009. Is it going to be yet another thing like Origami, Courier, Surface, et al. that Microsoft hypes up only to abandon or leave stillborn?

Bottom line, Apple, not without corner-case controversies, is far more flexible in 3rd party Smartphone development than Microsoft has or could ever be.

Now, Google Android, on the other hand... that's like the Wild Wild West of device freedom. So much so, that hardly anyone makes money. Where are the big-time devs creating world-beating technology on the platform and sopping up revenue like crusty bread at the bottom of a steak dish? I've looked EVERYWHERE for it, I even have "android marketplace revenue" bookmarked in Google News and check that every once in awhile. I see people selling 20k units a month at #1 on the entire Android store, which is what Apple top tens sell in less than a week or even a days worth of sales. That's a marketplace estimated at 10 Million users, and only a few hundred thousand are actually buying anything. In fact, android users buy about $1 on average of apps per month, while iPhone/iPod Touch users spend about $5 a month, and that's an ecosystem with fast-approaching 100 Million users hungry (and more importantly, willing to pay) for content. It's a no-brainer for any developer.

You mean this? http://i.engadget.com/2010/03/15/confirmed-marketplace-will-...

Couldn't agree more. Though I'm waiting to see what new Mac Pro will bring. Tuth is I can't find dual processor machine for same money/quality as apple makes it, even though I'm installing windows on it (mostly for applications I'm using). Mac Pro is one damn nice Windows box.

Imagine a world with appstore as the main way of distributing software for any kind of devices.

I think such a world would be much better for most end users. And a lot of people have already voted with their wallet that this is so.

If there were many App Stores, then market forces would come into play. Someone would figure out how to get developers paid without mistreating them. Then really smart devs would start flocking to the other App Store, forcing Apple to reform or lose mindshare.

You should include Google along with Apple. I understand that Chrome OS won't allow any native apps whatsoever. The only native apps that will run are Google developed apps. So by your logic, Google is even more evil than Apple, right?

Unfortunately I don't think these private individual political boycotts are very effective. If you want to stop Apple, you need to bring something clearly better to the market, and that thing needs to have the underlying structure necessary to reach Apple's core audience and tell them how much better the new thing is and why you don't need Apple's crap anymore.

Well private individual will also have a hard time bringing something better to the market than apple.

Individual's first strength is to boycott something. And to raise his/shes voice so that the alternative arguments are heard too.

I just called 90% of my techie/geek colleagues pussies over twitter after reading this.

direct link: http://benfry.com/writing/archives/608

my link was to a twitt calling them pussy :) . I wasn't trying to use my twitt as a relay to the article. I removed link to avoid confusion now.

  If you want to stop Apple, you need to bring something
  clearly better to the market,

Oh, please, someone crying how evil Apple is do that. I guess that's the only way for you to understand what real users want, what Apple does, and why it does it.

  is and why you don't need Apple's crap anymore.

I won't need "Apple's crap" when someone will finally get what usability and user experience means.

Have you built and sold any iPhone apps?

The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Apple, it's Nintendo. You're pretty free to develop and distribute software as you want on OS X. On new Nintendo devices, they control the way software is distributed, they tax you, they make you obey their rules. Imagine a world where all applications must be licensed and vetted by Nintendo, for all their devices. This would be hell. This is where Nintendo is going. Stop using Nintendo. Use Ball on a String, or if you can't, use Apple.

I can't say anything else but agree.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com