Hacker News Reader

Comment by isodev | Hacker News Reader

As a developer for apple platforms, it's extremely difficult to keep a positive mindset to all this. Year after year, Apple finds ways to continue unbounded fuckery. Making apps for iPhones is not that profitable anymore either, at this point is more about addressing a painful necessity - Apple is the phone company and you have to make it work if you want access to that "unmovable" infrastructure.

View on HN

I'm seriously at a loss about why people would support this increasingly developer-hostile ecosystem and essentially work towards their own demise and perhaps even the rest of their profession. I'd suggest switching to a different source of income while you still can, even if only out of self-respect.

Because most people are not developers? Between ad-infested Google, enshittified Microsoft and still not ready for the desktop Linux the Apple ecosystem might be the most accessible and easy to use platform for most non-technical users. As a developer it's an annoyance but I have to admire the elegance in the way Apple uses their core software and hardware technologies over their entire stack. As a user I don't care about what developers feel about it. Apple's market share is big enough to draw lots of them.

> still not ready for the desktop Linux

This has been a myth for the last decade. I'm even using GNU/Linux on my smartphone, which is arguably not ready for the average consumer but can be good enough for the HN audience.

My Bluetooth headset does not work with Debian. But it does with WinDOS.

My Bluetooth headphones work even with my GNU/Linux phone. Perhaps your problem is not with Linux but on the other side of the connection.

Linux on the phone is not Linux on the desktop.

Here's a working Bluetooth on a Linux laptop: https://forums.puri.sm/t/bluetooth-stopped-working-on-l14-wi...

Proving my point. “Linux on the desktop” implied that you don't need to be a DIY hacker to get it working. Probably the reason why the poster you originally replied to called it “still not ready”.

PureOS is an FSF-endorsed OS without any propritary drivers and firmware. Any other GNU/Linux will run that module out of the box.

"Bluetooth stopped working on L14 with PureOS" is the title of the thread. Frankly, not very many people have patience for that. Like if I'm doing a presentation, this needs to not even be a question.

It didn't work, because PureOS doesn't provide proprietary drivers. Please read more than just titles.

There are like 100 people in our department using Linux, on Thinkpad laptops that officially support Linux, and cannot use Bluetooth audio reliably. And the problem isn't with the headphones, cause they work with Mac and others. It's a known thing, desktop Linux and Bluetooth don't mix, you use the jack if you're on Linux.

That's funny because only my Linux laptop running pulseaudio ever seems to work reliably with bluetooth headphones. I had to go back to wired headphones on my work mac because half the time when I needed them they just couldn't connect.

What's really funny is that I'm getting a working BT connection between Debian and the headset, but there's still no audio. Presumably I'm missing some driver, but I don't know which.

I think rather pulseaudio either isn't configured correctly or you haven't authorized the connection (Bluetooth devices will pair, then connect, then you have to authorize them. In bluetoothctl you get an asynchronous yes/no prompt, I don't know what this looks like in the GUI bluetooth management tools.)

Generally drivers on Linux are all kind of shipped together. Unless you have some really niche device that's so rare your distro doesn't ship the module for it with its normal "linux" package you're not missing drivers. That's almost certainly not the case with A2DP/HFP especially if bluetooth itself already works.

Thanks for that tip, I'll look into it!

I think the question was, why do devs support this ecosystem

Because as a developer, you often don't get that choice, for example, if your product is an online service. Either you have an iOS app and play by Apple's stupid rules, or you don't, and your iPhone users go to a competitor that does have an iOS app, or at the very least complain quite loudly.

If your product is an online service, having a website seems like a slam dunk.

It’s a good start. But then people want push notifications, Sign in with Apple, to pay with card but they have an iPhone etc - so many points Apple makes a lot harder than they should be. Eventually, it’s economically better to just suck it up and make an app.

Do you know why QRCodes are by far the most popular banking system? Because, Apple didn’t like it if apps use NFC for payments that’s not Apple Pay. There was a time BLE beacons had to be iBeacons too etc. it’s really decades of pressure in all kinds of ways.

The darlingest of developer darlings—Linear, the PWA first lightweight website that was and still is blazing fast, caved and launched an iOS app. If they can't be web only you have zero chance.

I used to be an iPhone app dev before I ragequit around 2017. Took that skill off my resumé, got a new SWE job that paid more anyway. Besides Apple's rules, it wasn't enjoyable to develop for that platform. Everyone was constantly fighting the tooling.

The worst time ever was Swift 1.0 + Core Data, two broken things combined, that was like Dark Castle on CD-i.

All iOS and Android developers I know don't write app that they sell themselves. They work for customers that more often than not give away their apps for free because they make money from the service the app gives access to. And they don't sell the service on the app store.

Think about banks, insurance companies, TV broadcasters, train timetables and services, cars management, etc.

Making quality software is usually a business, and if you distribute it in walled gardens even more so. That said, I have a number of iOS apps installed that I know are developed and sold by specific individuals or small businesses: myNoise, NetNewsWire, The Iconfactory (Bitcam, Tapestry), Sun Seeker, Rarevision VHS are some examples. I am sure there are plenty more, but there are reasons someone would not want to publish an app under own name—same as why you would create an LLC: liability, not having people stalk you personally if they did not like what you make (especially true if you distribute it for free or for a very low price), appearing more professional, etc.

I believe iOS App Store has been groundbreaking specifically in how it allowed a solo developer to start distributing work to millions of people across the entire globe with very little friction, taking care of things that are not just boring but actually not in reach of an individual—pricing in different currencies, accounting under different legal and tax systems, zero friction installation, discovery (at least before it, thanks to the aforementioned qualities, became ultra competitive and overwhelmed by businesses who outsource development and/or by less than scrupulous people wanting to earn a quick dollar), etc.—and just getting you paid. If there was a comparable precursor that I am not aware of, I would be keen to know.

> If there was a comparable precursor that I am not aware of, I would be keen to know.

Play Store Apps is contemporary to App Store, no?

I finally gave up and pulled all my iOS apps from the store after receiving yet another app update rejection from a reviewer that clearly hadn't spent 5 minutes trying to understand what the app is for. I'm tired of begging for having access to my users restored every time something like this happens and I'm through feeling that powerless.

From now on I'm an Android user and only building PWAs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com