Apple cracking down on apps that have high subscription fees

[Master Disaster]

I'll Tackle this paragraph by paragraph.....

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

What the F does this have to do with anything? Are you seriously one of those who dig through one's history just to do the lame "gotcha dance"? Seriously? Has it ever occurred to you that "defending" Apple sometimes doesn't make you a fanboy or "pro-Apple" person as you seem to assert it? I see bunch of such idiots on GSM Arena on daily basis. Say anything positive about Apple and suddenly you're biggest fucking Apple fanboy apparently because shitting on Apple is hip and merely not straight up shitting on it makes you a fanboy.

Defending any company doesn't make you a fan boy, at the same time criticising a company doesn't automatically make you a hater. You have to look at the situation on merit and decide if the criticism is valid and/or constructive. OFC there are people who hate just for the sake of it.

 

Remember this though, no company ever has any of their customers best interests at heart, its OK to be a fan of a company, just don't get radical.

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Explaining things from other perspective, the other perspective I never see any train of thought ever go to. I don't expect anyone to take it as "truth", just an opinion why they might be doing it. Like everyone outraged when Apple did the battery and camera flag if it's replaced by 3rd party. And I was the only one who ever said "I kinda get it why" and went on explaining it. But people just straight up ignore that coz they are too busy shitting on Apple. But if you think of it, would you be happy buying 800€ second hand iPhone not knowing if battery was replaced by some cheap Chinese crap of AliExpress and replaced by a butterfingered guy and have its water resistance compromised or would you like to know it's pristine? My guess is Apple shop workers need to have same quick and simple access knowing that when they are doing phone trade in without having to disassemble it.

My issue with this train of thought is like I said above. Apple are not your friend and they're not doing things to make your life easier. If they can spin something bad to look like its intent is to protect customers then that's a win win for them.

 

You really think they care about the quality of a used phone that they would refuse warranty service on anyway? Or do you think they care more about stopping unlicensed repair shops keeping their broken items in service which stops users from buying new Apple devices?

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Or how everyone constantly whines about closed Apple ecosystem yet I was once again the only one who gave a view on why that can also be beneficial. Which is again evident from absolutely smooth and swift transition of Macs from x86 to ARM. If ecosystem wasn't so tightly and entirely controlled by Apple, whole migration would take years and would be half baked just like all Windows attempts. This isn't me defending Apple. This is just me giving a different view on the matter.

Lots of businesses employ ecosystems to keep customers attached to them post sale and there 100% can be benefits to keeping within one ecosystem for all your devices. Another great example is Air Play, that shit is crazy easy to use. All your Apple devices talk to each other with zero configuration required, it just works.

 

The problem with Apple is their assertion of control over hardware after the point of sale. Customers are literally forced to use Apples curated store, there's no alternative and installing anything outside of that is impossible without jailbreaking the device.

 

If that isn't almost a dictionary definition of monopolistic then nothing is.

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

The same way my explanation against "muh overpriced iPhone" tells hardware specs are not everything that defines worth of a device. Which is something all the Android fanboys like to do so much. Uh oh, it has a display with 5000Hz and 700 trillion pixels and 128GB of RAM and 2TB of storage and 9000 megapixels camera with 70 mega ampere hours battery and just dismiss Android is an absolute clusterfuck of fragmented OS with garbage long term support and absurd delay between Google releasing updates and users receiving them through 3rd party phone vendor. That's not me shitting on Android. That's just me stating a literal fact. Android as OS is not bad and I literally never said it is. But the way it's managed globally is. But people yet again see me state that as shitting on Android.

Android is open source, literally anyone can fork it and adjust it in any way they want. Google has no control over any of its variants nor should they have, that's how open source works. Google release security updates once every 2 months, its not their fault everybody else ignores them.

 

This is a point of contention for Google and they are currently beta testing a new module system for OS components that would allow them to push security updates out over the Play Store for important OS libraries to ALL devices. Its going to take them a few years since everyone will need Android 12 or higher but once they get to that point Android security will be MUCH BETTER than it is currently.

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Only know I see how hard it is to express any thought about Apple products without shitstorm of people throwing lame accusations at you just because you don't follow the herd of sheep and you happen to express a different opinion on the matter that's seemingly favorable for Apple "side". Heh.

Thought experiment....

 

Are you expressing opposing opinions because you believe them or because you see others trying to be cool and believe that its cooler to be on the other side?

 

You're free to have any opinion you like, just make sure it really is yours and own it (you seem to be doing a good job of that already to be fair )

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, tim0901 said:

I did not dig through your history at all. AS I SAID - this is from what I've seen of you around the site - although 99% is from this post here.

 

But I can now think of another reason why people don't listen to you here:

you don't listen to what other people are saying.

I’m not sure the “why people don’t listen to you here”thing is accurate. It preassumes a bunch of stuff.

[tim0901]

1 hour ago, Dedayog said:

Not to defend anyone but saying that is a catch 22.  And kinda of sets someone up.

 

Like... Hey, don't hit me back if I hit you. Yep, makes sense

Ok yeah reading that back now I can see that... Apologies RejZoR.

  

34 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Defending any company doesn't make you a fan boy, at the same time criticising a company doesn't automatically make you a hater. You have to look at the situation on merit and decide if the criticism is valid and/or constructive. OFC there are people who hate just for the sake of it.

Exactly. There are indeed blind fanboys out there, but dismissing valid critique (as I believe this thread originally was) as such is wrong. Critique is important and nobody should be immune to it. The world isn't black or white - everything has good and bad sides to it.

  

18 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

I’m not sure the “why people don’t listen to you here”thing is accurate. It preassumes a bunch of stuff.

I did say it was my point of view, if you disagree with that then that's your right. But I agree that there I should have phrased that second post differently - maybe "why people may label you as a fanboy" would have been better. Another reminder for me to not say things on the internet when annoyed... (not related to this post)

[Bombastinator]

20 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

Ok yeah reading that back now I can see that... Apologies RejZoR.

  

Exactly. There are indeed blind fanboys out there, but dismissing valid critique (as I believe this thread originally was) as such is wrong. Critique is important and nobody should be immune to it. The world isn't black or white - everything has good and bad sides to it.

  

I did say it was my point of view, if you disagree with that then that's your right. But I agree that there I should have phrased that second post differently - maybe "why people may label you as a fanboy" would have been better. Another reminder for me to not say things on the internet when annoyed... (not related to this post)

Was stated as a catch all though. “People” instead of “me”

[tim0901]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Was stated as a catch all though. “People” instead of “me”

I can see why you would oppose that. I used the plural because he said "despite how much everyone tries to paint me as one" - I was merely matching his langauge there.

[Bombastinator]

8 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

I can see why you would oppose that. I used the plural because he said "despite how much everyone tries to paint me as one" - I was merely matching his langauge there.

Hyperbole is hyperbole. 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, tim0901 said:

I'm not asking for an argument here. I'm merely going to explain my view, and my opinion as to why you may feel that you have this reputation, given what I've seen around this site (full disclaimer: I'm not on here constantly. I will have missed things you have posted). Feel free to completely ignore it, but don't bother writing a heated response if you take offense to what I've said. I'm not trying to insult you - I'm just trying to help. I'll put it in a spoiler because it's not relevant to the thread itself:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Your 1000 word post here may read like a coherent, well thought out argument to you, but to me here it reads like a 4-year-old having a temper tantrum, which is an immediate "I don't have time for this" from me. You're throwing around insults about the people you're arguing against left right and centre (the "stupid Android fanboys" that are "wanking to pointless specs" and "whining" about "muh xyz") - which is the point when many, including myself, consider that you've lost an argument. You maintain you aren't an Apple fanboy, and yet this sort of behaviour perfectly fits that of a stereotypical fanboy for any brand or company. Posts like this where you go on a completely unrelated rant about Android fans for 1000 words before writing anything about the actual topic really don't help your case either. If you want people to take you seriously, cut out the insults, text-speech (coz, muh etc.) and vulgar language - and especially cut out the rants about fanboys of the opposing brand. Present a well-written argument and people are far more likely to hear you out.

 

Another reason is that, as far as I've seen, you never even acknowledge that the opponents have good things going for them. For example, I can't find a single positive opinion about Android in this post, and you belittle Android users multiple times for caring about different things, such as "walled garden" and "pointless specs". To quote yourself: "not everyone appreciate the same shit you do". I think you need to take your own advice here - the best reviewers are the ones who are quite happy to say "I don't like this, but it's still a great product and I can see why people would like it" - something that Anthony is very good at.

 

But the biggest reason you get piled on around here is, well, you're the outsider on this site. You have the opinion that's very opposite to the majority of the userbase here - you're the sheep surrounded by the pack of wolves. If you're going to make posts that are constantly 100% pro-Apple, then the very anti-Apple userbase here is going to jump on you. You bring it on yourself by constantly bringing up this brand-wars argument on every post like this - nobody mentioned Android here until you did. The only mention of Google here was that they were just as bad at taking a 30% cut - nothing was said about them being in any way superior. Why bring it up at all?

 

 

Not to go too off-topic but you just literally argued against just post rather than what he said, and called his post irrational?

[DrMacintosh]

16 hours ago, tim0901 said:

On the other hand, I don't like that Apple - the ones who own the store - are now essentially dictating the prices at which independent companies can sell their products

They are preventing developers from scamming customers. Whatever reasoning behind saying “oh but muh free market” kinda goes out the window when you realize that. Further it is Apples platform and if they want they can set a price cap. Everyone here acts out of concern for the poor developers without realizing that scum tier developers are the reason this move is happening in the first place. 
 

I don’t care what your app is, you don’t get to bill people $8 a WEEK. 

[DrMacintosh]

I would like to know why this thread has derailed so much and why people are so unwilling to acknowledge that any company that takes actions to prevent customers from being scammed is a good thing? 
 

The developers aren’t the victims here, they were the perpetrators! 

[Bombastinator]

5 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

I would like to know why this thread has derailed so much and why people are so unwilling to acknowledge that any company that takes actions to prevent customers from being scammed is a good thing? 
 

The developers aren’t the victims here, they were the perpetrators! 

PC desktop gaming forum.  Bias is a thing.  We’re human.  It’s impossible to completely escape.  The people complaining about lack of freedoms make a limited point, but to do it they have to rebalance their personal freedoms vs public good seesaw.  I can’t think of an example that isn’t political so I’ll just leave it.

[Master Disaster]

13 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

I would like to know why this thread has derailed so much and why people are so unwilling to acknowledge that any company that takes actions to prevent customers from being scammed is a good thing? 
 

The developers aren’t the victims here, they were the perpetrators! 

My concern isn't what Apple did in this case. I've said it before, despite the fact I don't like Apple as a company I'm more than willing to acknowledge they do care more about customer privacy than most others (at least on the surface) and they do deserve some credit for some of the stuff they do in this regard.

 

My concern is the fact that they were able to do it in such a blanket way. Having a third party in such a position of power over something you own is NEVER a good thing, Apple love to spin it as "in the customers best interest" and in some ways they're not wrong but in other ways it sets a dangerous precedence. At what point are Apple customers paying them $1000 to simply rent the device from Apple? You buy your iPhone and you cannot use it outside of the way Apple says its OK, that sounds very much like a rental contract to me except customers are also paying full price.

[DrMacintosh]

8 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

You buy your iPhone and you cannot use it outside of the way Apple says its OK, that sounds very much like a rental contract to me except customers are also paying full price.

That’s exactly what’s not happening here. Apple is preventing developers from milking customers with WEEKLY charges for apps. I don’t care what service your app provides, you don’t get to bill weekly. It’s predatory and Apple is exerting control over their platform (which they have every right to do) to stop it. 

If you host an app on the Apple store you have to follow the rules. That’s already been established. There is simply a new rule now that says scamming customers (the only reason weekly billing exists) is not allowed. 

[Master Disaster]

33 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

That’s exactly what’s not happening here. Apple is preventing developers from milking customers with WEEKLY charges for apps. I don’t care what service your app provides, you don’t get to bill weekly. It’s predatory and Apple is exerting control over their platform (which they have every right to do) to stop it. 

If you host an app on the Apple store you have to follow the rules. That’s already been established. There is simply a new rule now that says scamming customers (the only reason weekly billing exists) is not allowed. 

Except it is. What right do Apple have to tell their customers they can't infect their own property with malware if they want to?

 

I'm not debating that its Apple's Store, Apple's Rules, that's fine with me. The problem is its Apple's Store or nothing.

[DrMacintosh]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

What right do Apple have to tell their customers they can't infect their own property with malware if they want to?

Every right since they own and operate the distribution platform. A grocery store manager has every right to not carry a certain product if they don’t want it in their store. Apple is no different. 

 

5 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

The problem is its Apple's Store or nothing.

That’s something people know going into iOS. If they don’t like it, they can decline the EULA and return the device. 
 

Also it’s kinda not because you can side load apps and even download them from the internet on an iPhone. 

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

Except it is. What right do Apple have to tell their customers they can't infect their own property with malware if they want to?

 

I'm not debating that its Apple's Store, Apple's Rules, that's fine with me. The problem is its Apple's Store or nothing.

That argument doesn’t work.  Extend it to other things and it quickly breaks down.  The problem is malware is communicable.  This is one argument Q-anon fundies used to rationalize fighting mask requirements and effectively killing people.

[Master Disaster]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

That argument doesn’t work.  Extend it to other things and it quickly breaks down.  The problem is malware is communicable.  This is one argument Q-anon fundies used to rationalize fighting mask requirements and effectively killing people.

Having control over something you paid for =/= denying evidence and endangering lives. They're not even remotely in the same ballpark. One is a right, the other is a crime.

 

A better example would be Samsung selling you a fridge, telling you that you can't use it to store milk in and if you do put milk in it not only will they not warranty it but they also reserve the right to come to your house and take the milk away from you.

 

People have the right to do whatever the hell they want to something that is their own legal property, after the point of sale the manufacturer should retain no control over the device at all, its yours, you bought it from them and they have your money.

 

Is it a crime to knowingly install malware on to your own device? So then what right do Apple have to tell anybody they cannot do it if they want to? Last time I checked it was the polices job to police, not Tim Cooks.

 

Apple can do whatever they want on their own store, their refusal to allow any alternative to exist at all is anti consumer and monopolistic and they know it too. They know their wall is about to be demolished by a judge, why else do you think they thought subpoenaing Valve was a good idea?

 

2 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

Every right since they own and operate the distribution platform. A grocery store manager has every right to not carry a certain product if they don’t want it in their store. Apple is no different. 

You're so focused on "their store, their rules" that you're missing the point entirely, if Walmart stop selling something customers can go somewhere else to get it. That's the point.

Quote

That’s something people know going into iOS. If they don’t like it, they can decline the EULA and return the device.

Nope, that's something people except as reality because Apple have positioned their devices as the must have thing and people are fickle by nature. Then once you're in the garden you're locked in, the longer you stay the more tied in you become until you've spent so much money on stuff that only works with your Apple devices, changing platforms becomes impossible.

 

This is all enabled by the very fact that you have no choice but to buy everything from Apple and Apple stuff only works with other Apple stuff.

 

Their entire business model is designed in such a way that once you're in, leaving becomes extremely difficult and you essentially get tricked into a constant cycle of having to upgrade your existing Apple devices with new Apple devices.

 

2 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

Also it’s kinda not because you can side load apps and even download them from the internet on an iPhone. 

Either you don't understand how this works or you think I won't and are being disingenuous. App developers must have a valid Apple Developer certificate, at any point Apple can decide to revoke that license from the app developer and suddenly your sideloaded app doesn't work any more. Sideloading is no different to just using the Store, Apple still have full control over what you can and cannot use on your phone.

[Bombastinator]

9 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Having control over something you paid for =/= denying evidence and endangering lives. They're not even remotely in the same ballpark. One is a right, the other is a crime.

 

A better example would be Samsung selling you a fridge, telling you that you can't use it to store milk in and if you do put milk in it not only will they not warranty it but they also reserve the right to come to your house and take the milk away from you.

 

People have the right to do whatever the hell they want to something that is their own legal property, after the point of sale the manufacturer should retain no control over the device at all, its yours, you bought it from them and they have your money.

 

Is it a crime to knowingly install malware on to your own device? So then what right do Apple have to tell anybody they cannot do it if they want to? Last time I checked it was the polices job to police, not Tim Cooks.

 

Apple can do whatever they want on their own store, their refusal to allow any alternative to exist at all is anti consumer and monopolistic and they know it too. They know their wall is about to be demolished by a judge, why else do you think they thought subpoenaing Valve was a good idea?

 

You're so focused on "their store, their rules" that you're missing the point entirely, if Walmart stop selling something customers can go somewhere else to get it. That's the point.

Nope, that's something people except as reality because Apple have positioned their devices as the must have thing and people are fickle by nature. Then once you're in the garden you're locked in, the longer you stay the more tied in you become until you've spent so much money on stuff that only works with your Apple devices, changing platforms becomes impossible.

 

This is all enabled by the very fact that you have no choice but to buy everything from Apple and Apple stuff only works with other Apple stuff.

 

Their entire business model is designed in such a way that once you're in, leaving becomes extremely difficult and you essentially get tricked into a constant cycle of having to upgrade your existing Apple devices with new Apple devices.

 

Either you don't understand how this works or you think I won't and are being disingenuous. App developers must have a valid Apple Developer certificate, at any point Apple can decide to revoke that license from the app developer and suddenly your sideloaded app doesn't work any more. Sideloading is no different to just using the Store, Apple still have full control over what you can and cannot use on your phone.

You misconstrued my statement.  Of course there a major differences, but the logic used isn’t one.  It still doesn’t work.  If malware was something that wouldn’t affect others such as,oh, I dunno a compulsion to wear gender role reversed underwear or something else random, you might have a point, but it isn’t so you don’t.

[Master Disaster]

9 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

You misconstrued my statement.  Of course there a major differences, but the logic used isn’t one.  It still doesn’t work.  If malware was something that wouldn’t affect others such as,oh, I dunno a compulsion to wear gender role reversed underwear or something else random, you might have a point, but it isn’t so you don’t.

Installing malware was just an example I pulled out of thin air, Apple don't allow you to install anything they haven't personally curated and retain the ability to stop you from using something you might have paid for because they've decided they don't like it any more.

 

If you use the device in a way that impacts others then its the polices job to stop you, not Apples.

 

Apple are judge, jury and executioner and I believe that's called a conflict of interests.

 

Also that example was pretty specific, you talking from experience?

[Bombastinator]

15 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Installing malware was just an example I pulled out of thin air, Apple don't allow you to install anything they haven't personally curated and retain the ability to stop you from using something you might have paid for because they've decided they don't like it any more.

 

If you use the device in a way that impacts others then its the polices job to stop you, not Apples.

 

Apple are judge, jury and executioner and I believe that's called a conflict of interests.

 

Also that example was pretty specific, you talking from experience?

It’s more than random though.  It’s the point. They’re at least supposedly doing it to check for malware.  They don’t even claim they can stop it, merely that there is an attempt.  Could they be doing other things as well with this capacity that might be less pure?  Sure.   They need to be watched very closely about that one.  If they abuse it in a significant way so that the advantage of a partial defense against malware is eclipsed by the problems caused they’re likely going to be forced to stop it.

 

this whole “you have to accept the malware because freedumz!” Thing is extremely similar to the argument Q-anon was making. 

[Master Disaster]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

this whole “you have to accept the malware because freedumz!” Thing is extremely similar to the argument Q-anon was making. 

I never said we have to accept malware. I said dumb people have the right to install malware on their phones if they really want to, because for better or worse, they do.

[DrMacintosh]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

I said dumb people have the right to install malware on their phones if they really want to, because for better or worse, they do.

Malware does not have the right to be on the AppStore and Apple has every right to remove any that appears on their platform. 

[Master Disaster]

33 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Malware does not have the right to be on the AppStore and Apple has every right to remove any that appears on their platform. 

Repeating the same logical fallacy over and over again doesn't make it get any better.

 

Yes, they do. And customers have the right to choose for themselves what they want to install and run on their own phone.

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

I never said we have to accept malware. I said dumb people have the right to install malware on their phones if they really want to, because for better or worse, they do.

So you’re saying you said a=x and b=x but you did not say a=b.  

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Bombastinator said:

So you’re saying you said a=x and b=x but you did not say a=b.  

Nice try but no.

 

I've said the same thing from the start, Apple have no right to tell anyone what they can or cannot use on their own devices. Be it Malware, Porn, Game Streaming services or literally anything else you can name. As soon as you pay Apple your money their control over the device is relinquished, or at least it should be.

 

You're vehemently sticking with malware because its the only example that fits your narrative, replace malware with Xbox Game Pass or Stadia and absolutely nothing about my argument changes, your argument about "it being blocked/removed because it can damage other people" sinks very quickly. Unless you now want to argue that XBGP doesn't belong on the Apple store either?

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Nice try but no.

 

I've said the same thing from the start, Apple have no right to tell anyone what they can or cannot use on their own devices. Be it Malware, Porn, Game Streaming services or literally anything else you can name. As soon as you pay Apple your money their control over the device is relinquished, or at least it should be.

 

You're vehemently sticking with malware because its the only example that fits your narrative, replace malware with Xbox Game Pass or Stadia and absolutely nothing about my argument changes, your argument about "it being blocked/removed because it can damage other people" sinks very quickly. Unless you now want to argue that XBGP doesn't belong on the Apple store either?

Exactly. So yes.  You’re attempting to argue a different point.  You’re talking about all app stores but are bashing Apple specifically because there is only one way to get Apple apps.  That is not what is being talked about.

 

NOTE: I realized the reply looked like agreement rather than negation so I elaborated on it.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Bombastinator