You might get actual sympathy if Apple's costs were abusive. But 30% for everything they do is not hurting developers.
If you want to actually point out how Apple's policies are hurting developers, fine. That would be a discussion worth having.
But saying they charge a lot (especially to Microsoft!) is the whining of a seven yr old. And is not a discussion worth having, so I'll keep telling you to shut up.
Apple's approach is also considerably more sustainable, as it pays for itself, and can therefore last.
You might want to go look at the economics of Android, including how much Google has spent on it. What happens when Google decides to stop spending billions on Android because they still make more money on iOS?
I'm willing to bet what ever amount you want, up to and including all the money in the world, that you'll make more money in the Apple store than the Android store(s).
Make your decision and accept the consequences of that choice, just stop whining.
Are you seriously saying that animals besides humans don't "exist in highly complex constantly changing societal structures and often do things for entirely non-immediately-intuitive reasons"
Slashdot Mirror
I've always said CEOs and their entire families should be downstream/wind of their plants.
Most places would have environmental standards above the minimums.
So, how much Apple is paying other businesses is 'completely orthogonal' to the restrictions on costs to those businesses? That's just not reality.
Top 25 are big business and don't care at all about Apple's cost structure. They're making money hand over fist.
How many small devs are making a living on iOS vs Android? Ask them why they chose each platform.
The 'expense' of app devs who have been paid more than $6.5 billion dollars so far.
Apple's model is a financially successful model for everyone, if you develop a half decent app.
Everyone else whining it costs too much probably either isn't actually in the game or can't develop a half decent app.
You might get actual sympathy if Apple's costs were abusive. But 30% for everything they do is not hurting developers.
If you want to actually point out how Apple's policies are hurting developers, fine. That would be a discussion worth having.
But saying they charge a lot (especially to Microsoft!) is the whining of a seven yr old. And is not a discussion worth having, so I'll keep telling you to shut up.
Apple's approach is also considerably more sustainable, as it pays for itself, and can therefore last.
You might want to go look at the economics of Android, including how much Google has spent on it. What happens when Google decides to stop spending billions on Android because they still make more money on iOS?
So, shut up and do it on Android.
Don't like Apple's game? Get out.
I'm willing to bet what ever amount you want, up to and including all the money in the world, that you'll make more money in the Apple store than the Android store(s).
Make your decision and accept the consequences of that choice, just stop whining.
You might want to go look at the quarterly numbers. Amazon is famous for NOT making any profits. Apple is famous FOR making profits.
Windows Store is not in the position of Apple's App Store.
What part aren't they doing from the list above?
Hosting app/in-app purchases - yep
Collecting payment - yep
Remitting to developer - yep
Distributing updates/purchases - yep
Providing notification service - yep
Making apps/updates easy to find - yep.
My hands.
I didn't know the FBI was in the UK.
She's not getting AIDS. It's a disabled virus. Read the damn summary.
Identical to the flu shot, just a different payload.
No, I'm saying Yahoo branch offices in Germany are not subject to US law.
Or that a DT branch in Flagstaff is not subject to German law.
Are you not even trying to pay attention to the larger discussion?
Are you seriously saying that animals besides humans don't "exist in highly complex constantly changing societal structures and often do things for entirely non-immediately-intuitive reasons"
Because US laws don't apply to EU based companies, whose operations being raided are in the EU, but have a US branch which somehow makes it ok?
Sure, that's not crazy at ALL.
Wow, that's a lot of delusion for three sentences.
1. Enforcing judgements is not the same as knocking on some business' door in Brussels and saying give us your data, or else.
2. Yes, exactly like that. It was bad then, it's just as bad now.
You mean those same companies that are now selling LCD TVs at virtually identical prices?
Hmmm, wonder what a huge fine for similar behavior might have?
Wow, that's seriously missing the discussion.
Do US laws apply to EU companies, IN the EU, just because they have a US branch?
No, they don't. Even if the US thinks they do.
Just in case you're unclear, try switching the US and the EU, see how that feels.
Yes.
No*
*Not until they pass a similar PATRIOT Act.
But then, that's why we haven't done it to China companies. Because the blowback would get messy. EU companies are already our bitch.
That's not a pistol!
A big step across a big ocean.
Not that I was aware of.
However, it was egg whites not fat. So it wouldn't be similar to oils.
Your taste preference is not typical, so why bother?
I worked with/on Hershey's Desert Bar. In 1990.
http://www.hersheyarchives.org/essay/details.aspx?EssayId=39
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonliebigstuff/7290674224/
It was processing the egg whites to withstand structural changes at higher temps.
I put one in a flame on a gas stove. It burned, did not melt.
They were tolerable to eat, but not great. Much like last year's halloween candy.