Lengths of bills is not an example of "excessive bureaucracy". There are things that need to be done which need to be spelled out. Further, trying to put everything in one or two pages sounds great in theory, until you realize there are a lot of edge cases that need to be addressed too.
Are you going to pump out your gas by the gallon and put it into said container, observe it, and then put it into your vehicle every time you need to fuel up?
Without the leach field, the homeowner would know about the fraud within a few weeks and sue the contractor.
With what money? Are you going to pay their legal bills? And suppose the contractor operated under an LLC, and dissolved it shortly after pulling this stunt, and fled. What's the homeowner to do then?
This idea that "suing everyone will make all the problems go away" is not feasible in the least.
Only on Slashdot would saying you're against the "freedom" of contractors to rip you off by not actually installing your septic system would you be called a statist.
From what it looks like, that project started out great, but then was infected with a bunch of anti-government types who insist on the private sector at all costs, even when it's clear to everyone that the private sector has no interest in doing what needs to be done and is just going to take money to sit on their asses.
Apple isn't forbidding anything; you're perfectly free to not use their platform. What you're bitching about is that you want to use their platform AND have things your way.
Besides, if all those costs are so low, then why don't you start your own store on Android, and charge just 10%? I mean, if the costs are so cheap, then you should be raking in the dough.
Niether Google Play nor Windows Marketplace nor Amazon nor RIM force all developers on their platform to give 30% of everything sold within their apps.
Google and Amazon require that, if you sell through their stores, you use their IAP solution, which does take 30%.
Apple has NOTHING TO DO with providing SkyDrive service to Microsoft's customers, yet they are demanding that Microsoft give them a 30% cut of it merely to have an app on their platform.
However, the issue here is that Microsoft wants preferential treatment. They are not arguing for Apple to drop that requirement for all developers.
If you sell through Google Play, you do NOT get to use a 3rd party for your In App Purchases. If you go through a 3rd party store, you can do whatever that 3rd party store allows, but likely it is not as popular as the Google Play one.
Microsoft's Windows Store for Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 is much more open and better financially for developers than either iOS or Android?
This is only the case if developers get more total revenue out of Microsoft's stuff. Per unit costs might be lower, but if you barely ship any, it doesn't really matter.
Google isn't paying for all of that with that fee. They're paying for most of it with advertising. The $25 fee is a little bit of a barrier to entry, designed to slow down spammers and such.
Google is NOT covering their Play Store costs with that one time $25 fee. Not even close.
Just like EVERYTHING else they do, it is subsidized by the money they make on advertising.
One for FAR less than the other. In which world does one choose the more expensive option with no benefit?
Because, as you have been told many times, that is not the case. The benefit is that one is much more likely to make money with a paid app on iOS than on Android. If you're not selling an app, then that's not a benefit you care about. But for many, many, many people out there, it is a benefit.
Just because YOU don't benefit from something doesn't mean others don't either. Thinking like that makes you an asshole.
And both numbers are a rounding error compared to the amount of money that Microsoft would be dealing with if they put Office in either of those stores.
Again, nobody really cares. If you sell stuff on the App store, then the $99 is a pittance. If you're not selling stuff, then it doesn't matter to you, as you've already chosen your platform according to your needs.
You forgot to add in the cost of the Apple computer required to do the development. Then you do the work making or porting the app, and Apple decides they don't want to allow it on their market. That's a loss of $1000 or so all for nothing in return. Sorry, I don't find that worth it. I will stick with Android, where for one single $25 application I am guaranteed to have any apps I make visible and available on the Google Play market for as long as I want them there.
Good for you; I hope you're successful.
However, #1, you can buy a used Mac Mini for a couple hundred dollars, so it's not that much. #2, the guidelines for what is allowed in the store are very well known, and there is a 95% passage rate. That's not much of a risk. #3, the Apple App Store is still more popular, so if you're selling your apps, you're probably going to make more money there than on Android.
In which world are you living that this is seen as a bad thing?
The one where you apparently are not happy with it, and constantly bitch about the other stuff that's out there, that you have already decided not to use.
He doesn't want a whole bunch of shitty "for fun" apps that aren't any good becoming noise in the App Store?
If you're going to write it once and forget about it, then I don't want you releasing it on any store, as that's just polluting it with noise and crap. If you're going to write something to release on the store, put effort into it, and actually fix it when it needs fixing.
Nobody is saying that. We're just tired of assholes like you bitching about stuff that doesn't affect you in the slightest. You've already made the decision that Apple is not for you. That's fine. There are plenty of other people who have decided that the costs are acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
Lengths of bills is not an example of "excessive bureaucracy". There are things that need to be done which need to be spelled out. Further, trying to put everything in one or two pages sounds great in theory, until you realize there are a lot of edge cases that need to be addressed too.
Sounds more like a Homeowners Association, which is NOT government, but a private organization.
And how much do you actually look at what is being pumped into the container?
Are you going to pump out your gas by the gallon and put it into said container, observe it, and then put it into your vehicle every time you need to fuel up?
Without the leach field, the homeowner would know about the fraud within a few weeks and sue the contractor.
With what money? Are you going to pay their legal bills? And suppose the contractor operated under an LLC, and dissolved it shortly after pulling this stunt, and fled. What's the homeowner to do then?
This idea that "suing everyone will make all the problems go away" is not feasible in the least.
Only on Slashdot would saying you're against the "freedom" of contractors to rip you off by not actually installing your septic system would you be called a statist.
Except there is absolutely nothing to back up your statement, and the fact of the matter is, the private sector has REFUSED to provide this service.
Seriously, how the fuck can you say the private sector would be "cheaper and more efficient" if they won't do it at all?
To counter you, I would look at Chattanooga, TN.
Just because your project was infected with anti-government types wanting to sabotage it doesn't mean all of them will be.
From what it looks like, that project started out great, but then was infected with a bunch of anti-government types who insist on the private sector at all costs, even when it's clear to everyone that the private sector has no interest in doing what needs to be done and is just going to take money to sit on their asses.
Apple isn't forbidding anything; you're perfectly free to not use their platform. What you're bitching about is that you want to use their platform AND have things your way.
Besides, if all those costs are so low, then why don't you start your own store on Android, and charge just 10%? I mean, if the costs are so cheap, then you should be raking in the dough.
Niether Google Play nor Windows Marketplace nor Amazon nor RIM force all developers on their platform to give 30% of everything sold within their apps.
Google and Amazon require that, if you sell through their stores, you use their IAP solution, which does take 30%.
Apple has NOTHING TO DO with providing SkyDrive service to Microsoft's customers, yet they are demanding that Microsoft give them a 30% cut of it merely to have an app on their platform.
However, the issue here is that Microsoft wants preferential treatment. They are not arguing for Apple to drop that requirement for all developers.
You have completely confused the issue.
If you sell through Google Play, you do NOT get to use a 3rd party for your In App Purchases. If you go through a 3rd party store, you can do whatever that 3rd party store allows, but likely it is not as popular as the Google Play one.
Microsoft's Windows Store for Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 is much more open and better financially for developers than either iOS or Android?
This is only the case if developers get more total revenue out of Microsoft's stuff. Per unit costs might be lower, but if you barely ship any, it doesn't really matter.
Google isn't paying for all of that with that fee. They're paying for most of it with advertising. The $25 fee is a little bit of a barrier to entry, designed to slow down spammers and such.
Google is NOT covering their Play Store costs with that one time $25 fee. Not even close.
Just like EVERYTHING else they do, it is subsidized by the money they make on advertising.
One for FAR less than the other. In which world does one choose the more expensive option with no benefit?
Because, as you have been told many times, that is not the case. The benefit is that one is much more likely to make money with a paid app on iOS than on Android. If you're not selling an app, then that's not a benefit you care about. But for many, many, many people out there, it is a benefit.
Just because YOU don't benefit from something doesn't mean others don't either. Thinking like that makes you an asshole.
And both numbers are a rounding error compared to the amount of money that Microsoft would be dealing with if they put Office in either of those stores.
By comparison.
Again, nobody really cares. If you sell stuff on the App store, then the $99 is a pittance. If you're not selling stuff, then it doesn't matter to you, as you've already chosen your platform according to your needs.
You forgot to add in the cost of the Apple computer required to do the development. Then you do the work making or porting the app, and Apple decides they don't want to allow it on their market. That's a loss of $1000 or so all for nothing in return. Sorry, I don't find that worth it. I will stick with Android, where for one single $25 application I am guaranteed to have any apps I make visible and available on the Google Play market for as long as I want them there.
Good for you; I hope you're successful.
However, #1, you can buy a used Mac Mini for a couple hundred dollars, so it's not that much. #2, the guidelines for what is allowed in the store are very well known, and there is a 95% passage rate. That's not much of a risk. #3, the Apple App Store is still more popular, so if you're selling your apps, you're probably going to make more money there than on Android.
In which world are you living that this is seen as a bad thing?
The one where you apparently are not happy with it, and constantly bitch about the other stuff that's out there, that you have already decided not to use.
Salary is different; you're not including the costs of benefits like insurance and 401k.
A good contractor, who works hourly, can easily command $100/hour to $250/hour, or more.
But they're not a douchebag. They're just charging a price that you're not willing to pay.
Is Ferrari a douchebag for not selling me one of their cars for the same price I could buy a Civic for?
He doesn't want a whole bunch of shitty "for fun" apps that aren't any good becoming noise in the App Store?
If you're going to write it once and forget about it, then I don't want you releasing it on any store, as that's just polluting it with noise and crap. If you're going to write something to release on the store, put effort into it, and actually fix it when it needs fixing.
Nobody is saying that. We're just tired of assholes like you bitching about stuff that doesn't affect you in the slightest. You've already made the decision that Apple is not for you. That's fine. There are plenty of other people who have decided that the costs are acceptable.
It's hardly about whether one can afford it. It's about there being cheaper options available for the same service...
You can't really call it the same service considering the fact that the Apple App Store is far more successful than the Google Play one.
Freedom of Expression dude. Heard of it?
He's using his "Freedom of Expression" to call you an idiot.