The best things Apple could do are get rid of in-app purchases and mobile ads entirely. Let’s go back to adequate pricing of apps in their entirety - i.e. significant up-front pricing. I know it won’t happen but I can dream.
Well … why not?
In-app purchases are a bad idea anyway.
I use my iPhone for day to day things to make my life easier. I stopped playing games on it so many years ago. It's a time-waster for me.
However, with COVID, I had a few months of literally nothing to do so I decided to try out some games that grabbed my attention. The cesspool of in-app purchases and how almost all of the games I tried were literally developed from beginning to end in such a way to try to get as much money from the player was just offensive to me, and I'm a developer too! These "games" were almost unplayable. This is a bad business-model for Apple and I think Apple would be doing the community better by getting rid on in-app purchases. Today's Internet where everything is "free" is just not sustainable. People expect "free" apps yet balk at all the ads, in-app purchases, etc.. use it. It's almost like people forget that there are actual people that work to develop these apps and they too need to get paid and make money. I get that, but the way in-app purchases are is just seedy. I will gladly pay $5 (or more) for a quality app than the constant panhandling going on right now.
After about a week of trying these apps, I stopped using them. It was just too much.
Have to agree. Apple should’ve never allowed it in the first place.
<<Anderson told The New York Times that, although North Dakota is a conservative state, it's also "where Teddy Roosevelt came from, and there's no bigger trustbuster." She did concede that the bill may not have the votes to pass.>>
Someone should inform Mr Anderson that Teddy Roosevelt was born and raised in New York.
The best things Apple could do are get rid of in-app purchases and mobile ads entirely. Let’s go back to adequate pricing of apps in their entirety - i.e. significant up-front pricing. I know it won’t happen but I can dream.
I remember selling basic software in the $100s and more sophisticated titles for a $1000+ to the same people that now complain if an app is $4.99 or $9.99. That being said, I love Serif's model for their Affinity family of software versus Adobe's monthly nickel and dime model.
(For the young folks here, nickels and dimes were a form of hard, actual physical currency used prior to the 21st century.) https://www.serif.com/en-gb/
The best things Apple could do are get rid of in-app purchases and mobile ads entirely. Let’s go back to adequate pricing of apps in their entirety - i.e. significant up-front pricing. I know it won’t happen but I can dream.
I remember selling basic software in the $100s and more sophisticated titles for a $1000+ to the same people that now complain if an app is $4.99 or $9.99. That being said, I love Serif's model for their Affinity family of software versus Adobe's monthly nickel and dime model.
(For the young folks here, nickels and dimes were a form of hard, actual physical currency used prior to the 21st century.) https://www.serif.com/en-gb/
Ah yes, more actions from the billionaire that's pretending he's in it for anyone but himself.
On one hand always projecting an image of a concerned quaint developer, on the other hand using his utterly overwhelming financial resources to attempt to pay for changes that benefits his business to the detriment of others.
<<Anderson told The New York Times that, although North Dakota is a conservative state, it's also "where Teddy Roosevelt came from, and there's no bigger trustbuster." She did concede that the bill may not have the votes to pass.>>
Someone should inform Mr Anderson that Teddy Roosevelt was born and raised in New York.
Good catch. Born and raised and Governor of NY too. Went to Harvard. He did own a ranch in N. Dakota though.
Although I'm 100% on Apple's side, I'm sad North Dakota didn't pass any draconian legislation. Apple could have easily withdrawn its product sales from North Dakota to address the problem. Even on Apple's website it would choose to refuse to deliver products to North Dakota. And even after North Dakota revoked the law, Apple should have continued to not provide sales for N.D. for a long time to let them stew over their ineptitude. I'd love to have seen Epic's jubilant response to Apple withdrawing from the N.D. market.
Although I'm 100% on Apple's side, I'm sad North Dakota didn't pass any draconian legislation. Apple could have easily withdrawn its product sales from North Dakota to address the problem. Even on Apple's website it would choose to refuse to deliver products to North Dakota. And even after North Dakota revoked the law, Apple should have continued to not provide sales for N.D. for a long time to let them stew over their ineptitude. I'd love to have seen Epic's jubilant response to Apple withdrawing from the N.D. market.
Revenge isn't good business. These fantasies of yours will never happen.
That’s because you have no idea what those words mean.
On the contrary, I am perfectly aware of the fact that government is, of its nature, a protection racket, and using the state to compel peaceful parties to specific actions is extortion.
Spoken like someone who has never read Lysander Spooner, Murray Rothbard, etc.
Perhaps you would like to cite some Statist myth like the “divine right of kings” as rebuttal.
Nope, I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal at all. You're talking fringe anarcho-libertarian political theory in a thread about video games, that kind of nonsense doesn't requiring serious address. Again, spare us, no one cares.
Comments
https://www.serif.com/en-gb/
On one hand always projecting an image of a concerned quaint developer, on the other hand using his utterly overwhelming financial resources to attempt to pay for changes that benefits his business to the detriment of others.
Perhaps you would like to cite some Statist myth like the “divine right of kings” as rebuttal.