skippingrock
About
- Username
- skippingrock
- Joined
- Visits
- 67
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,494
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 207
Reactions
-
Epic versus Apple: What's at stake if Apple loses
Why is this point always missed? The cost that Apple charges for the App Store isn’t just for running the App Store itself, it also pays for all of the development work that Apple puts into every iOS update. Creating new APIs and frameworks and even the Swift programming language and development tools don’t come free and don’t come cheap. It cannot be recouped by device purchases alone. If Apple is forced to cut out the revenue that they get for apps using these features then you’re either going to see increased developer tool costs. Once upon a time if you wanted an ADC membership it could cost thousands of dollars for large organizations instead of the $99 yearly cost for all platforms. This could be gone and greatly raises the barrier for small developers.The bottom line is this. If you make more from the platform, you should pay more for those development tools that you are using. It’s only fair.
-
'Fortnite' expected to return to iOS in October - on GeForce NOW
Soon Fortnight won’t be popular anyways -
Epic CEO Tim Sweeney grilled on platform agreements, V-Bucks
The iPhone is not just used as a game machine. If it did, probably would be sold at a loss. The thing is that it does other things like um, make phone calls… and so much more. That profit is used to further development of the devices that all of these companies use.Also not to forget that before the ADC fees were so much more but not scalable to those getting into the market. You sell more and make more you should have to pay more for the systems that it runs on. The M1 and AX chips didn’t come out of thin air. The profits of the iPhone alone wouldn’t have paid for it.I chose this platform because I can have a sense of trust that the software on my device is not going to access anything I don’t let it.
-
Apple burns early iPad Pro adopters, loyal customers with Magic Keyboard incompatibility
I disagree. There are many instances where add-on hardware doesn’t work well or at all with the next version of something. Take cars for example, you get the accessories that fit that year and model, you don’t take it out when you want to sell it to use in the following year’s model. When RAM and storage was upgradable in Mac you might be able to take it to the next one, but you might not.ITGUYINSD said:
You mean "just lose more money"? Can't sell my MK for what I paid, so I lose money there. Then have to buy the new MK at full price.skippingrock said:Just sell the keyboard along with your old iPad Pro.
It's bad enough paying the ridiculous prices for the iPad Pro.I’m sure you got use out of your iPad Pro and keyboard, wrote articles or whatever to generate money, so I can hardly agree that you are losing money. No one is forcing anyone to upgrade to the latest iPad Pro. I’m sure your device will work just fine tomorrow as it does today. I’m still using an iPad mini 2 and a MacBook Pro retina 2014. They’re old, but still work.Sorry you feel burned but don’t assume that others feel the same way. Like someone else said they is most likely an engineering reason why they are not compatible. I am quite certain that an iPad Pro with the keyboard will sell much better and higher premium than one without. Or do what many do, use your device longer until you have the money to get the new ones.But I never expect being able to install my add-on’s on my next device if the do, bonus, but don’t expect commoditized components from a premium product. Pro means getting the best and leaving behind the rest, including keyboards from older models.
-
Apple burns early iPad Pro adopters, loyal customers with Magic Keyboard incompatibility
Just sell the keyboard along with your old iPad Pro.
