Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Apparently "open source group" means "high maintenance and unprofessional goalpost-shifters who suffer the delusion that they are in charge".



You make open source groups sound a lot like apple.


Except when it comes to the App Store, Apple is in charge.


No, if Apple decides to create a new marketplace - to which tens of thousands of small business have a stake; Apple has a duty to act in an impartial and fair manner.

The fact that Apple created this economic space, doesn't give it the right to behave like a feudal overlord might have behaved in the Middle Ages.

--

It's very much a case of 'who watches the watchmen'.

An independent complaints or regulatory commission needs to be established which can be used to lodge complaints about unfair action within any privately created IP-focused marketplace. I believe that laws should be introduced to ensure that Apple (and Google / Blackberry etc.) would have to subscribe to any guidelines put forth by such a body.


"No, if Apple decides to create a new marketplace - to which tens of thousands of small business have a stake; Apple has a duty to act in an impartial and fair manner."

Apple didn't change their terms to exclude VLC or GPL. A developer (not VLC) put together the iOS version of the app, and, being fully aware of the terms of the App Store, the model of distribution, the use of DRM, and the likely incompatibilities with GPL submitted the app to Apple.

Blaming Apple for this is completely wrongheaded. It's essentially a disagreement between a VLC developer and the developer of the iOS app.

You might have a point if Apple had changed their terms after the app was submitted in order to exclude the app.

If anything, they loosened their terms to remove incompatibilities.

The iOS app developer screwed up. You should be calling for a regulatory commission to prevent developers from doing stupid things with GPL-licensed code like making business decisions that require abusing GPL.


Unfortunately that's just not true. While I agree that is "ideal" and the way it "should be," if I own a clothing retail store, and only want to sell designer Italian clothing, I'm allowed to. I don't also have to allow any and all Chinese, French, and American tailors to put their clothes in my shop.


Apple in no way analogous to a retail clothing store;

1. They are not buying products for resale - they are providing a marketplace for other businesses to sell their own products.

2. The products that are created for the iOS AppStore cannot be sold anywhere else.

Content creators can't vote with their feet - they're tied to using Apple's system. They have to invest in very specific technologies to participate in the Apple ecosystem. This creates a situation where Apple is provided with an unwarranted amount of power.

Whether you agree with me or not - I strongly believe measures will be put in place which attempt to rectify the situation.


    Content creators can't vote with their feet - they're tied to using Apple's system.
This is not true. There are other marketplaces. They the Content Creators are the ones who decided the AppStore was a necessity and they are perfectly capable of changing that. In fact on HackerNews we have in the past seen Content Creators do exactly that. Choosing a different distribution mechanism or a different platform entirely for their Content.

Point 1 still stands but point 2 does not since it's too restrictive to be applied to the debate.


I'd heard that there are ways to circumvent the AppStore - but are these alternative AppStores economically viable?

A couple of questions;

1. Could an application developer make a living by selling their Apps via the alternative mechanisms - and would a regular (non-technical) user, be able to obtain these Apps without much effort?

2. Could Apple decide to 'outlaw' these alternatives if it chose to?


You don't have to circumvent the app store. You can choose a different platform. Saying that the iOS platform is the only market worth mentioning in this debate is a needless restriction. They can choose instead to go the android route or move off of Mobile completely and do something else.

iOS and the AppStore are popular for many reasons some of which have a lot to do with the Content Creators who are publishing there. It is not however the only marketplace and Creators have other choices.


So my original point still stands;

There is only one marketplace [for iOS applications] ...

2. The products that are created for the iOS AppStore cannot be sold anywhere else.

--

There are multiple commercial marketplaces available for Android - so I don't think highlighting the Apple AppStore is necessarily a needless restriction.


I realise asking for clarification often involves subsequent down-voting, but I'd like to continue the conversation.


Open Source means that this is a collaborative work where anyone can do what he wants with his copyright.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: