←back to thread

380 points rezonant | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
anileated ◴[] No.40208302[source]
Do I think side-loading and alt app stores would make iPads and iPhones more versatile devices? Yes.

Do I believe indie devs will be worse off? Unfortunately, also yes.

If you are a solo app developer, you will now have to keep presence on all app stores out there, since if you don’t publish on one then a copycat will. Every store would have its own review processes, fee structures, billing and tax procedures. Since you would need to follow a dozen of those, as an indie operation realistically you will either go under or pay middleman companies a chunk for this—so, in the end, you’ll lose the same cut or more and we’re back to the starting point.

Furthermore, I believe you will have much less protection against plain piracy, which was a big thing in the days of yore until it was spectacularly dealt with by Apple within its mobile ecosystem.

This is why I suspect the primary interests side-loading and alt app stores on Apple devices would satisfy is large enterprises and a few opportunistic middlemen. Entities like Epic, Netflix, who will be able to generate more profit; governments, perhaps; a few publishing companies (think CDBaby for apps) will win small time; some users who don’t want to pay and want to get things for free might be able to get their way; indie devs will be worse off.

replies(16): >>40208353 #>>40208448 #>>40208458 #>>40208518 #>>40208520 #>>40208529 #>>40208559 #>>40208626 #>>40208630 #>>40208693 #>>40208746 #>>40208979 #>>40209032 #>>40210376 #>>40210772 #>>40220048 #
madeofpalk ◴[] No.40208746[source]
1) Users win. The first alt app store didn't even launch and it pressured Apple to change it's review policies TWICE. Once to allow game streaming services, and then to allow game emulators. Hell, even developers won here.

2) How did this play out on every other platform. Sure - piracy exists, but most don't and it's pretty non-impactful AFAICT.

replies(2): >>40208936 #>>40210195 #
gtufano ◴[] No.40208936[source]
Piracy is not-impactful is not true. The disappearance of indie software that do not depend on a remote server (or that's not software on a remote server) is basically due to the inability to monetize with sales native, stand-alone, software. And that's for the piracy.

In some way, the success of the App Store towards indie/solo developers is because there was a way to sell things without the piracy easily steal your sales.

Yes, I know that "it's not stealing", "it's not theft", etc. Beside the ethical/moral conundrum of piracy, the fact is that it destroys the market for small developers.

replies(3): >>40209013 #>>40209564 #>>40212071 #
1. meepmorp ◴[] No.40209013{3}[source]
Piracy literally cannot affect the economic wellbeing of content or software producers. It is logically impossible!

If it weren't, you wouldn't be experiencing this cascade of downvotes, so get with the program.

replies(2): >>40209097 #>>40209107 #
2. Zr40 ◴[] No.40209097[source]
This would be true if the only alternative to piracy is not using said content or software. If paying is a valid alternative to a nonzero fraction of pirate users if piracy was not an option, then the piracy does affect the creators economically.
3. robertlagrant ◴[] No.40209107[source]
> If it weren't, you wouldn't be experiencing this cascade of downvotes, so get with the program.

Disregarding this statement's general silliness, it is also downvoted. Now we're in a paradox. Downvotes mean you're wrong, so the statement that downvotes mean you're wrong..is wrong?