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

The argument is nonsense because Apple decisions are not driven by security but are there to ensure they get a cut of every revenue stream on their platform. If this was just about security there would be a way to verify secure 3rd party payment processing methods - I trust Stripe as much as I trust Apple for example. And you wouldn't be forced to offer the same price on other platforms either.

I don't mind personally I see the value they offer - they make products that are better overall for a large majority of consumers and their ecosystem just works for many use cases - it doesn't fit me particularly well but I see the value proposition.

Pretending that these store policies are driven by security is nonsense, those kinds of arguments tick me off.




Who's pretending they are "driven by security"?

Clearly Apple wants to make money. The only argument being made is that some customers choose the walled garden because they want a telephone, not a part-time job keeping the weeds at bay. As you say, that's (a component of) what they are selling, and they do it because it sells (long-term, in their estimation).


The number of customers who chose an iPhone because it only lets them buy apps from Apple is a tiny fraction of the number of people who bought the device as a fashion accessory. What a strange thing to want. It makes little sense to think that Apple is catering to the tiny former group instead of simply extracting as much money as it can out of the latter group.


I don't think it's accurate or fair to ascribe motivations to Apple based on a relevant, yet arbitrary, line in the sand that you chose to draw.




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

Search: