Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Irrelevant question. You originally said "should everyone who has ever sold apps on Apple platforms be forced to refund their users if that happens". Selling fully functional apps on any of Apple's platforms requires notorization which costs $99/year.

Lol

That was a completely unrelated point that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

My actual quote was:
Does it mean that every single app developer out there making software for Apple's platforms is currently guilty of "stealing" by using Apple's tools and APIs for free that they can't guarantee will still be there tomorrow?

You replied saying that the tools aren't free, but cost $99 / year, which I proved is incorrect, and you know is incorrect which is why you refuse to answer the simple question "Is Xcode free?"
 
That was a completely unrelated point that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

My actual quote was:


You replied saying that the tools aren't free, but cost $99 / year, which I proved is incorrect, and you know is incorrect which is why you refuse to answer the simple question "Is Xcode free?"
Why did you leave out the first sentence? Here's the link to your actual quote: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...n.2394522/page-17?post=32288617#post-32288617

I never said "the tools aren't free". Here's my exact quote
"Developers paid $99/year + 30% cut (15% cut for some). This funds Apple's tooling and services to developers."

Tell me exactly how that statement is incorrect. Tell me where I said tools aren't free.

Developers (meaning more than 1 developer) paid $99/year + 30% cut. And this is how Apple funds their tooling and services. This is factually correct.
 
That's a terrible analogy. All that's happened is that people pre-paid for a year of service and the economic conditions dramatically changed for the developer such that he can't provide that full year of service. He's offering refunds for the portion of that year that was paid for but won't be serviced, and asked for people to consider declining the refund. That's fine. The user gets to choose if they want to provide one last gesture of support to a person who's business is closing their doors or not. He was never holding anyone's wallet, he just had money that people paid him for a year of service in return. When they gave first him that money they weren't expecting any it back, so why are you talking about wallets and shoelaces?

If you want to use the donut analogy, it's like pre-paying for a punchcard that entitles you to 12 donuts, but before you used up the punchcard the donut shop went out of business. The owner offered to buy back the unused part of the punchcard, but asked you to consider declining the offer. It's up to you if you take a refund or if you want to support the owner while they transition to something else. You never asked them to hold your wallet, nor were you expecting money back when you bought the card. You just thought you were getting more donuts.

if you want to argue the developer is a terrible person for asking this, you're entitled to that opinion. But if you held everyone in the reddit story to that same standard, reddit's CEO would come out looking a lot worse, so I don't know why this would be the stance you choose.
except the LANGUAGE matters in this analogy.

If the donut shop owner said

"Hey buddy, I'm shutting down. I'd give you back the money for that unused punch card. But *nudge nudge* you know this money I've giving you, it's out of my pocket. So if you can just forgive it, that would be awesome. If not fine, I will give it back"

How do you feel? It's absolute horrible Im sure you'll agree. Why? Well, in almost every other case, this is be an ABSURB statement to make. If it's Apple, or a celebrity or anyone else. Can you imagine?

Beyonce cancelled her concert. Offers to refund all tickets. BUT, she's sending out a mass survey to all emails that if ANYONE is willing call their credit card company and just stop the refund because you know, any money Beyonce pays out is "out of her pocket" so please do so!

But SOMEHOW it's ok for Apollo to say it. Why? Because the fanboism runs rampart here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saladin12
Why did you leave out the first sentence? Here's the link to your actual quote: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...n.2394522/page-17?post=32288617#post-32288617

I never said "the tools aren't free". Here's my exact quote


Tell me exactly how that statement is incorrect. Tell me where I said tools aren't free.

Developers (meaning more than 1 developer) paid $99/year + 30% cut. And this is how Apple funds their tooling and services. This is factually correct.

>> Why did you leave out the first sentence?

Because those two sentences aren't linked in any way? How would the price of tools affect refunds?

Anyway, I'm glad you finally admit that Xcode is free.
 
Apollo used the reddit API without paying for it because reddit offered it for free.
Apollo used Xcode and Apple SDKs without paying for them because Apple offers them for free.

Hope this isn't too confusing.
Apollo paid $99/year.

Hope this isn't too confusing.
 
Apollo paid $99/year.

Hope this isn't too confusing.
Ok, we just worked this through and you literally agreed that Xcode is free, but that he also paid $99/year for distribution (and not the tools)

But let's say you're correct, what's your point? That using Xcode is fine because he paid Apple $99 for something else? Are you saying the Reddit API should also have cost $99, instead of $20 million? If so then we agree yet again :)
 
Ok, we just worked this through and you literally agreed that Xcode is free, but that he also paid $99/year for distribution (and not the tools)

$99/year + 30% (15%) funds the tools and services. That makes it ok for Apollo to use Xcode AND to sell the app.

but that he also paid $99/year for distribution (and not the tools)

You still need $99/year for macOS apps where you distribute yourself to be fully functional. So $99/year does go toward funding of tools.

But let's say you're correct, what's your point? That using Xcode is fine because he paid Apple $99 for something else?

Again, $99/year + 30% (15%) funds the tools and services. That is fine.

If you want to just download Xcode and not sell your app, that's free. This is fine with Apple because these developers can't make money from selling fully functional apps until they pay $99/year. These "free" developers have nothing to do with Apollo since Apollo paid $99/year to make money using Apple's tools. So why did you bring up these "free" developers?


Are you saying the Reddit API should also have cost $99, instead of $2 million?
Nope.
 
Last edited:
except the LANGUAGE matters in this analogy.

If the donut shop owner said

"Hey buddy, I'm shutting down. I'd give you back the money for that unused punch card. But *nudge nudge* you know this money I've giving you, it's out of my pocket. So if you can just forgive it, that would be awesome. If not fine, I will give it back"

How do you feel? It's absolute horrible Im sure you'll agree. Why? Well, in almost every other case, this is be an ABSURB statement to make. If it's Apple, or a celebrity or anyone else. Can you imagine?

Beyonce cancelled her concert. Offers to refund all tickets. BUT, she's sending out a mass survey to all emails that if ANYONE is willing call their credit card company and just stop the refund because you know, any money Beyonce pays out is "out of her pocket" so please do so!

But SOMEHOW it's ok for Apollo to say it. Why? Because the fanboism runs rampart here.
I’d never heard of Apollo before this, but sure I’m a fanboy. How about you own up to posting a brainless analogy in the same post you accused others of brainless fanboyism?

You said it was like giving someone your wallet to hold while you tie your shoes. It’s nothing like that. Own your own words before trying to move the goalposts again.

PS: Once you paid someone money and they give it back, it is out of their pocket, by definition. There is nothing wrong with the wording there. But sure, be mad. I just ask that apply that same standard to everyone involved in this fiasco, which you aren’t doing.

Recurring subscription revenue was their salary and how they covered their expenses. Imagine losing your job and having to pay back 3 months of salary at the same time. Even if you’re well off, that’s not exactly pleasant. Don’t throw around words like “brainless” if you don’t even understand the topic.

If you understood the topic you’d realize just how ridiculous it is that it’s cheaper for the developer to pay back all the cancelled subscriptions than it is to pay Reddits API fees…
 
Recurring subscription revenue was their salary and how they covered their expenses. Imagine losing your job and having to pay back 3 months of salary at the same time. Even if you’re well off, that’s not exactly pleasant. Don’t throw around words like “brainless” if you don’t even understand the topic.
Except this isn't the case. It's salary for the NEXT 6 months of your work, which is no longer needed now. And we want the money back, and it's not "out of your pocket" because it's our money to begin with :) Please educate yourself on this matter because you are embarrassing the whole apollo fan team over here! Your whole team is reading this, oh boy!
 
Except this isn't the case. It's salary for the NEXT 6 months of your work, which is no longer needed now. And we want the money back, and it's not "out of your pocket" because it's our money to begin with :) Please educate yourself on this matter because you are embarrassing the whole apollo fan team over here! Your whole team is reading this, oh boy!

It’s income. It doesn’t go into a blind trust where it sits until they deliver 12 months of service. No one operates like that. It’s immediately put towards expenses or converted to less liquid assets.

Yes, they agreed to provide a year of service to the customer, but the way it works is you get X renewals every month and that’s used for immediate expenses and improvements. The customer deserves their money back (unless they agree to opt out of the refund), but I’m talking about how this actually works for the developer.

Explain how shoelaces and wallets are relevant already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bgillander
It’s income. It doesn’t go into a blind trust where it sits until they deliver 12 months of service. No one operates like that. It’s immediately put towards expenses or converted to less liquid assets.

Yes, they agreed to provide a year of service to the customer, but the way it works is you get X renewals every month and that’s used for immediate expenses and improvements. The customer deserves their money back (unless they agree to opt out of the refund), but I’m talking about how this actually works for the developer.

Explain how shoelaces and wallets are relevant already.
Except there ARE no expenses. There are no server costs you pay up front, it's not like he was renting an office. There are no salary he paid to hire someone for the NEXT 6 months. Sorry your can't just make up **** to make your logic sound. It doesn't work. :)

He messed up, and spent someone else money. And now he wants to be forgiven for that money by playing the victim role. Na uh, doesn't work sorry bud. That's what shoelaces and wallets are. You stole someone else money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Call me unsympathetic but this pity party is pathetic. "The refund is out of pocket", is actually a massive lie. A refund is simply returning funds you collected, I do not care that you spent the money. Personally I call it a big scam taking advantage of the "hate on reddit policy" and "kindness of people". Do not fall for it folks, actively tell this developer to go F himself for even asking. Give your money to a real charity, you owe this stranger nothing. He entered into a business and knew the risks getting in! He also likely enjoyed some very nice reward while the going was good, pathetic is my polite word, don't reward stupid.
Wow, this is an incredibly unsympathetic and unrealistic view.

An app developer by definition sells apps in order to earn their income. That's why they make apps. How long exactly should someone leave their entire revenue in the bank for you to not consider them a scammer?

Reddit is receiving hate because they negotiated in bad faith. They lied to this developer and the entire third-party developer community. The publicly promised to charge reasonable rates for the API calls, but in fact they're charging unsustainable rates.

They lied often, repeatedly, and in bad faith.

They failed to follow their own statements about the timing of the roll out of these costs, they failed to follow their own statements about the cost of this change, and then they told people all the developers are in the wrong here.

The CEO personally lied about this developer, saying he was trying to extort Reddit, yet the developer has recordings and transcripts of all calls.

Had Reddit not made these decisions to screw the developer community, people would still be happily paying for the tool he made. Reddit's own app is awful, and it's lacking features for moderators that the company promised they'd add more than eight years ago.

I'm one of the users of the app that won't be requesting a refund, because I enjoyed what the developer made, and I understand that he tried to make this work with Reddit, and they screwed him.

I loved his app, I used it many times a day.

And guess what‽ I can and will still give money to charity. I can help out a developer that got screwed while doing the bed the could AND help charity! Because I took the time to follow this issue, read the coverage, and I know what I'm talking about.

Quick note, your polite word isn't polite. It's misinformed and incredibly uncharitable.
 
Wow, this is an incredibly unsympathetic and unrealistic view.

An app developer by definition sells apps in order to earn their income. That's why they make apps. How long exactly should someone leave their entire revenue in the bank for you to not consider them a scammer?
Um according to US GAAP accounting, how long? well you should keep the money until the service is rendered, so if you took someone’s money for 1 year subscription, you can start spending 1/12 of it every month. Uh oh, apollo didn’t blow that 1 year worth of money on drugs and casino on the first month, did he? :)
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: atokads
Except there ARE no expenses. There are no server costs you pay up front, it's not like he was renting an office. There are no salary he paid to hire someone for the NEXT 6 months. Sorry your can't just make up **** to make your logic sound. It doesn't work. :)

He messed up, and spent someone else money. And now he wants to be forgiven for that money by playing the victim role. Na uh, doesn't work sorry bud. That's what shoelaces and wallets are. You stole someone else money.

Lol apparently developers have no expenses. At the end of the day, they are returning the money to anyone who requests a refund. So how did they really mess up?

I’m just pointing out there is a real hardship there, and it would exist for anyone in a similar situation.

Thanks for admitting you don’t understand contract law either. This would be a civil matter, not a criminal one.

Donuts, wallets, shoelaces
 
  • Like
Reactions: bgillander
Lol apparently developers have no expenses. At the end of the day, they are returning the money to anyone who requests a refund. So how did they really mess up?

I’m just pointing out there is a real hardship there, and it would exist for anyone in a similar situation.

Thanks for admitting you don’t understand contract law either. This would be a civil matter, not a criminal one.

Donuts, wallets, shoelaces
you dont have expense for services you havent yet rendered (not his business anyways).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
you dont have expense for services you havent yet rendered (not his business anyways). I guess maybe that slot machine addiction can be an expense though? Gotta check with IRS

Donuts, wallets, shoelaces. They are issuing refunds, so why are you talking about slot machines now? Cheers, I’m checking out of this nonsense. It was fun for a little while.
 
Just answer one incredibly simple question: Is Xcode free or not?
Still waiting for the admission of being wrong about selling fully functional apps without paying $99/year. Simple question: do you admit you were wrong?
 
Just FYI: if Apollo's bill is high, look at the bill Reddit is putting up to run the API.

Sorry, but Apollo gets no sympathy from me. And before you even ask, I am an iOS developer and I understand the risks in implementing ANY API.
You clearly are not aware of what is actually going on here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
Yeah, at the very least Reddit could've bought out Apollo.
That's the thing, they killed most 3rd party apps without a suitable replacement so a handful of people could get rich on a user generated and supported community that they had very little to do with. This should be a poisonous stock offering so I'm guess they will be a lot less rich than they thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bgillander
So in summary, you don't have anything to indicate that VC investments are drying up, and instead of replying to the points I made about Selig, you're going back to reddit.. for reasons.
I thought I answered that point pretty well. Christian asked for a favour, and we agreed. End of story. He's not entitled to the money supposedly earmarked as refunds, and yet here we are telling him "You know what, hold on to it and get a cuppa on my behalf". You are the one here who can't seem to let go for some reason and seem convinced that he is some massive scammer and that we are the ones living in the matrix and need to wake up.

I don't know what more I can say beyond "noted" and continuing to toss a few more dollars his way. Just because I can.
 
Um according to US GAAP accounting, how long? well you should keep the money until the service is rendered, so if you took someone’s money for 1 year subscription, you can start spending 1/12 of it every month. Uh oh, apollo didn’t blow that 1 year worth of money on drugs and casino on the first month, did he? :)
Since you keep talking about rules, you should at least try to stop repeatedly making libellous statements on the internet. If you truly think the developer is really only about the cash as you keep saying, then you’ve giving him several pieces of evidence to try to actually get money from you by taking you to court for libel.

If he doesn’t refund any of the requests that go through, then you can accuse away, but your accusing him of stealing for asking that users consider declining their refunds makes me think you must totally lose it when people ask you for spare change on the street.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.