this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
191 points (91.0% liked)

Apple

19332 readers
17 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (32 children)

Does it block ads? It doesn’t, I don’t think Google would like that, but if you have YouTube Premium you won’t see ads, just like the website. Honestly, YouTube Premium is like one of the most essential subscriptions for me, it’s so handy to never worry about ads and it’s pretty cool in that it also supports the creators substantially more than if you watched ads. So I dunno, if you can afford an expensive Apple Vision Pro, I’d really consider treating yourself to YouTube Premium!

O no,… they took him.

[–] HollandJim@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (26 children)

Oh grow up.

YouTube sucks balls, but people still want it and the dev, who made Apollo and is one of the best app makers out there, did what they could to make YT available quickly.

So now you’re shitting on him personally because he didn’t fulfill your crusade. Get a life or learn to program and get off your ass and do it yourself.

Jesus, people.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (23 children)

You need to simmer down.

Your point is correct, but it's fair to comment on the fact a previously vocal free software/no subscription dev is following a different model with this project. He was quite vocal about the reddit API changes, and many folks heard of him during that situation.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's not anywhere close to anything he said.

He was perfectly happy to pay reasonable pricing for API access or to pass through ads if Reddit included them as part of the API.

His issue was that Reddit's pricing was obscenely more than they generate per user, functionally made it impossible for developers to pass the costs on to the users even if they wanted to, dropped it on him with minimal warning after very recent statements that they had every intention of leaving API access alone, and then repeatedly fucking publicly lied about him when he had the audacity to tell his paying customers what was going on in the very near future.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's exactly the vocality I'm referring to.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Except your characterization of it is a lie.

He never said anything that could possibly be interpreted as being against paying for access to content, or as a subscription to an ongoing service being in any way inappropriate.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's not a lie.

I'm asserting two things:

  1. He formerly produced a free app that was very popular.

  2. He openly discussed the the API pricing changes destroyed the model Apollo was operating on.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)
  1. He did plenty of monetization on the app, and made good money with it with volume that doesn't exist on Vision Pro. He never said anything implying apps don't deserve to be paid for.

  2. In literally every discussion he ever had about the API pricing change, he said that he entirely supported their need to monetize the API. His issues were not any sort of issue with the premise of the API changes. It was the specific nature of the API changes very obviously being for the sole purpose of making using the API to make an app impossible, when the app ecosystem was the entire reason Reddit was successful to begin with.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You said I lied and I didn't. Retract that.

My assertions are consistent from comment 1

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Absolutely not. Your statement does not have anything in common with the truth.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Quote the exact words in my first comment that are untruthful

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

All of it. He was never an advocate for software being free or against the right of companies to monetize their API in any context. He was against a specific company using "monetizing" their API as an excuse to make it impossible for third party apps to exist.

His position has not changed in any way and there is nothing that is in any way consistent between any of his statements or behavior.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I never said he "advocated" anything.

You're arguing in bad faith. You are being toxic.

I asserted some very basic things about how people may be familiar with this person, and you abstracted a whole fight.

-He made a free app.

-He gained greater public visibility during the reddit API price changes.

Those are fucking facts, and those are quite clear in my original comment.

I never claimed he was a champion of "free".

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, you are.

Your presentation implied he owed someone something because he made an app that had a free version once.

It absolutely is not, and does not resemble, "fair" to complain that a guy followed the bare minimum rules for an app to be allowed to exist.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

"no u"

Followed by an assumption.

Great stuff.

It's possibly fair you misunderstood me the first time, not everyone is a great reader, or ESL, or any other reason. .

But you persisted after clarification, after I called on you to cite my words, not continue to invent your own. (Ex: you claiming I said he "advocated" for certain practices.) That's toxic.

I'm done with you. I've made my position very clear, and you've don't nothing but bloviate your own issues and reality, rather than what's written.

Cya

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Notice how all of the replies are calling out the exact same malicious horseshit I did?

But sure , it's because I can't read, not because you wrote something bashing someone for doing literally nothing wrong.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago

What replies? You're the only one speaking to me on this matter.

Holy shit, do you think I'm someone else?

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)