To be fair, this is exactly how I use Netflix. I have a free app that I pay to use completely outside the app store. Not sure of the actual rules, but it's definitely possible.
It's fine to have out of band payments for subscription services on the App Store, so long as it's possible to subscribe to the service through an in app purchase and you don't advertise paying outside the app within the app.
Apple takes these matters pretty seriously, it is their bottom line after all. I once had an app get rejected by App Review because it was possible to buy a subscription from the WebView that opened the Forgot Password page.
Correct. In my experience in talking with Apple/Google, that is most definitely not a good idea and could get your developer license revoked. Maybe someday they'll open up the walled garden (lmao ok), but for now devs should stick to only selling desktop apps independently.
I'm really interested in this market. Does anyone know where having easy-to-build floorplans are actually useful? Especially without expensive HW setups like this?
Unless you are doing live video, there is no reason to transcode real-time. Do it all upfront. You need to decide on your requirements and transcode everything to your desired format.
From the research I've done, I'd suggest MPEG-DASH for reasonable cross-ish platform adaptive streaming without requiring fancy video servers. Your requirements and platforms might be different than mine though. Research is required.
This would normally be the case, but for small projects with a small number of contributors, they are always free to dual-license their own code, even "retro-actively". Anything that was already released would still be available under GPL, but new edits could in theory be licensed under whatever terms they want, independent of how "derivative" it is. For large open source projects without a copyright assignment clause, this is essentially impossible, but for small projects it's relatively easy, assuming you can track down all the contributors. IANAL.
Google is actually pretty good at accepting updates to things like operating hours. I've done it many times. They actually have a program (https://www.google.com/local/guides/) that encourages you to keep their maps up-to-date with correct information.
no. name picking is a rabbit hole, proving your product/service is far more important. pick something unique so that people can google it and come up with a meaningful result. If it becomes a problem, you can always change it AFTER you've proven your idea.
Yes, that's what I've been thinking too. The only thing that holds me back is that I'm going to put a lot of effort into promoting the product launch and generate traffic to my domain. If I switch the product name (domain) later on, all the effort might be wasted. I know I can redirect the old domain to a new one but still, backlinks might lose some weight.
sorry man, it's just not that useful in it's current form. Ranking reviews by usefulness might help, but it's a babystep. I think what I would find more useful is being able to compare camera's and lenses side by side, although there are certainly sites that already do that. I think people care about 1) budget 2) lens ecosystem considerations 3) the "gotchas" (hard to quantify, but you see stuff like "this camera requires you to hunt through 7 menus just to change this one setting", or this would be a great camera except _____), which your site does very little to address.
Thanks for the feedback! Yeah, I should probably be more clear with the message about what the intent here is as I work on the overall design.
The intent is not so much to just list reviews by product, but rather to create a curated list of high quality resources for researching. Sort of a "first place to go" when shopping for equipment. Since the site is so new, it looks like (and really is in its current form) a pretty generic list, but one of my goals is to guide people towards more popular items and create filters for different lens ecosystems, etc.
Didn't get it. Found your ig profile. tried it. seems very un-intuitive. not sure people will understand it or go through all the trouble. [See Image -> goto profile -> click link in profile -> find image again -> click image -> go to website]
I feel like something that simply 302'd the user to the most recently posted URL would make more intuitive sense, but with obvious drawbacks.
Thanks for the feedback @asteadman! We might consider featuring the most recent photo more prominently because that's the most common use case, but we don't want to confuse the user by sending them to specific content without context. That's the issue with just directly linking to the most recent content in your bio. Older photos with "link in bio" in the caption get sent to the wrong destination. Maybe we can offer the single redirect as an option to the user. Thanks again for checking us out!
To me the obvious use case is querying your log files as stored on s3. Query for a specific combination of features, or do some (simple) processing on them.
It's really only useful for a small list of file formats. Doesn't really do much for you if you primarily use s3 for binary data or static web hosting.