秒抓 YouTube影片重點速度超有感
任何 CC 影片,AI 都能秒速幫你畫重點。從此告別廢片標題黨,學習力直接開外掛,效率飆升 10 倍!
U
-
TL;DR — Apple 的封閉生態系(iOS、iPadOS、App Store 審查、Xcode 等)嚴重限制了軟體創新、開發者自由與 AI 技術的發展,對下一代的創造力造成了 generational 傷害。
-
Key Points —
- 0:00 儘管作者喜歡 iOS,但 Apple 的封閉政策正在扼殺整個軟體產業與未來的可能性。
- 3:37 回顧歷史:賈伯斯最初推出 iPhone 時曾承諾基於 Web 標準、無需 SDK 即可自由開發,但隨後 App Store 的出現讓自由度逐年倒退。
- 11:21 開發極度痛苦:在自家 iPad 上測試自己寫的 App 竟需等待 Apple 長達 36 小時的審核與繁瑣簽署。
- 18:30 沙盒機制過於嚴苛:禁止 JIT(即時編譯器)、不允許跨 App 通訊、不支援瀏覽器引擎核心替換(只能用 WebKit),摧毀了模擬器、插件等軟體類別。
- 23:08 不合理的 App Store 政策:抽成高達 30%、禁止雲端串流遊戲、強制綁定自家支付,甚至變相從兒童手遊訂閱詐騙中獲利。
- 31:10 Xcode 嚴重落後:核心代碼源自 25 年前的 NeXTSTEP,編譯緩慢、常當機、Git 協作極其痛苦。
- 42:22 阻礙 AI 發展:類似 Mac 上的進階 AI 應用(如系統級自動化與代理)無法在 iOS 上實現,因 Apple 壟斷了所有 OS 層級的權限。
- 49:03 Android 也沒幫忙:Google 並非追求創新,而是一味複製 Apple 的封閉模式。
- Takeaways —
- 擁抱開源與可自訂性:支持並使用如 Linux 等對開發者友善、具備高度可塑性的作業系統與軟體工具。
- 培養下一代的軟體意識:不要讓新世代誤以為軟體天生就是被封閉和限制的;鼓勵年輕人接觸真正的程式開發與 malleable software(可修改的軟體)。
M
Summary
- 本影片探討了創業者若缺乏明確商業點子或技能時,該如何找到創業切入點。
- 講者建議從三個面向發掘潛力:個人過去的工作經驗、家庭背景累積的知識,以及個人興趣。
- 強調創業不必追求完美,重點在於透過執行來「償還無知債(ignorance debt)」,並在實作中不斷修正與學習。
- 推薦以服務型業務作為起點,因為其風險低,且能透過觀察既有市場的缺失,提供更好的解決方案來創造價值。
Notes
- 發掘優勢的三個途徑:個人過去的工作經驗、家庭薰陶與背景知識、個人感興趣的領域。
- 創業的核心邏輯是「解決問題」,你可以透過幫助他人賺錢或節省時間來換取報酬。
- 不要試圖預測 100 步之後的結果,創業初期最重要的是採取行動,下一步的路徑會在執行中逐漸明朗。
- 起步時不必尋求創新,觀察現有市場並找出做得更好的機會(優化流程、服務或品質)即可。
- 初期的商業活動重點在於「學習」而非「賺錢」,透過服務他人來累積產業知識與經驗。
Comments
- 「我認同 Alex 的觀點:先跨出第一步,剩下的路會自然展開。我從一個利基市場開始,隨著旅程推進,我才發現真正的利基市場和最終產品是什麼。」(20 likes)
- 「兩個老千走進了播客節目。」(5 likes)
- 「更多的莫子,更多的靈魂。」(2 likes)
- 「Ali 是穆斯林嗎?」(2 likes)
- 「這絕對是最糟糕的。」(1 likes)
- 「看起來很像 AI 生成的。」(1 likes)
- 「我認出背景裡那些 KING 的掛圖盒子了 :D」(0 likes)
- 「大家覺得我應該把高端產品拆分成一個獨立的品牌,還是將中端和高端產品放在同一個品牌下?我很擔心高端產品在對比下會讓中端產品看起來很『廉價』,儘管中端產品的品質也不錯。我是在製造化妝品,你們有什麼建議嗎?」(0 likes)
- 「我正處於同樣的旅程中 🙌」(0 likes)
- 「同一個品牌」(0 likes)
Quotes
- "Everyone has unique depths of knowledge in certain areas because you've been alive and your eyes and ears have taken inputs."
- "The key to successful scraping is understanding the HTML structure of your target page" (Note: Transcript actually refers to business logic) -> "Everyone knows something, all right? And so, the idea is what do you have."
- "You want to sell the most valuable thing, right? And so, the most valuable thing is what is the problem that I can somebody else solve that I could charge the most money for."
- "Most people have a graveyard of failures behind them."
- "You trying to think 100 steps into the future when you have no context is is irrelevant because chaos is going to break your plan anyways."
- "Do what you know, exchange I like service businesses to start because they are the in my opinion the lowest risk to start."
- "The best way to start a business is just look at what everyone else is doing and just try and do it better."
- "You're trading that time for money in order to learn, not to earn."
- "The vast majority of your income is coming in the terms of in in the form of education, rather than earning."
- "No matter what you're struggling with, someone else has already struggled with it and solved it."
2,000+
已生成摘要
2.6s
生成時間中位數
10+
摘要語言
1,900+
已摘要影片
你的時間,被無用內容綁架了
時間是你最寶貴的資產。YouTube 卻這樣為你揮霍它。
- 9:00 - 9:25長達 25 分鐘的教學,但真正的 2 分鐘解答卻藏在影片最後。
- 14:30 - 14:4515 分鐘的「評測」,只為了業配,而不是在 1 秒內給你明確答案。
- 19:45 - 20:20「簡短」影片,卻讓你掉進 20 分鐘的無關內容裡。
每日總損失
75
分鐘/天
整整一個工作週,就這樣沒了。
40+
小時/月
為什麼我得看半部影片,才知道它到底有沒有用?
— 任何珍惜時間的人
有更好的方法...
在你看影片之前,提前知道內容!
1.點擊
點擊
,立即取得摘要
在任何有字幕的 YouTube 影片上,點擊 PeekaTube 圖示 (
),AI 會在幾秒內為您生成摘要。
2.
順便看看觀眾怎麼說
每則摘要都會把影片的熱門留言和字幕一起分析,讓你不用滑到留言區,就能掌握觀眾的評價、更正與共識。
3.
學得更快或直接跳過
立即判斷影片是否值得您花時間觀看。快速吸收所需見解,或自信地離開影片尋找更好的內容。
檢視 & 輸出一次搞定
逐字稿 • 摘要
en
4.02s
I'm about to crash out in a way I never thought I would. I need to talk about something very important to me, something near and dear to my heart. My iPhone. I love iOS in so many ways. I used to be such an Android fanboy, I never thought I would see the day that iOS was my preference. And it still is, and it probably will be for the foreseeable future. Which is why what I'm about to say hurts so deeply. iOS is holding back the entirety of software, not just for iPhone users, but for everybody. Apple's been doing this for a bit, but not in ways that necessarily hurt as much as they do now. But in a world where AI is as powerful as it is, where building things has never been easier to do. A platform that goes out of its way to be as hard as possible to get anything done with. A platform that prevents us from experimenting, trying new things, and building what the future could be. A platform that doesn't even let you install apps unless Tim Cook himself thinks the category is valid. It's destroying us. And it's not just destroying the iPhone platform either. is I genuinely love my Pixel Fold except for all the things that it's held back on, which are also Apple's fault. And don't even get me started on the iPad. This is the single device that should have changed computing forever that instead just pisses me off every time I open it. And it's cuz Apple's an evil company. They're just the worst. They're I have a lot to say. I have had so many stupid moments with Apple stuff recently, especially with our attempts to build and ship the new T3 Chat and T3 Code apps that I feel like I'm going mad. I cannot believe this company operates the way they do today and that people aren't realizing just how destructive it is. I thought I might be the only one going insane here. So, I asked GPT55 to look at my bullet point list and add some ideas of its own. to which it added over 30, sorry, 40 points that it added on top of the ones I already had in the list. Are you kidding? I have to crash out. This one's going to be long. I'm sorry. I genuinely am. But if I'm going to survive the hellish process of getting these apps deployed, I need to complain a lot. And if I'm going to make this worth it, we have to take a quick break for something that sucks a lot less. Today's sponsor. In my opinion, there's three ways to evaluate a given product or company. There is how important is the problem that it solves. There is how good is the solution they came up with. And most importantly, there's the quality of the team. I bring this up because today's sponsor is general translation. And I think they're killing it in all of those fronts. Having your app in every language and localization is great because 85% of the world doesn't speak English. Their SDK and platform are one of the best solutions I've ever seen because normally you have to make your codebase way harder to work in for both you and your agents in order to handle localization. Their SDK makes it trivial. Most importantly here is the team. And I'm not saying this cuz they pay me. You cannot pay me to say this. I love the general translation team. I've done many a call at the founder cuz I just like him a lot and I go to hang out at their office all the time because they're fun to hang out with. These guys understand. They're quickly building a ton of trust in the space, which is why everyone from Cursor to Partal to Click House to Mintify and Ramp are all building on top of General Translation. When they hit me up about sponsoring, I went to look at the platform and immediately begged them to let me invest because this is the right way to handle translations. It's a simple T component that you wrap your JSX with. If you need to pass variables in, you can wrap it with their ver component. If you need to handle currency translations, you can pass in their currency component. You can set it up with one command and let your agent handle the rest. And going forward, everyone can use your site. If you're only serving English users, fix it today at soyv.link/gt. In order for me to properly explain why iOS is holding us back, I want to build a framework for understanding software. First, roughly speaking, you can categorize software in a few ways. The ones I want to focus on are importance, cost, and capability. And I want to be very clear, these three are not inherently tied. Software can be very important and also very cheap. Software can be very capable and not very important. I'm looking at you Arch Linux people. Software can be incredibly expensive and not important nor capable. These are three different things and all of them need to be thought about when we think about software and mobile. We also need to think a bit about the world when the iPhone came out. The iPhone came out in a world of sidekicks, a world of Blackberries, a world of flip phones, a world of portable devices where the software wasn't very good. It wasn't very important. It was too expensive to make good software. Everybody just made it cheap and the capabilities were basically non-existent. The best thing you could have on your phone was a shitty port of a Tony Hawk Game Boy game. The software on phones wasn't very good. The iPhone changed that. It made it possible to make way more important software and way more capable software, but it also inherently kind of increased the cost of making software because iOS development was harder than yet another shitty Java applet. But the cost increase was reasonable considering how much more important and capable the software was. There was a catch though. That's not how it started. The iPhone ships on June 29th. That is just 18 days from today. I believe at 6:00 p.m. in the evening they will go on sale. June 29th, 18 days from today. Now, what about developers? What about developers? We have been trying to come up with a solution to expand the capabilities of iPhone by letting developers write great apps for it and yet keep the iPhone reliable and secure. And we've come up with a very sweet solution. And let me tell you about it. So, we've got an innovative new way to create applications for mobile devices. Really innovative. And it's all based on the fact that iPhone has the full Safari inside it. The full Safari engine is inside of iPhone and it gives us tremendous capability, more than has ever been in a mobile device to this date. I will interrupt here to say this is a true point at the time. Before the iPhone came out, the power of these types of mobile devices was way less. The capabilities, the freedom, the things you could do on it was inherently way smaller. And Safari on iOS, as silly as it is to say this way, was more capable than the Java applets on almost every other phone. But notice that he's not saying anything about native here because that wasn't the plan when the iPhone first came out. I'll let Steve continue. You can write amazing web 2.0 and Ajax apps that look exactly and behave exactly like apps on the iPhone. And these apps can integrate perfectly with iPhone services. They can make a call. They can send an email. They can look up an location on Google Maps. After you write them, you have instant distribution. You don't have to worry about distribution. Just put them on your internet server. And they're really easy to update. just change the code on your own server rather than having to go through this really complex update process. And they're secure with the same kind of security you'd use for transactions with Amazon or a bank. And they run securely on the iPhone so that they don't compromise its reliability or security. And guess what? There's no SDK that you need. You've got everything you need if you know how to write apps using the most modern web standards to write amazing apps for the iPhone today. You can go live on June 29th. And we'd like to show you an example of the kind of apps that you can write starting today. Do you understand just how far we have fallen? The number of points here like this, no SDK required, that's how it should have been. And the jump from where mobile development was before the iPhone to what was promised here was genuinely massive, which is why it hurt so much that it has regressed since. Starting with the release of the app store, the capabilities of the mobile devices we use every day have gone down year-over-year, not up. And I will be frank, as much as I prefer Tim Cook to Steve Jobs, I think this is one of the few things that Steve Jobs would have possibly gotten right. That Tim Cook, the person trying to maximize every penny Apple makes, has gotten entirely [ __ ] wrong. And it's possibly doomed the direction of software as a whole as a result. And a lot of this changed because of the nature of the bet that was being made. At the time, the iPhone was the underdog. They had to convince developers to build for it. So, it had to be as easy as possible to build and they had to convince users to get it because they had 0% market share because the phone didn't exist yet. They had to climb through the market to make this device popular. And they did everything right from the start because it was the only option they had. And then they started to get some serious market share. And then they started to behave like absolute [ __ ] The harsh reality is that Apple has their market share. So, they don't care anymore. They just don't. Every single time an app is purchased on the app store, Apple makes 30%. Every single time you buy a digital good in an app, whether you're buying an ebook, you're renting a movie, you're buying a cosmetic in a game, you're paying for an indie developer fun map in a game that you're playing, Apple gets 30% of all of that, too. Apple gets their percentage, and they have no interest in anything that harms their percentage. And as such, they have no interest in things that make developers lives easier because you're stuck building for the iPhone anyways. Apple doesn't have to compete on developer experience because if you want to make money and you want to make a mobile app, you have to support Apple. While Apple has less than 20% of market share globally, they have over 60% of money spent on mobile phones. The vast majority of money being spent on a phone is spent on iPhones. So, if you are looking at the split of devices sold and think Apple is the wrong bet as an app manufacturer, you just don't understand the finances behind it. Apple has an absurd monopoly on money spent on mobile. People in my chat have worked at companies that were doing a h 100 plus million a year on their mobile apps and iOS would push 60 to 70% of that money spent on iOS. It's insane. What I'm trying to say is that Apple will make their money regardless. So what they do instead is the bare minimum, the absolute bare minimum. And I want to show you guys a little bit of what that looks like, both through things that have happened over the last few years and also through my own personal experience trying to build apps. I'll be real and I'll start with one I was crashing out about over the weekend, which inspired me to make this video. I want to talk about my iPad. I could talk a lot about how we should be able to build iPad apps on iPads. I could talk a lot about how I should be able to do a bunch of custom [ __ ] on here. I can talk a lot about how the OS is gimping this incredible piece of hardware, but I'm not. As much as I want to talk about those things, that's not what I'm here to talk about today. I'm here to talk about the absolute insanity that is the fact that I was making changes to my team's mobile app. And I made those changes and I verified them on my phone because my phone was already attached to my Apple developer account. My iPad wasn't. So, I connected my iPad to my computer. It autopop populated with the Apple provisioning whatever the hell and it got put in a pending state where it would proceed to stay for 36 hours. I was not able to use the MacBook I purchased to install the app I built on the iPad I purchased because Apple hadn't given me the thumbs up yet. What the [ __ ] That's some 1984 level [ __ ] if I'm being real. Like I I still cannot process the fact that I had software. I had paid a team to build and I had built with the team that I couldn't put on one of my devices because Apple didn't want me to yet. They wanted to go through their process of verifying because if I had found a way to get the app without their permission, that could harm their app store. Sorry, that could be insecure and they don't want us getting viruses. No, that's not what they actually want. They want to lock us in because they want to make sure there is no path to app installs that isn't their app store because then they might lose some money and they're being [ __ ] evil about it. And that is just one of the many things I'm about to crash out about. Do not worry, we have a long ways to go. This is actually a very fun point, Taka. Thank you for bringing this one up. During the Epic versus Apple trial, it was revealed that Apple makes more money on games than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo, and Activision combined because they get the 30% of all money spent on mobile games. Insane. Actually, insane. A company that's never made a game makes billions on games because they have an entry tax. I'm going to crash out about Xcode in a bit, but I want to first crash out about the signing [ __ ] As I mentioned before, despite paying the $100 a year fee and buying multiple Apple devices and building the app on Apple devices, I could not test the app on my iPad until waiting a certain amount of time for Apple to do the approval. Actually, insane. Oh, but Thea, what about TestFlight? Did you know TestFlight requires you to go through the full app review process? I can't use TestFlight as a way to get around Apple's stuff because you still have to go through it. At first, we should just take a moment to appreciate how insane it is that you have to use a Mac to build apps. Like, the exceptions to this rule involve the app being built on someone else's Mac in the cloud. That's insane. There is no way to build an app on your iPad or your iPhone without a Mac. It's one of the reasons I'm stuck still using a Mac despite the fact that I do genuinely want to make the move to Linux. That's just one of the pieces. It gets a lot worse. For example, when you're doing the signed app process through the computer, you need to make sure your devices connect to that computer at least once every seven days or the app will stop opening. Apple needs to know that your app is signed by a developer. And I'm going to crash out about that process a lot in a bit. You know what? I'll I'll put a little more about that here because for some reason they have you hardcode the credential for signing the app in the infop list file, which for the most part is a manifest for the app and the permissions it needs. But it also just so happens to include the account and the team that it's attached to in the code directly which makes doing anything with a platform like I don't know Git obnoxious because a portion of that file is specific to your developer account. The fact that the Xcode ecosystem was built pregit is its own problem. The fact that it still operates with a pregit mindset is the real issue though. It just sucks so hard to do anything with any of this. If you built with any even vaguely modern set of tools like any web app or Electron or even just React Native the traditional blessed way with Expo, you get shielded from a lot of the hell that I'm talking about here because it is absolutely hellish. And having built a lot of things for a lot of platforms, the absolute shitow that is iOS development is so hard for me to fathom. And here's where I'm going to get a little spicier. This absolute [ __ ] policy is hostile to experimentation, to people who want to try out new ideas and experiment with things and do something no one's done before. The people who want to invent the future should be encouraged to do so, not locked out of doing so, not restricted by these layers upon layers of rules and fees and processes and hardware ownership to even get to the point where you're allowed to start. It's hostile to open source because if somebody opens sources their app and I want to make some changes and play with it, it doesn't matter that the app's already been approved. I have to go through the whole process again myself and I have to modify a bunch of things that could accidentally get checked in when I'm trying to make a PR because you have to do that in order to even be able to build in the first place after you already paid the hostage fee, by the way. And also making sure that you check in with your device plugged into your computer every 7 days so the app doesn't get locked out. But most importantly, and this is the part I really want to emphasize, as an Apple fan myself, it's hostile towards me. It was easier for me to build custom versions of Android for my Android phone than it was for me to start my first app on my iPhone. And it's somehow gotten worse over time, not better. When I finally got my iPad approved, by the way, I still couldn't build to it because I got an obscure error telling me that there's some new agreement I have to go find in a hidden dashboard somewhere before I'm allowed to sign my devices again. So, I had to go to the developer.apple.com. It redirected me to the wrong place twice. I finally signed in. It redirected me to apple.com. I went back to developer.apple.com. And this time, I actually stayed off. So, developer.apple.com had me signed in. And I had to scour through the page to find this weird banner that was basically impossible to see because there was five more above and below it. But this one particular banner had a button in it that would bring me to a page that had this new agreement they just put out during the most recent WWDC that I had to hit approve on and then wait another 20 to 30 minutes for that provisioning and that approval to get updated on Apple's servers so that I was allowed to build the app I made for my Mac to my [ __ ] iPad. Are you kidding? It is genuinely insane that I can't just build the app I made on my iPad that I own. It's It's like orders of magnitude away from where it should be. We'll come back to this later cuz I want to talk about the beautiful world we could live in if Apple just got over their [ __ ] I realize this will go on forever if I don't break up the topic, so I just did it here. I'm going to rant about the sandboxing, Xcode being absolute [ __ ] garbage, the App Store policies that hold us back from ever having great innovative software again, the fact that AI can never be good on iOS because of Apple's [ __ ] and a tangent on how Android doesn't help us at all here. So, let's start with the sandboxings. I have a lot to say here. Uh, let me just think of some examples. Why can't my app send messages to each other? They can, but the way it sends a message isn't through iOS. There is literally no way for apps to communicate without you doing it on your own external server. You can share through Apple's share feature between apps. Good luck implementing that in a way that makes any sense at [ __ ] all. It's hell. Beyond that, why can't I customize my apps? Why can't I not control the apps at all? Why can't I force an app to stay in dark mode? Why can't I have an agent change the first screen in an app? Why can't I limit the way an app works for my business? So when people are on our sandboxed phones that have like the developer credentials on them that are built in a way for my network and for my company, why can't I make slight changes to an app? Obviously, there should be some level of restriction and control here. But I can install a Chrome extension that changes anything I want about a website. I can force everyone at my company to have that extension installed. Why is there literally nothing at all like this for iOS? I'll give you a hint. Part of it's cuz JIT doesn't work. Just in time compilers, things that will make your code more efficient for the processor when the code appears in the app, are not allowed at all because you're not allowed to do any dynamic execution in iOS apps. Even React Native, the way it is built, is on the line for what is or isn't allowed because Apple doesn't want you doing things on the fly. This kills a lot of [ __ ] This makes good performant game emulators nearly impossible because you need to do some specific compilation like shader stuff for given games. But if you are updating the way the code executes on the fly, hard ban from Apple. We'll never get good emulators on iOS. Even though Apple did loosen their restrictions on the concept of emulators, we'll never have performant ones because Apple won't let us. But most importantly, why can't my app install apps? Why can't my app build apps? Why can't my app customize apps? Why can't my app do anything Apple doesn't want us to? It's because Apple doesn't care. They don't benefit meaningfully from allowing us to do these things, but they are potentially risking reviews being harder or the apps are getting less traffic. On that note, why can't I use a different browser engine? On my Mac right here, I have a shitload of different browsers installed. I have Zen, which is based on Firefox and Gecko. I have Helium, which is based on Chromium. And begrudgingly, I have Safari because it comes with the Mac and Apple won't let me uninstall it. On your phone, you might have Chrome installed, but that's not using the Chrome engine. That is just using WebKit because Apple only lets you use WebKit on iOS. It's insane. All of these restrictions prevent us from having whole categories of potential awesome software. It means I can't have a good Windows emulator on my iPad. It means I can't have a good GameCube emulator on my iPhone. It means I can't build a new language with its own compiler and then play with it on my Apple devices. It means I can't try to make a browser engine with more capabilities than Apple wants it to have. It means I can't do anything [ __ ] interesting because Apple's already restricted all the interesting stuff. I can't build my own ecosystem of apps that have their own relationships with each other because I have to go build a backend to share anything between them because Apple won't let you. On that note, there's one whole category of things that aren't allowed due to the way Apple sandboxes. plugins. One of the coolest things you can do in software is modify it. I can install an extension in Chrome that changes how a website works. I can install extensions in VS Code that change how it works. I can install extensions in Safari even, but you cannot make software that has extensions. Apple just doesn't really allow it. There are some hacks here and there, but you can't really do it. Apple doesn't want software to be extendable. They want software to be sold by them to make them money. That's all they want. and they will hold us back every single [ __ ] day, preventing cool new ideas from ever happening because it's just slightly easier for them to review. Insanity. The amount of things that could have happened if sandboxing wasn't so restrictive is incredible. But even if they fixed all that, we still wouldn't be able to do [ __ ] because Xcode is [ __ ] and the App Store policy is even more [ __ ] We're a little closer to the App Store policy thing here. So, I'm going to start with that. that will go to Xcode after because the App Store policies are so bad that they deserve to lose every single court case that they've already been losing and their malicious compliance with the rulings is somehow even more egregious. Here's a fun fact. The only way to install an app on your phone that wasn't signed by you or a team you're in with your device ID hardcoded to it is to go through the App Store or to go through TestFlight. There is no path from my app to your phone that isn't App Store or Test Flight. both of which require Apple to approve it. Which means if you happen to be building any of the things Apple doesn't want you to build, you have no choice. You are just screwed. Just to go through a handful of these categories, some have maintained the ban. Some have had their ban status changed. Streaming videos, streaming music, totally fine. Apple's okay with that. Streaming games, nope, not allowed. This is a whole category of software that could have been revolutionary that is entirely impossible because Apple didn't want it to exist. Let's say that your app only has O for your like enterprise SL like you're a Google or a Microsoft company and everyone signs in through that. Apple has a hard rule that requires any sign-in methods that are provided through another O layer whether it's Google, Microsoft, whatever else require that sign in with Apple is also an option. Doesn't matter if it's 0% of your users. Doesn't matter if you hard restrict them and not be able to do anything in the app. You have to have that button or Apple won't approve. Period. Speaking of which, external payment systems. Let's say you built a game that has a credit system in it, like Fortnite, and you have V-Bucks in it. You bought a bunch of V-Bucks on the computer version, and then you go to play it on the phone. If you don't have a way to buy V-Bucks in the phone app, they ban you. If they let you keep using the credit card you already linked to your account, they ban you. You have to implement Apple Pay and give them their 30%. It is required. It is a rule. And if you don't do it, you'll be banned. And if you don't like it, I hope you have good lawyers because you will see them in court. There is an unless on this one, though. If your app is selling services or physical goods, you can get by. And when I say services, I mean in-person things like an Uber driver that is going to drive you from one place to another or Door Dasher bringing you food or a Task Rabbit hanging up a TV. Those don't have to have the 30%. Those can be a perfectly flat zero and Apple doesn't do anything about it. They require you to enable Apple Pay as an option, but they won't take a percentage. So, your options are 30% if Apple doesn't like your category or 0% if you're in the blessed section that they allow. They also, fun fact, had an exception for video streaming subscription services because Amazon threatened to pull all Apple products out of Amazon.com and also pull all of their apps out of the app store, including the Amazon app, if Apple was going to enforce the 30% on Amazon Prime for people doing Prime Video. And this is why Apple introduced the Apple video partner program to allow premium subscription video providers to participate in new TV watching experiences. Also to get a slightly lower cut. Getting into this program drops your cut from 30% to Apple to 15 to Apple. And one company has ever in history become part of it and it's [ __ ] Amazon. It's insane. This should have been its own lawsuit. This should have been a class action. This should have torn them to shreds. the number of these types of [ __ ] things they do where they put out this whole fake video partner program thing literally just to skirt the law. Insane. There are so many categories of apps that have been made nearly impossible or entirely impossible thanks to Apple. Even something like Twitch, where I'm currently live streaming myself recording, Twitch takes 15 to 50% of the revenue for subscriptions. Usually, it's 30 to 50%. In order for Twitch to justify that, they have to provide an entire platform and experience where I and my audience can interact. They have to eat a ton of costs for video streaming, and they get 30% when somebody pays me $5. If Apple also got 30% for just happening to be the place the app was installed on, I'm left with 40% of that transaction. And don't get me started on something like Patreon, where Patreon takes 5 to 15% and Apple hard enforces their 30. That means that platforms that want to make it easier for people to support creators like me don't make any sense at all because Apple will take a hostage fee. If I wanted to out of the goodness of my heart create a platform that only takes 3% because that's what Stripe effectively charges and let you donate to somebody without me getting any money just like a charitable thing. If I built like a GoFundMe style app and only took transaction fees and nothing else, Apple would still get 30% of every single transaction. We will never have a GoFundMe app because if we did and you paid through it, Apple would take a fee. And that 30% fee destroys whole categories of potential types of software. Patreon would not be dying as a business if it wasn't for Apple's [ __ ] Twitch would still be dying because of their own incompetence, but they would be struggling a lot less if it wasn't for Apple's [ __ ] When I was at Twitch, we had to just not allow subscriptions on iOS for a while. And eventually the workaround that we found was selling subs as a currency where you could buy a subscription for $6.50. It would be cash in your account and then when you went to click the sub button, it would deduct from that and that would effectively let you have this tiered system where the 650 is where Apple took their 30% and then what was left was cashed as a thing you could go spend on somebody later. The fact that we had to invent a novel currency on Twitch just to simply comply with Apple's stuff is insane because they wouldn't let us offer a cheaper version on the site. Horrifying. And don't get me started about recommending people leave the app because Apple will ban you for that, too. In fact, they went back to court and lost twice because of how strictly they were banning this. I have a whole video about Apple's lack of compliance with the Epic Games ruling that I would recommend watching after this if you want to hear even more. Holy [ __ ] I'm going to stop myself here even though it's hard because I haven't even talked about the [ __ ] show that is app reviews where Apple can just randomly arbitrarily decide that your app's no longer allowed because of some functionality they approved a year ago or because you gave us charges on how they can sign into the app and use it and they didn't read them and then they yell at you and say, "Sorry, we can't verify the app. You won't let us use it. You're banned now." And you're like, "Wait, I literally gave you instructions." And they send you a screenshot where they typo the [ __ ] email and sign in, which I've had happen three separate times. I couldn't ship an update because the reviewer typoed the email address I gave them for a fake signin credential. Unfucking believable. Theo from the future because I remembered one more app store policy thing. I can't stop myself. This one's important. Uh scamming kids is their business model. This one hurts. If you don't have kids or friends with kids that you've talked to about these things, you don't know how bad this is. It is incredibly common for kids to install an app that says it's free, that is free, and then randomly a pop-up comes up in it that says you can use this part of this app and it's only $50 a week and the first seven days are free and then it bills weekly from that point forward and you end up with your kid accidentally setting up subscriptions to the tune of a,000 plus dollars a month. These stories come out all the time. They get international news attention and Apple doesn't do [ __ ] [ __ ] about it. They don't even ban the apps for it. Apple makes a meaningful percentage of their yearly revenue by scamming children. And they're not banning it because they don't want to touch the golden goose. They'll let those kids get scammed. They'll let those parents lose all their money because they make money off of it. They get 30% of every scammed kid's revenue. Why would they ban it? I firmly believe there is not a single weekly subscription service in the App Store that isn't a scam. Apple leaves it in because changing it would hurt their revenue. Apple doesn't ban these apps because banning them would hurt their revenue. Apple doesn't address these problems because they like their revenue more than they like kids having a safe experience on their phones. Crazy that Apple is at that point, but they are. Here's a fun fact. Did you know that Xcode is just Nextep? If you were born in this century, you probably don't know what Nextstep is. Did you know that Steve Jobs got fired from Apple and then he went and built his own computer company? And because he knew the fact that Apple's software was such [ __ ] garbage, there was no future in which they could make an actual developer platform. He decided to go the other way. He decided to just build useful software that would make it possible for devs to do real things. Next step was the object-oriented computing platform. They were trying to make OOP the selling point because the Apple development ecosystem was so bad. Steve Jobs genuinely believed he could sell software, he could sell computers just by marketing it as we don't suck to write code for. And he was right enough because Apple had to buy NextStep. And I have learned this from Apple employees that might even get fired for me mentioning this, but it was long enough ago that I don't remember their names and there's no way the link could be made. The majority of the core of Xcode is still the same NextStep code base that they bought from Steve Jobs when they bought his company. Apple was so far behind that they rebranded nextep as Xcode and have continued to iterate on it since. The core of Xcode is over 25 years old. Why would we ever expect it to function? Don't worry though, they added a local model to help with code completion. [ __ ] die. I cannot believe the state of Xcode. It is not a shock that the software quality of Apple stuff has been going down. that iOS and Mac OS are getting buggier because the people building it have to build it in [ __ ] Xcode. I don't know how good of a cake you would expect if they're cooking it on [ __ ] plastic. If you were given like two pencils and a ruler and told to build a cake, I wouldn't expect a very good one, but for some reason Apple thinks Xcode is in a reasonable state and refuses to fix it. Do you have any idea how many times Xcode has crashed because I checked out a different branch? Do you have any idea how many times Xcode is locked up and I had to go purge its entire cache manually to get it to even [ __ ] open again? Do you have any idea how much time is wasted with Xcode rebuilding steps that were absolutely cachable because they have no concept of progressive build systems? It is easier to build a Linux than it is to build an iOS app. It's actually insane. I just wanted to open Xcode to see how long it takes for me to crash it or deal with it again. And it's reindexing files that haven't changed since I last opened it. It's insane. This is a 128 gig of RAM machine and Xcode will easily use half or more of it. And then the simulators, too. Don't get me [ __ ] started on the simulators. Holy hell. There's a little cloud button now cuz they let you use Xcode cloud now because their software is so impossible to [ __ ] use that you're expected to just put it on their cloud instead and pay them money instead. The fact that this is necessary software to build an app is insulting. There is no way to build an app for an iPhone without it going through Xcode in one way, shape, or form. Thankfully, with something like Expo, you can build the native part once, put it on your phone, scan a QR code, and now you can load the dynamic.js from a web server on your computer, which is so much less bad that I could actually get work done on my phone from my phone, except for the fact that I still have to go phone home every 7 days to plug in the phone and confirm, yeah, I'm allowed to do this. And even better, the Expo bundler that they used to have on the App Store where you could scan a QR code and get work done can no longer be updated because of Apple's hard ban of anything even vaguely vibe coding and app generation related. I don't think we're going to pass our first round of app store review with T3 Code. Even though T3 Code doesn't run on the phone, it is just a wrapper that connects to your computer and sends messages to and from the computer. The fact that it is dynamic software might be enough for Apple to ban us. I don't know. I will be sure to report back once we go through the review, which we have to. Not cuz we're shipping the app, but because we want to have access to the app in test flight. The real reason I'm a web dev is because I tried to be a mobile app dev, and Apple made it so goddamn hard that I gave up and learned a new language and platform. I have been avoiding Xcode to the best of my ability for the better part of a decade now. So, I'm going to use AI, Apple's least favorite thing, to cite all of the ways it sucks. Incremental builds become slower than clean ones. No code changes can still trigger multi-minute rebuild work. We just saw that in mind. Xcode can spend most of a build on vague phases like planning swift module. Build types are nondeterministic enough that devs stop trusting the machine. Clean build folder is a religious ritual. Deleting derived data becomes folk medicine. Build errors often disappear after restart, clean, or reopen, which trains devs to debug the tools before debugging code. And you also sometimes can't even see the error. When you click it, it goes to some random file and gives you no context. So even finding the error is obnoxious. Small Swift UI changes can cause massive type-checking work. Swift's type checker is clever in design, horrible in practice. Swift compile errors are sometimes not your code is wrong. Rather, the compiler gave up. There's a reason why the guy who designed Swift left and says he regrets it. The classic error, unable to type check this expression in reasonable time is especially hated because it often points at a broad expression instead of the actual cause. Yep. Professionals have to refactor code not because the design's out, because the compiler can't handle the shape of the code anymore. Build performance is extra punishing in Swift UI because Vuebuilder lets you write code that looks clean but explodes the compiler's complexity. Mix Objective C, Swift, C++, SP, and Copods projects become a build system haunted house. Don't even get me started on the fact that CocoPods is a third party Ruby thing that we had to build third party because Apple has no concept of a module. I'm going to die. Archive builds can behave differently from run builds. So works locally does not mean the shipped artifact works. Okay, I'm going to go back to the Cocoa Pods thing because uh fun fact, do you guys know what the guy who made Coco Pods did after trying his hardest to fix iOS dev? He went to Microsoft and became a Typescript contributor because he wanted to contribute to an ecosystem that cared and actually improved year-over-year. Imagine any modern tooling not having a way to do packages and instead of embracing and embedding it, they just ignore it and then the person who makes it goes to your biggest competitor and works on a different language entirely. The fact that didn't become the head of developer ecosystem at Apple is way funnier to me than the [ __ ] who made Brew not being able to get a job. I know companies whose builds take over a day and a half. And since Apple doesn't really allow for caching and incremental stuff, because as we mentioned before, incremental builds are often longer than the clean ones, there's nothing they can [ __ ] do. Your reward for making big large software on iOS is you need 15 people to try and keep the build times down. And maybe you'll be able to get your app out in under two days. Maybe. Insanity. The indexing is a shitow. breaks your editor when it's running and it doesn't function when it's not there yet. Swift UI previews like chat, do any of you actually use the previews for Swift UI? Cuz I've never met a serious iOS dev that bothers. Never worked for me. No, no, previews are useless. No previews are [ __ ] Literally not a single person saying yes or sometimes. It is one sometimes now. Everybody else is never or I don't use Swift UI. Someone said they've stopped even doing Swifty. I've done the same. I'm back to appkit cuz at least it [ __ ] functions. LLDB is an absolute shitow. So, good luck debugging things that aren't just [ __ ] syntax. Oh god, the copy pasted simulator breaking happens to me at least once or twice a day. It is obnoxious. Why I stopped using simulator entirely. The simulator need to be reinstalled I've had a few times too. I thought I was just doing something wrong. I did not know that was that common. You often have to erase all content and settings. The runtime downloads are massive. Yeah, when I get a new Mac I want to use for iOS dev, I just expect it to not work for the day. has to download so much [ __ ] Multiple simulator versions eat absurd amounts of disc space. Yep. Simulator bugs are different from device bugs. Device bugs are different from simulator bugs. Some things work only on physical devices, some only on simulators. And Apple's docs are not clear about which is which. Testing login, AP push, background modes, widgets, app groups, keychain, and entitlements can send you into device simulator mismatch hell. Already been there, too. This I ran into today. As of the most recent Xcode 26 build, Mac clipboard paste stopped working in simulator. Users reported that command V wouldn't do anything and there was no paste option with one person saying they had to OCR screenshots in order to get the error messages. Yep, any subset of these bugs, any five of them is enough for me to move off of a piece of software. But instead, we have to deal with thousands of them because we're not allowed to use other choices. There is no other option. We have to use Xcode. So, we deal with all of this. Oh, I didn't even get to the git section yet. Project.pbx Praj is the most hated file in professional Apple development, possibly the most hated ever other than DS store. It's huge, fragile, and not meant to be meaningfully handedited. It merge conflicts all the time for basically anything. The project file can fail to open if it's malformed, which makes means you can't open the project at all to fix things. Diffs are unreadable. The IDE mutates project state in ways that are hard to review. This is something I was talking about earlier. Xcode projects preserve a pre-Git worldview and rather than fixing it, they are just ignoring it. The the fact that Git doesn't work properly with iOS apps is enough to to end this. Be like, "Okay, Apple, fix that. Move on." That would be that would be a showstopper by itself. But combined with everything else, it becomes a [ __ ] bullet point. I'm going to drop my hottest take about Xcode and then we're going to move on from it and talk about the rest. Xcode can never be good because the Xcode team has never experienced good. Xcode developers at Apple have never worked on anything other than Xcode to build Xcode on Apple platforms. Maybe they used Xcode to build an app before and that's how they got their job. They don't know what good looks like. They don't have a reference. They live in their bubble, their shitty silver bubble, and they never look outside of it because it's fully opaque. They don't know how bad it is because they've never experienced what decent software is, what decent experience building software is. They don't even know. And you know what? I feel bad for them. I genuinely do. These are people that will never love building software because the software they have to build is garbage and the software they use to build it is garbage. To go back to the cooking analogy, I can't imagine somebody becoming a master chef if all they have to cook with is a few matches in a plastic pan. Like, you're just never going to love the thing if the things you have to do it with are trash. Insane. So, again, Xcode is engineered from its core and from its team structure to never allow for good software development. Somebody in chat is so deep in the Stockholm syndrome of iOS dev that they sincerely wrote this message. I'm not trying to pick on this person. I just want you guys to understand this is why we have the problem. I'm missing a few important things. While iOS isn't the best experience for devs, it's also not meant for super quick iteration like I expect from web. He's on a team that deploys apps for 20,000 users on the App Store only. No Android or web app. And you just get used to the quirks after a while. You just get used to the quirks after a while. You just get used to git not functioning in iOS projects. You just get used to builds randomly taking hours instead of minutes because the things that cache them don't function properly. You just get used to an app that crashes half the time you're trying to build. You just get used to an ecosystem with no concept of package. You just get used to writing software like we're still in the [ __ ] '9s. You know what? If you want to write software like we're in the '90s, feel free. I'm gonna write it like we're in 2026. I've said enough about Xcode. I've said too much about Xcode. I have thought about this piece of software way more than any human should have to. It is insulting that it still exists. And on this note, I want to get a little more existential because Apple's absolute [ __ ] way of running iOS will hold back the future of AI powered experiences. I hope we've all learned this by now. AI isn't just a thing you stuff into your apps. AI is a thing that changes how you should use your computer. I didn't really have issues with how I navigated my Mac before I started coding with AI. And suddenly the horrible shitow that is workspaces on Mac OS combined with the less than ideal app hierarchy made me feel like I was going insane. So I started to use Linux more heavily. And it was one of the biggest breaths of fresh air I've ever felt in my life. It felt like I was trapped in a sewer with no light or clean air for my entire life. and all of a sudden I was in the sun with fresh oxygen. But at the very least, we can customize how our OS works a little bit. For example, I am currently voice detecting on my Mac using Whisper Flow. It's really good. It has changed part of how I interact with my computer. I have a key on my keyboard that causes another app to trigger which has an overlay that takes over a small portion of my screen and then it makes changes to the thing I'm currently in. If it's a text box, it types things out in that text box. That's an OS level change. Not in the sense that you have to customize the operating system to do it, but in the sense that it's not just an app that is open and focused like my other apps are. It is a thing that augments how I use the computer. And the harsh reality is that a lot of the best AI experiences we're going to have going forward are going to be things like that. Things that don't just change how the app works, they change how the relationships between our apps and ourselves work. things like the super powerful computer use primitives that are built into Codeex. Codeex can use my browser in another window while I'm still using other things on the computer at the same time. Code is able to use my computer when the screen's off. Codex is able to go to different apps and do things in them. Codeex can use my computer better than I could use my iPhone. And you bet your ass Codex can't use an iPhone. I'm not saying it's easy to do this on other platforms. Automating Windows and Mac OS is hellish and Linux is better, but not a lot. But at least we can. We can customize how we use and navigate the platform. People have built everything from different window managers to spotlight alternatives that are 100 times better. Seriously, Raycast is one of the best things I've ever installed. I'm not even paying for it. It's just worth it. Definitely recommend it. The fact that Spotlight is so slow in comparison is just funny to me. But there are so many of these things, so many of them that my Mac is barely even a Mac to an extent because I have added all these things that change how it works. I can't do any of that on my iPhone. If it turns out the best use cases for AI are it controlling my device, it navigating my device, it pulling context from different places into one place, customizing how my apps work in different ways, using my apps for me, all these types of things. We'll never know. We'll literally never know because Apple will never let us do it. If it turns out Siri is actually the best place to interact, that holding down a button and getting a voice assistant to come up and then talking to it is the best place, we'll never know because Siri's a [ __ ] joke and we can't use other options. Siri's the only layer into all of these things to the extent that Apple's even willing to expose them. It's since it's powered by absolute garbage that might get a little better with the new iOS will never really get to embrace what it's possible. We'll never really get to embrace what it could do. All of the innovation happening in places like Codeex and Whisper Flow on desktop cannot happen on iOS. Whisper Flow even has an iOS app and it's pretty cool considering the restrictions. The way it works is they replace your keyboard with a Whisper Flow keyboard. But since you can't use voice in the keyboard app if you're not the official Apple keyboard, hitting the mic button forwards you over to the Whisper Flow app to turn on the mic and it then becomes a live activity which sits at the top of your phone and leaves your mic on 24/7 until you go manually turn it off. Or you could use the awful voice to text on built-in Apple keyboard and built-in iPhone and just tap it, talk, and then tap it again and it gets half the words wrong, but it doesn't leave your mic on. We'll never see how powerful AI could be on a phone because Apple will never let us. Apple will never let us make a better iPhone AI. They'll never let us experiment with new things AI can do on iPhone because they have decided that layer is theirs. We can build apps on our phone and maybe someday Apple will let those apps interact with the Siri layer that they own and define, but not the other way around. We'll never be allowed to make an app that controls our phone. We'll never be allowed to make an app that can adjust other apps. We'll never be able to make an app that's not even an app that's just a layer that does things on our device. We'll never be allowed because Apple doesn't care. And this is a whole category of things that we'll just never get to see or experience. I hate to go into whatif territory here, but it's hard not to. Imagine a world where things like Whisper Flow could be used on iPhone properly. Imagine a world where something like Codeex and its computer use capabilities can work on an iPhone. Imagine a world where if you have an app you're using that could be a little bit better, have a thing changed, and you can talk to your phone and it changes the app for you. We'll never see it. It'll never happen because Apple does not want us to try. Apple wants all innovation on mobile to come from Apple. And you know what? They succeeded because we have to crash out a little about Android. This is a talk from Scott Jensen. He worked on Android at Google. He worked on Canonicle and Ubuntu for a while, too. And it's one of my favorite talks about UX ever. I think about it all the time. But there's a specific quote I want to grab from here about Android that has held true to this day. >> Okay, that's what it feels like when you color outside the lines. If you do something that no one else has done before, you're jumping into the trash compactor. But how can we be Princess Leia? We need to be Princess Leia. We need to try some of these more crazy things. And I know it's hard, but how can we do these experiments in such a way that we don't feel like we're taking so much of a risk? Some of my stuff at Google was not shipping and I was quite frustrated. I talked to a VP about it and he said something I'll never forget. He goes, "The fastest way to ship your features to have Apple do it first." Thanks, Mr. Senior visionary guy. It was so frustrating that but that's what why we were copying desktop in the first place because they took all of the the pressure off of us and yet we have to be think more about that. So, you get the idea. Android doesn't bring anything to the table because Android is just Google's attempt at copying iOS. That's all it is. Almost everything we've talked about here, okay, twothirds of what we talked about here is the case on Android 2. Not because Google is greedy or selfish or is trying to maximize their return. It's just because they're copying Apple one for one. Google didn't take 30% of App Store purchases on the Google Play Store because they want to make a bunch of money. They make almost nothing off it. They did that because it's what Apple does. Google doesn't have a complex app review process that gets rejected all the time for even worse reasons than Apple apps do because they wanted to or because it protects them in some way. There's still way more malware on the Android store than there will ever be on anything Apple's ever made. They do it because Apple does. Google doesn't restrict the OS level controls that your apps can make because they want to because they're protecting your device. They're doing it because Apple does. Android isn't [ __ ] because Google is [ __ ] Okay, it's partially [ __ ] because Google is [ __ ] Android is largely [ __ ] because iOS is. It is sad that we live in this world, but we do. The vast majority of the problems I have with iOS still exist with Android, but there's a big difference. My iPhone is still a good phone and it still has good apps. And I wish that wasn't the case. I wish Google would let us do a little more with Android. I wish they would take advantage of the unique opportunity they have. I wish they would like buy Expo and embed it into the platform and let everyone customize every app on their phone. Let everybody build their own overlays, build their own voice to text, build their own whatever they want. If Android was to be treated less like iOS and more like Chrome, we could live in a different world than we do today. But we don't because Android isn't trying to be good. It's not trying to be Google's. It's trying to be Btier iOS. And you know what? They succeeded. That's all it is. And every major Android update just feels more like a bad iPhone than before. And a lot of the things they copied were for the better. Like the navigation system they stole from iOS is way better than the old back button. I'll fight you Android people on that. It's so much easier to navigate. It makes so much more sense. Even if the apps haven't been updated accordingly because the apps never get updated because nobody cares about Android apps. I don't make any money. Nah, Android is a shitow necessarily and I don't think that will ever change. That said, I'm working on my own slot fork of Android that'll allow the types of customization I'm looking for. I don't think it'll go anywhere, but I'm just doing it out of curiosity at this point because anything is better than the [ __ ] show we live in today. So, what could things look like? What would the future be like if we could actually do the things we should be able? Want to talk briefly about the what if. Imagine a world where a 10-year-old who just got their first iPad could also build iPad apps. Imagine a world where once they build that app on their iPad, they can share it with their friends. Imagine a world where somebody could customize their iPad and the way it interacts based on their specific needs or possibly their disabilities. Imagine a world where instead of Siri is the only option, we could have chat GPT, Claude, and maybe even Gemini as options that have the same level of OS primitive access and control. Imagine a world where keyboards aren't forced to only use like 50 megabytes of RAM and connect to other things. Imagine a world like the one that Steve Jobs promised us all the way back where you don't even need an SDK to get started. Where you could build an app and access everything your device is capable of without needing Apple's permission to do stuff. Imagine a world as creative and exciting as Steve Jobs imagined it. Imagine a world like the one Steve Jobs promised in his first discussion of apps on the iPhone. Imagine how much cooler software could be today. Maybe we wouldn't all just rotate between the same four apps all day. Maybe we wouldn't all just live in YouTube and Twitter and Gmail. Maybe, just maybe, someday, we'll see a world where our phones are somewhat customizable. Maybe even half of what our computers can do. But sadly, we don't live in that world today. We live in a world where all the cool [ __ ] happening happens on computers. And the coolest thing you could do on your phone right now is send a message to a computer so it can go do real work. It's so hard to imagine this world that when I tried to do my Android slot fork where it could bundle apps itself, even an AI as powerful as Fable couldn't imagine it and just couldn't figure out what I was asking for. It kept trying to figure out where the server would run and eventually concluded that it could virtualize Linux in order to do the build on my device because the world I'm imagining here is so different from reality that even the best AI in the world can't imagine what I'm thinking of. But do you know what I'm thinking of? I'm just thinking of my Mac. I'm just thinking of Linux. I'm just thinking of my Windows computer. I'm not thinking that far out. I'm not asking for infinite customization. I'm not asking for infinite control. I'm asking for Apple to stop treating the [ __ ] iPhone like a Blackberry from 2004. I want a device that I can install software on myself. I want a device that I can talk to with a system I chose. I want a device that can be used for things other than Apple's blessed categories because the device is too powerful and too useful and too much in my life and in my pocket for it to be so goddamn restricted. In many ways, my iPhone is the most magical device I've ever owned. It's unbelievable what it's capable of on a thing that small in my pocket. It can do almost anything. It's a shame Apple lets you touch a third of those things at best. And John Tarnis, the new CEO of Apple, your heart's in the right place. You care more about hardware and reliability than you care about profitability. Tim Cook had one job. Maximize margins. And he did it so goddamn well. He took Apple from a failing company just barely surviving on the iPod and iPhone to one of the most valuable companies in the world. Briefly the most valuable company in the world. If you guys don't fix this, you're not going to be able to hold your position there. But you still have this insane lead in hardware. Let the hardware win. It always was going to, and you know that, and you're going to ensure that since the hardware division is guaranteed to be successful, let software experiment a bit, just a little. Let me install apps without getting permission. Let me build an iPad app on my iPad. Let the children cook. Let the next generation invent the next generation. Don't prescribe the way Blackberries worked in 2004 to the children that don't know what a BlackBerry is. Most kids will never experience the ability to install an app or customize it outside of the App Store until they get their first MacBook or Windows computer in their late teens to early 20s. The lock in on iOS is no longer just locking down the platform. It's locking down the brains of these kids. They don't know how to think outside of the box because you've made the walls too stiff. They're too opaque. They don't see outside of it anymore. Fix this before we die off or the next generation will never realize software can be changed. Because the world they live in is a world where software is done the way the software is done. And that's not the world I want to live in. I'm excited for a future where the kids make their own apps, build their own experiences, invent their own games, share their own worlds with their friends, and you stand between us in that world. Apple's the only thing preventing this from happening. And I really [ __ ] hope they stop because the impact is no longer just iOS. The impact is generational. And the kids don't know what files are anymore. They certainly don't understand that they can build their own software. Fix it now before it's too late. It might already be. I knew I had feelings on this one, but holy [ __ ] I Yeah, I've said all I have to. Hopefully, you know this video is sincere because this is a thing that I've been concerned about for a long time. And the severity of it has been raising in my head the more I talk to the next generation and realize how much Apple's corrupted their brains with their [ __ ] I don't think they'll fix it. It might already be too late. This might have been a useless rant, but I had to get it out of myself. I hope that you guys heard what I had to say here and that you actually understand what I'm trying to get out of me. I don't want to live in a world where software can't be changed. And I hope that maybe one of you guys might buy one of your kids a Linux computer at a young enough age to actually use it for cool things and that you can get them excited about software being malleable instead of tired of software being locked in. The web I used to explore has been replaced by apps that are super locked down. The operating systems that I used to customize have been replaced with ones that I can't even install apps on without Apple's permission. The devices I used went from absolute shitows that need to be tethered to a wall to unbelievable generation defining hardware that can run for days without needing a charge that can only do the things Apple allows. And every time a law changes in a way that it might benefit us as Apple users, you guys go out of your way to make sure it can't. This is going to hurt the next generation in ways I can't even fathom and I'm already seeing it play out today. Hopefully, you guys will make sure this doesn't happen because I don't trust Apple to do it. In fact, I don't trust Apple at all anymore. The moment I can finally get good photo and video editing software on Linux, I might finally retire this guy, except for the fact that I need it to build iPhone apps, which is why we end up here again. I I'm done. I have nothing else to say. I'm sorry I don't have a better message to end this one on. Hug your loved ones and buy them a Linux computer. It's the only choice we have.
-
TL;DR — Apple 的封閉生態系(iOS、iPadOS、App Store 審查、Xcode 等)嚴重限制了軟體創新、開發者自由與 AI 技術的發展,對下一代的創造力造成了 generational 傷害。
-
Key Points —
- 0:00 儘管作者喜歡 iOS,但 Apple 的封閉政策正在扼殺整個軟體產業與未來的可能性。
- 3:37 回顧歷史:賈伯斯最初推出 iPhone 時曾承諾基於 Web 標準、無需 SDK 即可自由開發,但隨後 App Store 的出現讓自由度逐年倒退。
- 11:21 開發極度痛苦:在自家 iPad 上測試自己寫的 App 竟需等待 Apple 長達 36 小時的審核與繁瑣簽署。
- 18:30 沙盒機制過於嚴苛:禁止 JIT(即時編譯器)、不允許跨 App 通訊、不支援瀏覽器引擎核心替換(只能用 WebKit),摧毀了模擬器、插件等軟體類別。
- 23:08 不合理的 App Store 政策:抽成高達 30%、禁止雲端串流遊戲、強制綁定自家支付,甚至變相從兒童手遊訂閱詐騙中獲利。
- 31:10 Xcode 嚴重落後:核心代碼源自 25 年前的 NeXTSTEP,編譯緩慢、常當機、Git 協作極其痛苦。
- 42:22 阻礙 AI 發展:類似 Mac 上的進階 AI 應用(如系統級自動化與代理)無法在 iOS 上實現,因 Apple 壟斷了所有 OS 層級的權限。
- 49:03 Android 也沒幫忙:Google 並非追求創新,而是一味複製 Apple 的封閉模式。
- Takeaways —
- 擁抱開源與可自訂性:支持並使用如 Linux 等對開發者友善、具備高度可塑性的作業系統與軟體工具。
- 培養下一代的軟體意識:不要讓新世代誤以為軟體天生就是被封閉和限制的;鼓勵年輕人接觸真正的程式開發與 malleable software(可修改的軟體)。
What Should I Sell
What Should I SellMoreMozi
English (auto-generated)
12.56s
00:00 - 00:01 So, let's say someone's listening to
00:00 - 00:03 this and they're thinking, all right,
00:01 - 00:04 cool. I know I I like I've I've read
00:03 - 00:05 Alex's book, he's telling me he's he's
00:04 - 00:07 he's telling me I've I've got to I've
00:05 - 00:08 got to sell a thing. I don't I don't
00:07 - 00:10 know what to sell. I don't know if I
00:08 - 00:11 have any skills. I don't I don't I don't
00:10 - 00:13 know what I could possibly offer to the
00:11 - 00:14 world. Yeah. How do we How do we break
00:13 - 00:17 that down?
00:14 - 00:18 Yeah, this is actually a topic that I
00:17 - 00:19 covered more in the leads book that's
00:18 - 00:23 coming out soon.
00:19 - 00:23 Soon relative terms, 6 months-ish.
00:23 - 00:27 Everybody knows something, all right?
00:25 - 00:29 And so, the idea is what do you have
00:27 - 00:31 Like everyone has unique
00:29 - 00:33 depths of knowledge in certain areas
00:31 - 00:35 because you've been alive and your eyes
00:33 - 00:38 and ears have taken inputs, period,
00:35 - 00:40 right? And so, I like to think of people
00:38 - 00:42 starting Like so, if you look at Are you
00:40 - 00:45 familiar with Y Combinator?
00:42 - 00:45 Yeah. I say yeah. But yeah. Yeah, so Y
00:45 - 00:48 Combinator is one of the most
00:45 - 00:49 successful, you know,
00:48 - 00:51 I don't know if they're technically VC.
00:49 - 00:54 They're you know, seed capital startup
00:51 - 00:55 investors in Silicon Valley and they
00:54 - 00:57 have a very standard deal structure and
00:55 - 00:58 they have criteria for what they look
00:57 - 01:00 for in companies. And one of the most
00:58 - 01:02 important criteria that they look for is
01:00 - 01:04 past experience. And so, they're okay
01:02 - 01:06 with somebody who's super young, etc.,
01:04 - 01:07 but they want to they want you to have
01:06 - 01:09 experience in the industry cuz there's
01:07 - 01:12 just so much ignorance debt that you
01:09 - 01:14 have to pay down if you literally know
01:12 - 01:15 nothing about an industry. Like there's
01:14 - 01:18 just so much Like if your dad was a
01:15 - 01:20 mechanic, you know so much about cars
01:18 - 01:22 just by osmosis of being around a
01:20 - 01:24 mechanic for 18 years. And so, I like to
01:22 - 01:26 think
01:24 - 01:28 past jobs you've held, you will know
01:26 - 01:30 stuff about that industry. Um
01:28 - 01:32 the jobs of your parents are things that
01:30 - 01:34 you will know about that industry. And
01:32 - 01:36 then you've got personal interests. And
01:34 - 01:38 so, I think that if I had put those into
01:36 - 01:40 three buckets, it's like parents stuff,
01:38 - 01:42 past jobs of self, and current
01:40 - 01:43 interests. And so, it's like of those
01:42 - 01:45 three things,
01:43 - 01:47 which of those three buckets do you
01:45 - 01:48 think you could help someone do a thing
01:47 - 01:50 better?
01:48 - 01:51 And so, the idea is
01:50 - 01:53 you want to sell the most valuable
01:51 - 01:55 thing, right? And so, the most valuable
01:53 - 01:56 thing is what is the problem that I can
01:55 - 01:58 can somebody else solve that I could
01:56 - 02:00 charge the most money for or in reverse
01:58 - 02:01 that could make them the most money.
02:00 - 02:03 Um and then I will be able to charge a
02:01 - 02:05 percentage of the money that I'm able to
02:03 - 02:06 make somebody else in this thing. Now,
02:05 - 02:08 that's in a B2B setting. In a B2C
02:06 - 02:10 setting, it would be how valuable do
02:08 - 02:13 people perceive uh the problem that they
02:10 - 02:15 have as, right? Whether it's like I can
02:13 - 02:16 teach music, tons of people want to be
02:15 - 02:17 able to learn how to and if you're
02:16 - 02:19 better, you know, cuz you've had a side
02:17 - 02:19 interest in that, awesome. Maybe you
02:19 - 02:21 have a side interest because you're
02:19 - 02:22 really good at editing the songs. Well,
02:21 - 02:24 there's tons of musicians who would love
02:22 - 02:25 who hate that part and would love to
02:24 - 02:27 have that. So, it's like we all know how
02:25 - 02:29 to do stuff and all we have to do is
02:27 - 02:30 package the thing that we're doing and I
02:29 - 02:31 think the big problem is that people
02:30 - 02:32 expect that they're going to have a
02:31 - 02:34 perfect business, but if you look at the
02:32 - 02:36 track record of all of I can't think of
02:34 - 02:37 an entrepreneur besides Jeff Bezos,
02:36 - 02:39 who's a freak of nature,
02:37 - 02:41 whose first business becomes the most
02:39 - 02:43 valuable business in the world is most
02:41 - 02:46 people have a graveyard of failures
02:43 - 02:48 behind them. And so, the idea is you
02:46 - 02:48 start not with the intent of saying this
02:48 - 02:49 is going to be the one thing I'm going
02:48 - 02:52 to do for the rest of my life, which is
02:49 - 02:53 the fallacy that employees have
02:52 - 02:53 uh that whatever they pick is going to
02:53 - 02:55 be the thing they're going to do for the
02:53 - 02:56 rest of their lives. When in reality is
02:55 - 02:58 I just have to do a thing that I'm good
02:56 - 02:59 enough at that I can learn the game and
02:58 - 03:02 the thing is once you start taking
02:59 - 03:04 steps, the the next step becomes
03:02 - 03:05 illuminated. You trying to think 100
03:04 - 03:07 steps into the future when you have no
03:05 - 03:10 context is is irrelevant because chaos
03:07 - 03:13 is going to break your plan anyways. And
03:10 - 03:14 so, do what you know, exchange I like
03:13 - 03:17 service businesses to start because they
03:14 - 03:18 are the in my opinion the lowest risk to
03:17 - 03:19 start cuz you're just it's just your
03:18 - 03:22 time, right?
03:19 - 03:23 >> So, service businesses meaning Do stuff
03:22 - 03:25 for money.
03:23 - 03:26 Like mowing the lawn or cleaning windows
03:25 - 03:28 or like whatever.
03:26 - 03:29 >> service. Clean houses, like whatever.
03:28 - 03:30 Like all of those are just service
03:29 - 03:31 businesses, right? And they're fine. And
03:30 - 03:34 a lot of people think they need to have
03:31 - 03:36 some novel idea to start a business when
03:34 - 03:37 I mean, the best in my opinion, if
03:36 - 03:39 you're if you're getting into it, the
03:37 - 03:40 best way to start a business is just
03:39 - 03:42 look at what everyone else is doing and
03:40 - 03:45 just try and do it better. Like that I
03:42 - 03:46 mean and there's obvious holes. Like if
03:45 - 03:47 you've if you've gone to if you've
03:46 - 03:50 gotten your dry cleaning, it's like can
03:47 - 03:51 I do this in half the time as this guy?
03:50 - 03:52 If I do the lawn care, what are the
03:51 - 03:54 things people hate about lawn care? Ah,
03:52 - 03:56 they leave the the the trimmings around
03:54 - 03:57 the edges are all are all all shitty,
03:56 - 03:58 the person doesn't speak English that
03:57 - 04:00 well. Like, well, cool. Then I've got
03:58 - 04:02 advantages, right? So, it's like, what
04:00 - 04:04 are things that I already know how to do
04:02 - 04:05 or I have past experience in?
04:04 - 04:06 What things, because I have past
04:05 - 04:07 experience, I know that other people
04:06 - 04:09 struggle with that sucks about this
04:07 - 04:10 thing? And then I will solve that
04:09 - 04:11 specific problem. And it could also be a
04:10 - 04:13 problem that other people solve, too.
04:11 - 04:14 You just try and do a little bit better.
04:13 - 04:16 Like, it's it's it's just not rocket
04:14 - 04:17 science. You know what I mean? And then
04:16 - 04:19 you exchange you start selling your time
04:17 - 04:20 for money. So, yes, you're still trading
04:19 - 04:22 time for dollars. You don't need to read
04:20 - 04:24 read Rich Dad, Poor Dad just yet, right?
04:22 - 04:25 You're still trading time for dollars.
04:24 - 04:27 Right, but the point is that you're
04:25 - 04:30 you're you're trading that time for
04:27 - 04:31 money in order to learn, not to earn.
04:30 - 04:33 You need to earn in order to pay your
04:31 - 04:35 pay your rent, eat, et cetera. But, the
04:33 - 04:37 the major thing you're doing is you're
04:35 - 04:38 paying down ignorance debt. So, the vast
04:37 - 04:40 majority of your income is coming in the
04:38 - 04:42 terms of in in the form of education,
04:40 - 04:44 rather than earning. Real quick, if you
04:42 - 04:45 are a business owner and you're not
04:44 - 04:47 growing as fast as you'd like, I'd like
04:45 - 04:49 to give you a free gift. So, my team and
04:47 - 04:51 I put together the 100 million dollar
04:49 - 04:52 scaling road map, which is basically 200
04:51 - 04:54 hours of us looking over all the
04:52 - 04:56 portfolio companies we've had and what
04:54 - 04:58 stages of growth they went through and
04:56 - 05:00 more importantly, where they got stuck
04:58 - 05:01 and how they got past it. And so, we
05:00 - 05:03 broke it into these 10 stages and we
05:01 - 05:04 made this little kind of quiz thing,
05:03 - 05:05 where if you put in your business
05:04 - 05:07 information, it'll tell you where you're
05:05 - 05:09 at and the most important part for you,
05:07 - 05:10 what to do for each of functions of the
05:09 - 05:12 business across product, marketing,
05:10 - 05:14 sales, customer success, recruiting, IT,
05:12 - 05:16 human resources and finance. And so, no
05:14 - 05:17 matter what you're struggling with,
05:16 - 05:19 someone else has already struggled with
05:17 - 05:21 it and solved it. And so, I'd like to
05:19 - 05:23 give you this thing absolutely free. You
05:21 - 05:24 can go to acquisition.com/roadmap,
05:23 - 05:26 plug in your business information and if
05:24 - 05:28 you want us to actually help you
05:26 - 05:29 deconstruct the business and you're
05:28 - 05:31 trying to scale, we'd love to help you
05:29 - 05:33 out. On the thank you page, you just
05:31 - 05:35 book a call with my team and we will
05:33 - 05:36 look at the business, see if we can help
05:35 - 05:41 and if we can, we'll invite you out to
05:36 - 05:41 Vegas and we'll do this in person live.
Summary
- 本影片探討了創業者若缺乏明確商業點子或技能時,該如何找到創業切入點。
- 講者建議從三個面向發掘潛力:個人過去的工作經驗、家庭背景累積的知識,以及個人興趣。
- 強調創業不必追求完美,重點在於透過執行來「償還無知債(ignorance debt)」,並在實作中不斷修正與學習。
- 推薦以服務型業務作為起點,因為其風險低,且能透過觀察既有市場的缺失,提供更好的解決方案來創造價值。
Notes
- 發掘優勢的三個途徑:個人過去的工作經驗、家庭薰陶與背景知識、個人感興趣的領域。
- 創業的核心邏輯是「解決問題」,你可以透過幫助他人賺錢或節省時間來換取報酬。
- 不要試圖預測 100 步之後的結果,創業初期最重要的是採取行動,下一步的路徑會在執行中逐漸明朗。
- 起步時不必尋求創新,觀察現有市場並找出做得更好的機會(優化流程、服務或品質)即可。
- 初期的商業活動重點在於「學習」而非「賺錢」,透過服務他人來累積產業知識與經驗。
Comments
- 「我認同 Alex 的觀點:先跨出第一步,剩下的路會自然展開。我從一個利基市場開始,隨著旅程推進,我才發現真正的利基市場和最終產品是什麼。」(20 likes)
- 「兩個老千走進了播客節目。」(5 likes)
- 「更多的莫子,更多的靈魂。」(2 likes)
- 「Ali 是穆斯林嗎?」(2 likes)
- 「這絕對是最糟糕的。」(1 likes)
- 「看起來很像 AI 生成的。」(1 likes)
- 「我認出背景裡那些 KING 的掛圖盒子了 :D」(0 likes)
- 「大家覺得我應該把高端產品拆分成一個獨立的品牌,還是將中端和高端產品放在同一個品牌下?我很擔心高端產品在對比下會讓中端產品看起來很『廉價』,儘管中端產品的品質也不錯。我是在製造化妝品,你們有什麼建議嗎?」(0 likes)
- 「我正處於同樣的旅程中 🙌」(0 likes)
- 「同一個品牌」(0 likes)
Quotes
- "Everyone has unique depths of knowledge in certain areas because you've been alive and your eyes and ears have taken inputs."
- "The k
從混亂到清晰
拖動滑桿查看差異。停止觀看,開始理解。
LKK 的方式
一場 25 分鐘的豪賭
費力尋找答案快轉廣告和廢話被標題黨分散注意力PeekaTube 的方式
3 秒鐘總結
立即獲取重點直達相關時間戳實現零干擾學習從此告別標題黨!
Peekatube 為任何帶有 CC 字幕的 YouTube 影片提供即時 AI 摘要,讓您在點擊前就掌握影片精華。
Beta 75 折
Pro 方案
無限 AI 摘要,適用於任何 YouTube 影片
$5.99/月
- 帶有 CC 字幕的 YouTube 影片快速摘要
- 無限影片摘要
- 還包括:
- 搶先體驗新功能
- 一鍵匯出摘要與逐字稿
- 優先客服支援
- Chrome 擴充功能
- 或 $44.99/年(省 25%)
常見問題
關於 PeekaTube 的一切,這裡都有答案
PeekaTube 如何運作?
很簡單。您提供 YouTube 連結後,AI 會讀取影片的字幕 (CC) 或逐字稿,分析內容的關鍵論點,並生成一份架構清晰的摘要。PeekaTube 還會抓取 YouTube 留言,為你提供額外背景 — 例如觀眾更正、專家意見和社群反應 — 這些是光看影片無法得知的。
只能用在有 CC 字幕的影片上嗎?
目前是的,摘要的品質高度依賴影片字幕的準確性。不過,支援「無字幕影片」的技術已在開發中,如果您非常需要此功能,可以
什麼類型的影片摘要效果最好?
PeekaTube 特別擅長處理以「談話」為核心的內容,例如:教育演講、技術教學、人物訪談、紀錄片和新聞報導。基本上,只要影片有字幕,AI 就能進行分析。
摘要的準確度如何?
我們旨在高準確度地捕捉影片的核心思想和架構。然而,請將它視為一個聰明的「觀看指南」,而非完全取代觀看。它非常適合用來判斷一部影片是否值得您投入時間,並快速掌握其核心概念。
支援哪些語言?
PeekaTube 不僅能處理多種來源語言,更能將摘要翻譯成您指定的語言。例如,您可以為一部日文影片生成中文摘要。目前我們支援的輸出語言包含:中文、英文、日文、韓文、西班牙文、法文、德文、義大利文、葡萄牙文等。
處理速度可以更快嗎?
我一直在努力優化速度!目前的處理時間,包含了確保服務穩定性的必要步驟。為了防止服務被 YouTube 封鎖 IP,後端使用了代理 (Proxy) 來確保 PeekaTube 能為您持續穩定運作。這個做法雖然會增加幾秒鐘的讀取時間,卻是維持服務不中斷的關鍵權衡。我的目標,是在不犧牲穩定性的前提下,持續提升處理速度。
這個工具適合誰使用?
PeekaTube 適合任何珍惜時間的人:
- 學生:用來做報告研究、複習課程
- 專業人士:快速跟進產業趨勢和教學影片
- 終身學習者:探索新知,無需冒著浪費時間的風險
最新功能和未來計畫是什麼?
我們已推出 Chrome 擴充功能 — Pro 用戶現在可以直接在 YouTube 頁面上使用 PeekaTube!我們還新增了 YouTube 留言分析功能,會抓取觀眾留言,讓你對影片有超越逐字稿的更完整理解。接下來:支援「無字幕影片」的技術正在積極開發中。您的支持,是讓新功能更快推出的最大動力!
還有其他問題?
我們很樂意為您解答任何疑問





