This Apple fee is one of the most absurd things they do. Like, how is it even justified—does Apple really spend $99 on infra maintenance and server costs to host your app?
When I buy a device I want to know that I own it, but Apple keeps pushing the narrative that "we LET you use this device in ways we see fit". So basically the customer is just borrowing a device from Apple while paying the full price.
I'm a longtime Apple user but can't shake off this love-hate relationship with the company.
> Like, how is it even justified—does Apple really spend $99 on infra maintenance and server costs to host your app?
How much something costs is not what determines how much a company charges for something.
A company sets prices based on what will make it the most money. A company only lowers prices if they think doing so will generate higher total profits in the long run.
Apple seems to think charging $99 a year for developers will help its long term bottom line the most.
There are probably many reasons for that, some of them already mentioned in sibling comments - keeping low effort apps out, preventing spammers from constantly buying new accounts to bypass bans, reducing the workload for approvers, generating revenue from the fees, etc.
Prices aren't justified or not, you choose to pay them or not.
I think it's fair to also cover the fairly rigorous testing that occurs for each app store submission. I'm not sure a hundred bucks is the right number, but it's not fair to say all they do is host the file.
> Apple keeps pushing the narrative that "we LET you use this device in ways we see fit".
No, they do not. That is how you are interpreting their actions. It’s obviously not the narrative they are pushing, that would be utterly absurd. The narrative Apple pushes over and over is that it’s your device, and that what you do with it is private and stays with it. Outright saying the device is theirs and they only let you do what they choose would be incredibly stupid, and their marketing is not incompetent.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean your interpretation (which is shared by many people) is wrong. On the contrary, it has merit. But it makes no sense to say Apple is pushing it as a narrative, that’s not what the expression means.
This is why I switched to Android 10 years ago. Unfortunately the grass isn't looking much greener over there these days.
I'd love to hear from individuals who worked at these companies whether it disgusts them as much as it does me, and ideas (from a business perspective as much as technical) on how a new platform might wrest control back into the hands of users/owners.
Money is nice, they can charge it and people will pay them. Would be letting their shareholders down not to charge it really. I'm surprised they haven't tried bumping it up yet.
What other serious business to business agreements can you enter into without spending at least $100? The fee is not to cover technical costs, but administration costs.
Welcome to the world of having a small business. Be happy it's only $100. Your fees for cost-of-doing business is many times higher for a hot dog stand or any other thing you can come up with.
The iPhone 8 has the unpatchable checkm8 bootrom vulnerability, so while it doesn't say this in the article, the author could have jailbroken the device to run whatever software they want without paying any Apple fees.
That vulnerability was a huge win. It just recently stopped, with the final vulnerable device (7th gen iPad) not getting the iPad OS 26 update.
That was exactly my thought. Out of the whole universe of development platforms we have to choose from to do an off-label maker-think gadget hack, iOS is inarguably, and by a huge margin, the worst.
There are literally home appliances with more customizable app development and deployment stories than iPhones.
It's the "for longer than a week" bit - Unless you have a paid developer account, you can only sign apps to sideload that last one week.
There's some tools to automate "refreshing" the app, but that requires you have some other computer that pushes a new app every week.
The "1 week" restriction is usually fine when you're developing (as you typically are continually rebuilding and updating when actively working on an app) but is clearly intended to avoid being a way to sideload apps without the developer account "nearby".
I’m not a 100% on this, but I believe you need to pay them to “sign” your app. For iOS, that means there is no way anyone else will be able to use your app unless they side-load it themselves (and we all know how cumbersome that is, Apple doesn’t want to make it easy).
I was just checking the combo he is using [0] (River 2 Pro + 220W solar generator) and it's currently at USD 619. In the post, the author sums it at USD 780. I assume price dropped because of newer models, etc.
surely on an iPhone that has the checkm8 hardware vulnerability available, one could jailbreak the device, install a codesigning bypass plugin on it, then develop and sideload their app without the whole "pay apple $99/yr to keep your sideloaded app on your phone" thing?
the code example of vision framework, and the links in "Software Resources" section are enough I guess, you can feed them to an LLM to get a full application if you are too lazy to figure out by yourself
Nice hacker effort and writeup, but I want to comment on a general HN pattern of what tech people promote implicitly with hacker network effects...
For every HN blog post of "I accomplished ___ despite a hacker-hostile platform, and now you can use what I built, and be hopelessly tied to the platform"... Baby Jesus Linus sheds a tear.
In this case, it's a bit odd, since the writer has an entire section, "Why This Actually Matters", of unusually good hacker and social values.
Repurposing an old device is good. If the closed platform bothers you, don’t buy and iPhone - but regardless of what you do there are millions of old iPhones that could be saved from the landfill by projects like this
THANK YOU. For example, I'm currently a user of an android app (installed thru Play Store) which I found through front page; cool. The headline: "I developed <insert FOSS app which meets regular value prop> and didn't use <insert commonly used framework>".
Tragically, I care less about framework than I do about functionality, and ever since installing, i've been left wondering how many of the hundreds of upvoters tried running what I describe as the single buggiest app on my phone. I've rage uninstalled multiple times in hopes of fixing issues which are sometimes only fixed by clean installing.
My point: Guiding philosophies are important, and evaluating them at scale is critical* work.
Yes, but usually it doesn't come down to something that works vs. doesn't work.
And some of the times that it does, it's because someone earlier didn't think about values before establishing network effects that stuffed a bad-values thing while starving a good-values thing.
My guess is that he wanted to use that Apple OCR framework and that iPhone was whatever he had handy. I went to his blog's homepage hoping to find some article as to what he's processing, but I didn't find anything. Is he scanning all of his novels?
I have an iPhone 8 still in service and compared to an equally old Android device, the Android (some kind of Motorola eX series low end phone) runs circles around the iPhone. Even playing background video or audio streamed from wifi and output over bluetooth with the screen off, the Android will burn 15% in an hour while the iPhone will burn over 60%. Both are the same age but the iPhone feels subjectively obselete while the low end Motorola feels like a mid-2010s computer. Even for it's age the Android will last two weeks in Airplane mode.
This just suggests that the battery in your iPhone 8 is more degraded than your low end Motorola. This could easily occur if you have used the iPhone more over its lifetime and isn't a good measure of relative performance.
> The phone’s battery health held up reasonably well. After over a year of constant operation, it’s at 76% capacity.
I have an iPhone SE that I've tried keeping plugged in all the time and its battery has turned into a spicy pillow three times, first with Apple replacing the whole device (since they won't touch it with a swollen battery), then using third-party replacement kits.
This isn't going to work for long if the battery is usually at 100%.
My #1 wish for being able to repurpose old phones is to operate without touching the battery, and/or keeping the battery at 50%. Newer Apple phones have an 80% limit option which is an improvement, but I'm not sure how much. And unfortunately the option isn't there on any but the most recent phones, even on up-to-date iOS.
Plug your charger to any Homekit-compatible "smart plug," and create a shortcut that turns the the plug on when the battery reaches 45%, and off when it reaches 55%.
That's an intriguing idea, I had no idea that was a possibility.
Unfortunately it wouldn't work for my particular usage, which was keeping it plugged into an old but expensive smart speaker as a music player via its lightning port. A smart plug would turn off the speaker along with the phone... But I appreciate the suggestion, as complicated as it is!
Most of these devices can't run "without touching the battery" because the external supply can't provide the required peak current, so during some CPU burst it would shut off.
I've seen hacks that replace the battery with a supercapacitor though.
Couldn't the power management simply throttle the CPU to never go above supplied power in a battery-free mode? Don't they already implement a power threshold for degraded batteries? It seems like that would just be part of the feature I'm asking for, and easy to implement.
It really seems like, if it weren't for the battery part, these phones could run for decades... but right now you have to replace the battery every couple years because it swells when constantly kept at 100% which it is not designed for.
> since they won't touch it with a swollen battery
Interesting. I've had a spicy pillow on a 2017 MBP, they fixed the poor thing, and while at it: replaced the cursed keyboard, and left some kind of tape to reinforce the loosened USB-C ports.
Unfortunately, they didn't do the thermal paste - I had to do DIY, which is something I will never touch again. It did pay off though, it's cooler by some 10°C under load, and runs faster too. It's still loved and in everyday use.
I don't believe a battery bypass mode is physically feasible, since the user could be charging the phone with a cheap 5V 1A charger, and yet the peak power consumption of an iPhone could very well exceed that.
My iPad 3 is only unusable because anything beyond iOS 9 isn't installable, most of the like 5 Apps I did have installed on it didn't survive a "backup", and obvs nobody's going out of their way to support ancient platforms.
Otherwise, it still functions as an epub reader as long as iBooks continues functioning, but it's lame that I can't really use it for much else unless I made it a hobby.
For me, iPads (base model, non-Air/Pro) and iPhones seem to exist on opposite ends of the longevity spectrum. Never had an iPad last over 2-3 years without feeling sluggish and ready for an upgrade. Never had an iPhone since the 4 that felt sluggish when Apple stopped supporting it (5+ years).
I don't agree with this take at all. I had to give up my iPhone 7 because I couldn't update iOS and my banking app refused to work on the older version.
Apple would also gladly throttle your phone, see Batterygate.
Informed technical users should know that the alternative to Batterygate is that iPhones would randomly be turning OFF with no warning in user's hands.
When a battery is old and has low state of charge (under 25%), it is easy for a device to request more power than the battery can provide and BOOM, the screen is black.
Apple mitigated and avoided that experience for users by programming the phone to slow down when a user's old battery could not support the power needs of the device at full speed. It makes sense when you take the time to be informed about it.
Readit News
I suppose most of this is eaten up by the need to pay apple $99 per year just to run your own app on your own phone for longer than a week.
When I buy a device I want to know that I own it, but Apple keeps pushing the narrative that "we LET you use this device in ways we see fit". So basically the customer is just borrowing a device from Apple while paying the full price.
I'm a longtime Apple user but can't shake off this love-hate relationship with the company.
How much something costs is not what determines how much a company charges for something.
A company sets prices based on what will make it the most money. A company only lowers prices if they think doing so will generate higher total profits in the long run.
Apple seems to think charging $99 a year for developers will help its long term bottom line the most.
There are probably many reasons for that, some of them already mentioned in sibling comments - keeping low effort apps out, preventing spammers from constantly buying new accounts to bypass bans, reducing the workload for approvers, generating revenue from the fees, etc.
Prices aren't justified or not, you choose to pay them or not.
No, they do not. That is how you are interpreting their actions. It’s obviously not the narrative they are pushing, that would be utterly absurd. The narrative Apple pushes over and over is that it’s your device, and that what you do with it is private and stays with it. Outright saying the device is theirs and they only let you do what they choose would be incredibly stupid, and their marketing is not incompetent.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean your interpretation (which is shared by many people) is wrong. On the contrary, it has merit. But it makes no sense to say Apple is pushing it as a narrative, that’s not what the expression means.
I'd love to hear from individuals who worked at these companies whether it disgusts them as much as it does me, and ideas (from a business perspective as much as technical) on how a new platform might wrest control back into the hands of users/owners.
Money is nice, they can charge it and people will pay them. Would be letting their shareholders down not to charge it really. I'm surprised they haven't tried bumping it up yet.
Welcome to the world of having a small business. Be happy it's only $100. Your fees for cost-of-doing business is many times higher for a hot dog stand or any other thing you can come up with.
That vulnerability was a huge win. It just recently stopped, with the final vulnerable device (7th gen iPad) not getting the iPad OS 26 update.
There are literally home appliances with more customizable app development and deployment stories than iPhones.
There's some tools to automate "refreshing" the app, but that requires you have some other computer that pushes a new app every week.
The "1 week" restriction is usually fine when you're developing (as you typically are continually rebuilding and updating when actively working on an app) but is clearly intended to avoid being a way to sideload apps without the developer account "nearby".
[0]: https://us.ecoflow.com/products/river-2-pro-portable-power-s...
Also that's about 500kWh of power annually which averages to 50W. There is just no way iPhone uses that much.
Dead Comment
[0]: https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2025/277/
[1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/06/18/apple-transcription-api...
For every HN blog post of "I accomplished ___ despite a hacker-hostile platform, and now you can use what I built, and be hopelessly tied to the platform"... Baby Jesus Linus sheds a tear.
In this case, it's a bit odd, since the writer has an entire section, "Why This Actually Matters", of unusually good hacker and social values.
*see what i did there
And some of the times that it does, it's because someone earlier didn't think about values before establishing network effects that stuffed a bad-values thing while starving a good-values thing.
I have an iPhone SE that I've tried keeping plugged in all the time and its battery has turned into a spicy pillow three times, first with Apple replacing the whole device (since they won't touch it with a swollen battery), then using third-party replacement kits.
This isn't going to work for long if the battery is usually at 100%.
My #1 wish for being able to repurpose old phones is to operate without touching the battery, and/or keeping the battery at 50%. Newer Apple phones have an 80% limit option which is an improvement, but I'm not sure how much. And unfortunately the option isn't there on any but the most recent phones, even on up-to-date iOS.
This will of course require a Homekit hub.
Unfortunately it wouldn't work for my particular usage, which was keeping it plugged into an old but expensive smart speaker as a music player via its lightning port. A smart plug would turn off the speaker along with the phone... But I appreciate the suggestion, as complicated as it is!
I've seen hacks that replace the battery with a supercapacitor though.
It really seems like, if it weren't for the battery part, these phones could run for decades... but right now you have to replace the battery every couple years because it swells when constantly kept at 100% which it is not designed for.
Interesting. I've had a spicy pillow on a 2017 MBP, they fixed the poor thing, and while at it: replaced the cursed keyboard, and left some kind of tape to reinforce the loosened USB-C ports.
Unfortunately, they didn't do the thermal paste - I had to do DIY, which is something I will never touch again. It did pay off though, it's cooler by some 10°C under load, and runs faster too. It's still loved and in everyday use.
We don’t give enough credit to Apple for keeping these old devices alive and kicking.
I have a similar story wherein I repurposed my ancient OG iPhone SE and gave it a new life.
https://samkhawase.com/blog/dumb-smartphone/
I'm not sure I follow. It feels exceedingly hard to find new uses for old iPads without doing a lot of heavy lifting. Has that changed?
Otherwise, it still functions as an epub reader as long as iBooks continues functioning, but it's lame that I can't really use it for much else unless I made it a hobby.
Deleted Comment
Apple would also gladly throttle your phone, see Batterygate.
When a battery is old and has low state of charge (under 25%), it is easy for a device to request more power than the battery can provide and BOOM, the screen is black.
Apple mitigated and avoided that experience for users by programming the phone to slow down when a user's old battery could not support the power needs of the device at full speed. It makes sense when you take the time to be informed about it.