461–470 of 600 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Words Mean Things. That lawsuit didn’t initiate under Cook.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/06/12/apple-seeking-to-... https://www.thestreet.com/investing/california-judge-may-dis...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't need to support, they just have no right to forbid. There's a big difference between those two things. Imagine if windows crippled Netscape by forcing them to use Internet Explorer engine on Windows? And this is just one thing Apple are doing that is unbelievable they are getting away with it.
But there's a specific consumer safety reason for it. Not letting other browsers use their own JS engine (which is what it means to 'forcing them to use Internet Explorer engine on Windows' in your analogy) is because Apple want to disallow write|execute for people's safety.
Perhaps you're right. Maybe it's entirely coincidental that Apple's policy also prevents owners of Apple devices from using a browser with modern features that would allow web apps to effectively compete with the native apps from which Apple gets a huge cut of the revenue because of its monopoly control over the app store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean Apple removing apps that literally let a third party control your phone and spy on everything you do? Were you also against Apple disabling enterprise certificates when Google and Facebook were using it to spy on users - not just their own employees?
You mean the apps that Apple was fine hosting on their platform and taking their 30% cut from up until Apple decided to create a first party app that can control your phone and spy on everything you do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Literally being debated right now. https://techcrunch.com/2020/07/29/apple-ceo-tim-cook-questio...
Yup, that's where I heard it from. Had this streaming in the background the other day. The amount of anti-competitive behavior they had on these companies that I hadn't even known about was astounding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean the apps that Apple was fine hosting on their platform and taking their 30% cut from up until Apple decided to create a first party app that can control your phone and spy on everything you do?
Actually screen time limits are all done locally and sync between your devices. It in no way allows Apple to record what you are doing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You keep quoting a partial comment and then trying to shift the discussion away from the fundamental point. The fundamental point is still that, for practical purposes, many people now have to have a smartphone. There are, for practical purposes, two types of smartphone available. If neither of those meets some reasonable conditions that many people would prefer to have -- for example, retaining control of your own d…
> You keep quoting a partial comment and then trying to shift the discussion away from the fundamental point. When you try to give a concrete example I show how that concrete example doesn't make any sense to me. If the fundamental point doesn't translate to any concrete situations then it's a dud. > neither of those meets some reasonable conditions that many people would prefer to have -- for example, retaining cont…
So we can see. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be in the interests of owners of Apple devices, or that Apple shouldn't be prevented from exploiting its dominant position to restrict the market to the detriment of those owners.
I wonder whether you'd be OK with an electricity supplier saying you're only allowed to plug in equipment they have approved and they can change the rules or revoke approvals any time they like. If you don't like it, you can go to the other electricity supplier, who will give you their list of acceptable equipment instead. If you want to use equipment from both lists, don't worry, just buy two houses. And of course no-one makes any equipment that isn't on either list, because there is no possibility you'd ever want to power anything that wasn't approved by at least one electricity supplier.
Or you can buy Car A that goes only to one set of locations, or Car B that goes only to another set. Other locations might be happy to welcome you, but even if they build the roads to reach them, your car will artificially prevent you from driving that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Web browsers.
Apple makes money from not allowing third party web browsers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why not build a standard mechanism to install and update 3rd party software into the OS? It's hardly a radical idea. There are plenty of solutions to that problem that don't involve monopolising the distribution of all software on the platform.
I agree in principle that this would be OK, except part of Apple's vetting processes is making sure apps aren't accessing private APIs. I don't want to download a game and find out that it's secretly spinning up a background spyware process to monitor the screenbuffer and sending the screenshots off to god knows where.
Once again, trying to filter malware at the app store level is not a viable strategy for robust, reliable security, and it never has been.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An operating system that actually empowered you would give you the tools and options to prevent that, while also letting you run whatever software you desired. I will never understand people's desire to be handcuffed by Apple. Give me control over my own device god damn it.
Rest assured that despite the somehow surprisingly recent blind support for Apple here, there are people too that want to own our devices. I can just hope that the EU is successful in stopping all of Apple's trickeries ranging from 2.5mm headset jacks, ports, OS slow downs, mysterious battery underperformance, app store, the list just goes on.
You want the EU to regulate whether a company wants to put a headphone jack in their devices?
> OS slow downs
iOS has gotten faster over time [1].
> mysterious battery underperformance
It's common knowledge that this was an honest engineering mistake because as a phone ages, the battery cannot support the max voltage of the processor. Apple now lets you enable full performance with the understanding that your phone might shut down on you when you need it most.
> app store
Which we've determined not to be a monopoly as Apple is a minority player in the mobile device space.
> the list just goes on.
So you've suggested 4 things, 3 of which don't apply and 1 of which (headphone jacks) would be gross governmental overreach.
It seems to me that you just want the company to burn and you want the EU to regulate the hell out of everything in your life.
For example, deciding whether I want to put a headphone jack on my next device is my choice, not the EU's choice, and it would be tyrannical and innovation-stifling to let them have a say over something like that.
It is very reasonable for you to just buy something else if you don't like an Apple device, since Apple is not a monopoly in the mobile space. However, neither you nor the government should have the right to force Apple to develop a product you like. Apple does not exist to satisfy your whims.
[1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/09/ios-13-the-ars-techn...