Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 851 posts

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#91

Post by ls15 »

GrayShade wrote: post #6
austincheney wrote: post #5

We need a WASM box for QT and Node running with full API access. This is the best way I can see to bypass the restrictions of the App Store.

The best way to bypass their restrictions is to stop buying Apple devices.

As a user, I actually like Apple devices and iOS much better than Android, but I also want them to be more open. I want to install browser extensions freely and I want that the app distribution (quasi) duopoly gets broken. I also want full control over my phone's network activity.

Apple needs to be forced to enable alternative app stores, like Microsoft got forced to offer alternative browsers, because they will never do it on their own.

Since these issues are increasingly covered in the media and people are waking up to these issues, I am optimistic that things will change for the better in the near future.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#92

Post by fartcannon »

jmull wrote: post #80

I don’t know the legalities, but I think Apple should be free to set their App Store policies but allow alternative app stores to be installed (with some hoops to jump through so that it isn’t too easy for the tech-blind to do).

That's the same trash Google does with Android and it's effectively as anti-competitive. They shouldn't be permitted to limit competition at all. In any way.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#93

Post by candiddevmike »

slver wrote: post #86
doikor wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for how long would Safari on iOS keep up with new features or not get its performance nuked if for example games started to move into browser apps in major numbers on iOS. Apple itself said in the trial that games pretty much subsidize all other apps in terms of the money Apple makes out of the App Store. iOS Safari already lags behind in features. Apple would just make it even worse if it started to cost them si…

Apple lags behind Chrome in some features which curiously directly benefit Google. It's not slow, it's not broken. It's a great mobile browser. So stick to reality and not bunch of made up "what ifs".

PWAs and web based push notifications only benefit Google?

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#94

Post by devit »

slver wrote: post #83
wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

What you're saying is that you're OK with basically every single developer declaring their app as free, and then asking for your credit card, which will be processed in god knows what ways with most of them. So developers get in the shortterm to avoid the 30% cut. But what happens next? The payment process becomes much more cumbersome and much less safe for users. So they start avoiding any payments on iPhone. Apple…

This will not happen as long as Apple's cut percentage is lower than the percentage of users that will give up or not download the app when asked for their credit card in-app.

Obviously any reasonable Apple's cut will satisfy this requirement.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#95

Post by dia80 »

deergomoo wrote: post #28
wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything I’ve been following this case and the only thing I can conclude is that their executives genuinely believe that Apple is responsible for all commerce that happens on an iPhone. It’s bordering on delusion. Without third party developers the iPhone would be nothing by now.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

- Upton Sinclair

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#96

Post by fartcannon »

tomp wrote: post #40
Hamuko wrote: post #2

Tim Cook's line of argument seemed a bit weird to me. On one hand he's saying that he doesn't know if Apple's customers would be able to distinguish between Apple's good and holy curated store and Epic's filthy shitheap of porn and blackjack, but he's also saying that Apple's customers definitely want Apple's App Store as-is. > Lawyer says, “if people really value Apple’s curation and Apple’s App Store, even if there…

You're making Tim Cook sound stupid and/or evil, but he does have a point. > If customers really value real, safe drugs, even if there's multiple drug suppliers (some offering fake, unsafe drugs), people should still go to a pharmacy? > It seems like a decision that they shouldn't have to make. > Will people not be able to distinguish between safe drugs and fake unsafe drugs? > They've never had to do it before.

Pretending to be ignorant of what is obvious to hold onto your power/money is pretty close to evil. If he believes customers genuinely value his curated app store, let him show us.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#97

Post by dan-robertson »

celsoazevedo wrote: post #55
jrsj wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because my grandma is clueless and I give her an iPhone so she doesn’t install malware like she managed to on her Android phone

It's weird that a clueless person was able to download and install a malware apk when by default Android forces you to go to your settings and allow apps to install other apps (the behaviour has changed over the years, but you always need to do something). Not to mention that Google Play Protect scans your apps and warns you if it finds something sketchy. In any case and as much as I like my own clueless grandma, I d…

What’s your argument here, that the GP is lying or that their grandmother wanted the malware or something else?

I find it very easy to believe that some malware vendor managed to trick someone into enabling things in settings. I would also believe that malware was just sitting in the play store[1] and available to install the normal way.

[1] same goes for the App Store.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#98

Post by maxsilver »

duped wrote: post #75
deergomoo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything I’ve been following this case and the only thing I can conclude is that their executives genuinely believe that Apple is responsible for all commerce that happens on an iPhone. It’s bordering on delusion. Without third party developers the iPhone would be nothing by now.

I don't think they believe that so much they believe they can skim off the top of certain areas of commerce on iOS. If they did it with bank transactions, Apple Pay, Venmo, Robinhood, etc then people would be up in arms.

> If they did it with bank transactions, Apple Pay, Venmo, Robinhood, etc then people would be up in arms.

Would they? Don't they literally already do this too?

Isn't Apple Card https://www.apple.com/apple-card/ them literally skimming off the top of every financial transaction, despite them doing nothing but provide a branded whitelabeled Goldman Sachs Mastercard? (admittedly, a very pretty fancy card)

I don't think the general population will ever be terribly up in arms with Apple's behaviour anymore, so long as Apple keeps forcing other businesses to hide Apple's taxes/fees/cuts for them.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#99

Post by easton »

candiddevmike wrote: post #93
slver wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple lags behind Chrome in some features which curiously directly benefit Google. It's not slow, it's not broken. It's a great mobile browser. So stick to reality and not bunch of made up "what ifs".

PWAs and web based push notifications only benefit Google?

I don’t know about “only Google”, but Apple feels that web push in its current form doesn’t benefit the user (at least, how most browsers currently implement it where every page can ask you for notification privileges). They could gate the functionality behind PWA install, but right now they don’t.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#100

Post by dec0dedab0de »

pseingatl wrote: post #89

Apple's lawyers screwed up, big time. It is unimaginable that a party to a lawsuit would tell the judge, "You and I have a different view." OMG. Better go in the hall right there and then, Timmy, because the person holding the "different view" is deciding your case. There are dozens of other ways to get your point across without openly disagreeing with the judge. Apple is toast.

There are dozens of other ways to get your point across without openly disagreeing with the judge. Apple is toast.

That's only true if the judge is petty and unprofessional. Sure, judges are people, and people could always give into emotions. Though I think that's a pretty big leap to say they are "toast" for disagreeing.

Post reply on HN