21–30 of 903 posts
All talk and no substance, this thing won't go anywhere. Elon probably got what he wanted from Apple and everything else is just fud for the masses. Elon does not care the 30% or what Apple does in China. He wants Twitter to stay in the app store and Apple to pay for advertising on Twitter.
No substance, same arguments repeated from both sides all the time. Seems like a stalemate. I see to ways out for a company that feels it’s getting ripped of by Apple: 1. Don’t publish in App Store, do a web app or encourage your customers to get a different platform device. Not sure which one since Google Play Store AFAIK has the same rules. 2. Charge users +30% more when buying through IAP if same is offered any pl…
I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…
The car industry already has subscription services; Volvo, Porsche, Jaguar/Land Rover, Genesis, Nissan, all have subscription plans. Don't like those? Go down to most car dealers and you can get a short term subscription called a lease... Funny how the world hasn't ended because of this. Just go buy an Android phone if you don't like Apple's walled garden.
The manufacturers are all going to start locking features behind subscriptions. Things like heated seats, navigation, phone integration, performance, etc. will be premium features with a monthly fee. You may even pay extra for better audio or things like that. If enough people tolerate it, you may even end up with subscriptions for things like the sunroof.
Once all of that is in place, they'll include X years of subscriptions in a new vehicle, so the first owner doesn't really notice the increased cost if they get another new vehicle after X years.
As a secondhand buyer, I have to pay a non-discounted subscription for (ex) heated seats if I want that feature. The value of the heated seats won't depreciate alongside the car like it does now. If anything, the cost will go up.
That means the resale value of the car for the original owner is lower. They're selling something closer to a base model, even if they had all the premium features unlocked while they owned the car.
On the dealer side, they'll make it attractive for the original owner to trade in for a new car and it'll likely be by adding some incentives that revolve around the subscriptions because they don't really cost anything to activate, but they have a lot of value to the vehicle owner.
That will have the effect of consolidating used car sales to major dealers who can offer better value with less cost than 3rd party or private (used) sellers because they can add value via subscription incentives with (near) $0 cost.
The total cost of owning a vehicle is going to increase significantly in the next decade and a huge part of that is going to be done by leveraging post-sales subscriptions to damage / monopolize the secondhand market.
Elon just tweeted from Apple HQ and is meeting with Tim Cook. Elon also deleted the tweet meme that he's going to war over the 30%. All talk and no substance, this thing won't go anywhere. Elon probably got what he wanted from Apple and everything else is just fud for the masses. Elon does not care the 30% or what Apple does in China. He wants Twitter to stay in the app store and Apple to pay for advertising on Twitt…
You can’t win a fight with Tim. E-lawn should have consulted with Zuck first. He did something similar and we all know how it ended for Meta.
Most probably Elon is getting schooled, spanked, and hopefully not dragged around in that beautiful Apple park.
Elon just tweeted from Apple HQ and is meeting with Tim Cook. Elon also deleted the tweet meme that he's going to war over the 30%. All talk and no substance, this thing won't go anywhere. Elon probably got what he wanted from Apple and everything else is just fud for the masses. Elon does not care the 30% or what Apple does in China. He wants Twitter to stay in the app store and Apple to pay for advertising on Twitt…
> Apple to pay for advertising on Twitter You can’t win a fight with Tim. E-lawn should have consulted with Zuck first. He did something similar and we all know how it ended for Meta. Most probably Elon is getting schooled, spanked, and hopefully not dragged around in that beautiful Apple park.
I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…
> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!
I think the way things would shake out is that most app developers would want to have their app in as many stores as possible. Combine that with stores competing to have the largest app selection and you have a much healthier market. Having app stores compete for developers and users would be amazing for everyone except the current app store owners.
I don't think we should avoid demanding a better market for developers and users just because there are a couple of companies like Facebook that might try to abuse their market position to popularize their own app store.
Sharecroppers complaining that the land baron has stacked the deck in his own favour. Spotify and Twitter began life on the web, not in the app store. No feature they offer requires a native app. Hence there was no reason to corral half the US userbase into someone else's pen and leave them there for over a decade. Epic has already gone to court on this matter (re: Fortnite on App Store) and lost. And Fortnite wasn't…
Maybe not Twitter, but I don't see how Spotify's offline downloads would work through the iOS browser. Also, Spotify started as a native desktop app. The web player and full transition to electron wasn't until a couple of years later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse. The core idea is choice.
Quoted post unavailable.
Apple isn't some altruist protecting you from Facebook. The most likely scenario is that Apple wants to be the sole owner of your data so they can sell it instead of Facebook selling it. I bet Apple's ad business grows substantially over the next 5 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing about that article actually describes any harm done. It's often called the Golden Age of Hollywood, and many of the greatest movies of all time were made under the studio system. It's not even clear that the collusion increased ticket prices. Recently, in fact, the decrees have been reversed. Studios are allowed to own movie theaters again. I'm just curious why you picked that one. There are many better cases…
I pick that one because there's always arguments that Apple is not a monopoly (just switch to Android) therefore other examples of dangers of monopolies don't apply. The studio system was multiple oligopolies and not a monopoly. I think it parallels the current smartphone app market more. The decrees were reversed because they served their purpose and studios no longer have oligopolies, not because there were new fin…
The case documented that they violated the law, to be sure. There was certainly the potential for harm. But how much harm was actually done?
As far as I can tell the ones who objected most to the studio system were the actors, not the audiences. It's why the Screen Actors Guild was created; the abuses were well documented.
This case illustrates that an oligopoly can be broken up if it acts as a cartel. Do Apple and Google do that?
Sorry; I don't mean to sound like I'm "Just Asking Questions". I'm not a lawyer, but I am an actor with a bit of understanding of the studio system history so I'm interested in the lessons.