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

Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 903 posts

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#441

Post by trap_goes_hot »

dmitrygr wrote: post #11
donmcronald wrote: post #5

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!

Making Apple the cop to fight your fights is not going to solve anything, nor teach anyone anything about privacy. Its the milk bottle that will keep people pacified sucking at the teat of a corporation, while the executives line their pockets setting up a toll booth on the app store.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#442

Post by etchalon »

root_axis wrote: post #406
etchalon wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how the customer wouldn't belong to Apple. I can't go into McDonald's and order a Whopper. McDonald's owns me, so long as I'm in their store. If I want a Whopper, I have to go to Burger King. "But Burger King is farther away, and thus, McDonald's has a monopoly on that customer" is a weird argument.

That analogy makes no sense. An iPhone isn't a restaurant. If Apple is McDonalds and Google is Burger King, who does Epic, Spotify, or Twitter correspond to in the analogy?

Make it literally any store, then. Target, Costco, Walmart, etc.

You can't walk into Target, demand they carry your product, refuse to pay them a fee for doing so, while claiming Target has a "monopoly" on their customer because the customer isn't likely to drive across town to another store that does carry your product.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#443

Post by wvenable »

acdha wrote: post #346
wvenable wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it's a tax on software transactions and not simply something rented/charged monthly is kind of the point. And, no, not all software updates were uncommon or charged for before iOS. Windows Update predates iOS by many years. People did pay for development tools but then so do iOS developers for $100 a year. I've personally only paid for dev tools a few times in my life. Developers add value to an ecosyst…

Patches for Windows predate iOS. Free upgrades to major versions do not. I’m not entirely sure it’s worth it but it sure seems like most people accept this bargain since it’s become standard on the most used devices.

They don't have a choice. And most people don't realize that 1/3 of every purchase they make goes directly to Apple.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#444

Post by wvenable »

FPGAhacker wrote: post #433
zarzavat wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two different points in IE’s history. Chrome is like IE in the IE5 era when it was totally dominant and the best browser around. Safari is like IE in the IE7-8 era when it was the worst browser and actively holding back everything else.

That's a load of crap. I use safari for all my browsing with the one exception of using Firefox for read.amazon.com. It's perfectly fine. I'm never working on my computer an thinking, "damnit safari, why can't you just be like chrome/firefox." That never happens. I vastly prefer safari to chrome or Firefox. At work I'll use chrome because some of our web apps only support chrome for whatever reason. But they're garba…

Developers make sure their sites work in Safari. Just like developers made sure that their sites still worked in IE11 for almost a decade. Because it works for you is exactly why it's holding back development.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#445

Post by hnfong »

root_axis wrote: post #406
etchalon wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how the customer wouldn't belong to Apple. I can't go into McDonald's and order a Whopper. McDonald's owns me, so long as I'm in their store. If I want a Whopper, I have to go to Burger King. "But Burger King is farther away, and thus, McDonald's has a monopoly on that customer" is a weird argument.

That analogy makes no sense. An iPhone isn't a restaurant. If Apple is McDonalds and Google is Burger King, who does Epic, Spotify, or Twitter correspond to in the analogy?

The Coca-Cola Company complains about 30% cut from Coke sales...

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#446

Post by wvenable »

judge2020 wrote: post #378
wvenable wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your point. All browsers on iOS use the same underlying technology (Webkit) so the only relevant features between iOS browsers is those other features like password support, tab design, etc.

That's entirely my point. People don't use Chrome on desktop because it uses Blink and V8 - they use it because of the UX and UI decisions, and the same goes for Chrome on iOS.

If a hypothetical real Chrome for iOS existed that -- like this thread is about -- let you run native quality apps with access to features that Safari doesn't allow then people would switch over. Imagine actually getting notifications from your apps!

If they don't like the UI/UX, I'm sure they'd find hypothetical Chromium variant that suits their needs. Eventually browsers without better underlying technology would just cease to exist.

I use Firefox myself but if it stopped keeping up with modern web standards eventually I'd have give it up.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#447

Post by Mikeb85 »

saurik wrote: post #149
marricks wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it the users have two crappy options based on business model: 1) Apple's freedom from inspection: they control your device and their ecosystem because they make money off the ecosystem. The take a cut of the phone/computer/watch you buy then anything you buy in their ecosystem because the ecosystem is their product. Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business. 2) Google…

The big competitor to Apple is Samsung, and Samsung devices tend to be just as locked down as Apple devices (though the prevalence of jailbreaks has been higher, and of course you can sideload apps). Those two companies make up over 75% of smartphones in the US, and neither of their next competitors down (OnePlus and Lenovo) are Google. People talk about Android like it is the "do anything you want device marketed at…

> The big competitor to Apple is Samsung, and Samsung devices tend to be just as locked down as Apple devices

Please, you can sideload apps by selecting a single option... Not to mention you have all the options to make alternative apps default like any Google device.

That alone is significantly more open than Apple devices...

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#448

Post by sschueller »

endisneigh wrote: post #86

Stop buying Apple if you don't like it. Seriously. At the end of the day all of these companies would do the exact same thing as Apple if they were in Apple's position. The real solution to this is improved functionality of web apps and complete migration to those, then you can be free of the duopoly. Other than using phone specific features, why can't all apps run on your desktop, laptop or elsewhere? I'll never get…

I have, however if you are a business you can not avoid apple if you want to access the most lucrative markets. An iOS version of your app is a must.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#449

Post by devmunchies »

sgustard wrote: post #262
donmcronald wrote: post #5

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…

I'll contrast this with my TV. I want a TV that works and displays pictures & sound. Instead my TV is an Android hub with dozens of random apps installed. What it doesn't do half the time is work. Sure, I have "control" but I'd rather have "functional devices!"

I replaced my TV with a large monitor and a mac mini. My remote is a wireless apple mouse and keyboard which we leave on a cutting board on the couch.

The benefit of streaming shows in a browser is that I can slow down all shows for my kids to 85% so they are slightly less stimulating and i NEVER get ads.

The computer also serves as a hub for music, it’s connected to some wireless speakers we can move to another room when playing music.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#450

Post by mleo »

Krasnol wrote: post #438
bayindirh wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand where you are coming from, and support you on that. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with the default state of an iPhone. It just manages itself, and all that hard problems (backups, updates, ease of use, experience homogenity, etc.) are solved. I manage more than enough servers at work, and I don't want to manage another server in my pocket, do nitty-gritty settings, allow selected apps background ac…

I think it is about having an ADDITIONAL option to access things not about taking the "Lock me down, I don't care"-status away.

The unforeseen consequences of the former will break the latter. Schools, Test Proctoring companies, Game companies will "force" users to install the ADDITIONAL option to run whatever is required and then simply extend their reach beyond what is appropriate.
Post reply on HN