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

581–590 of 903 posts

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

#581

Post by j16sdiz »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #499
aussieshibe wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? I heard an argument like this a lot at the start of discussions about whether we should be able to choose to WFH in the longer term. "I don't want to WFH because..." Ok, sure, but nobody is trying to force you to. It might just be me, and I'll de…

> Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? You can always Jailbreak your device? I think Apples response to your argument would be that it isn't the technically aware user that is trying to get control over their device that is the problem, its apps being used by those with no technical…

> You can always Jailbreak your device?

Jailbreak use security exploits. I guess I want them fixed.

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

#582

Post by lelanthran »

cafed00d wrote: post #182
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 want the option to control my devices. Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_? Doesn't Linux and the plethora of devices it supports give you this already? I ask as a willful customer who prefers the complete control Apple provides. I never have to think about "porn" or "bitcoin scam" or "upsells from parent's bank" or any other crap from being easily accessible on my kids' or elderly parent's devices. Even Ste…

> Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_?

We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption?

No, seriously, why are car manufacturers forced to allow owners the option of non-manufacturer fuel, non-manufacturer tires, non-manufacturer oil and so on, but when it comes to phones, suddenly "the consumers are making an informed choice"?

We regulate this shit for a reason, and that reason is that market forces alone are not enough to protect the consumer.

Your thoughts on it are irrelevant.

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

#583

Post by KaiserPro »

The problem here is that there are competing wrongs.

1) apple taking 30% of everything is just plain greed.

2) Musk is being a prick.

It's possible to have a subscription on the iphone and not pay 30%. It requires extra steps.

The other issue is that musk almost certainly wants to do dodgy stuff with the payment processor because he's been stung hard by chargebacks from the Blue cockup.

The best outcome for me personally is that apple boots them off the store, musk takes them to court and goes bankrupt in the process. By whichtime Apple (and google) will be balls deep in an anti-trust suit for the appstore/advertising power grab. (bonus points for the EU nailing them for hoovering up personal data like 2013 facebook)

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

#584

Post by bayindirh »

saiya-jin wrote: post #576
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…

Can't agree on this. Also on Samsung, S22 ultra, I can't be bothered with any deep app settings because why would I do that? Device runs flawlessly, doesn't bother me with anything, has great battery life (and photos). On the other hand, my wife bought iphone 13 mini after being whole life on android and its a proper shitfest form her point of view - basic settings simply NOT possible by OS because Apple decided they…

Well, if the Android ecosystem is serving you well, and the devices you have are functioning the way you expect, more power to you. I'm not a person who takes hard sides, but support whatever works for people. There's plenty of evidence that Android fulfills needs of a lot of people, so let it be (except they're trying to replace Linux with Fuchsia in a relatively unethical way to lock down the devices even more than Apple, but let's not digress).

> ...its a proper shitfest form her point of view

You know what? That's perfectly OK in my book. Android and iOS are backwards with respect to each other, and they are built on different default modes of operation. However, I'll never call Android like that as an iOS user.

> basic settings simply NOT possible by OS because Apple decided they know better than users what users want and users have no say

Well, again this is a subjective view. I used many things before an iPhone. Android, Palm, Windows CE Casiopeia, Windows Mobile to name a few.

People think PalmOS is dead, but it's very well alive and its name is iOS. Basic iOS mode of operation is a direct descendant of PalmOS, and evolved from there. When looked from that point of view, it's a perfectly capable device which provides all the settings I want. Again, it might not be providing what you or your wife's expecting, and that's OK. This is why we have choices, and I support that.

> The whole device can be summarized as 'basic for very premium price' - it looks very cheap, works cheap, not a single fancy or cool thing on it.

Well, again it depends on your view. Considering I can do anything I need on it, short of conquering the world (which I'm gonna publish an app for that), I don't call it a basic tool. It might not be as open as an Android system (for things which I call fancy, you need to root that system too), but seriously, calling it "incapable and basic" is inaccurate and laughable.

> Apple is just another amoral non-privacy corporation just like the rest of bunch despite their hard efforts at marketing...

Apple is just another company, which earns money in different ways. Just to be clear, I don't see them anything extraordinary.

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

#585

Post by madeofpalk »

scarface74 wrote: post #542
piva00 wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should Apple be allowed to have a competitor in the same space without paying the 30% Apple tax on top then? That's anti-trust 101.

So should we also stop console makers from having first party games? Stop stores from selling store brands?

Actually, maybe yeah!

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

#586

Post by makeitdouble »

veilrap wrote: post #74
adam_arthur wrote: post #2

It's pretty obvious that legislation or anti-trust action will come that opens up mobile computing platforms. Considering the whole of a large market share mobile computing OS a private market, and not subject to competitive pressures, leads to monopolistic capture similar to what utilities could achieve without regulation. Why not just move to another neighborhood if you don't like your electric bill? Well then you'…

The restricted App Store does add customer value, and that customer value is degraded if there are other App Stores available. Namely - if a user buys Apple products because they want the security/curation/whatever that comes with Apple's walled garden, that advantage is broken by forcing Apple to have other app stores on their platform because now that user cannot get all the content through their trusted source as…

Supposing some users get maximum value from the App Store exactly as it is now, with all its quirks and limitations: you'll understand that other users get less value from the App Store, and are still stuck there because Google is also not willing to provide them with an App Store that helps them.

On one hand you have some happy users and a happy Apple, on the other hand a flurry of penalized users with nowhere to go (we should coin a phrase, like "the year of --linux-- alternative stores on smartphones") and angry service providers.

Up until now US regulators sided with Apple to protect its money, I don't expect EU regulators to be as kind.

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

#587

Post by motoxpro »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #561
MrScruff wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My parents use a Mac, it’s still occasionally a hostile environment for them. The iPhone has vastly more users, who are installing many more apps. People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac!

>People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac! Maybe users should be more mindful and more educated on the pros and cons of dumping their entire private lives in the devices they don't control and are instead controlled by publicly listed trillion dollar corporations who's sole purpose is revenue growth and shareholder ROI. Just a thought.

I don't like this argument. It's like saying everyone should be a race car driver because they drive to the grocery store. Tech for most people is like the sidewalk, it's just a means to an end. Also, the more control you have, the more dangerous the device. i.e. a race car. An iPhone is a Honda Civic and I hope it stays that way.

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

#588

Post by madeofpalk »

scarface74 wrote: post #540
madeofpalk wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can take him completely seriously: he just wants to be able to sign up paying users on iPhone without handing 30% to Apple. I don’t think that’s particularly opaque.

He can. Users can go to Spotify.com in any browser and they can even make it easy by supporting Apple Pay. Apple Pay charges standard credit card processing fees of around 2% as opposed to in all purchases.

Until very recently, when courts forced Apple to allow it, Apple prevent developers from event mentioning that a website exists where there's a cheaper option to sign up.

Apple has rules, and that's "fine". But they also have rules about the rules that disallow developers from explaining the rules to users. That doesn't sit right with me.

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

#589

Post by bayindirh »

nobrains wrote: post #553
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…

Ok then, for you, do not enable that option. What am I missing?

> What am I missing?

The part that I'm not telling that my choice shall be default for everyone, which I repeated numerous times in this thread.

Apple decides to add a switch to convert iOS to macOS levels of freedom? Fine. Apple enables sideloading? Fine, I'll applaud even.

The thing is I'm not pro-"Apple's current stance". I'm pro-choice, but what I get today is satisfying my needs. If we can satisfy more users' need with one device (regardless of manufacturer), we should do that, and I support that.

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

#590

Post by askvictor »

llukas wrote: post #307
askvictor wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do (and Windows on the older x86 based devices), but since the move to Apple Silicon, combined with a lack of availability of the specs, it becomes harder and harder. But OP is talking primarily about iOS, where it is impossible to run Linux (or any other OS)

What becomes harder and harder? Asahi seems to do just fine and has good pace with adding feature support. https://asahilinux.org/ M2 is similar to M1 so it is easier as there is less HW combinations in the wild.

It becomes harder every time apple makes a change to something. GPU, bootloader, some secondary processor in charge or some obscure but surprisingly important thing. The whole thing is dependent on Apple deciding not to disallow it for now.
Post reply on HN