Pay your artists something meaningful on your own platform first!
Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
591–600 of 903 posts
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#592Earlier 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? Next thing that would happen is that every major "can't miss out" app will walk its users through the process to disable safe management features, all to fulfill the promise of showing cute cat gifs. You know that's how it is.
Android has had this from day one(?) and it has never been an issue.
Except the velvet lined iron fist called Google Play Services which gatekeeps the apps from having nice things or not.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#593Earlier 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? Next thing that would happen is that every major "can't miss out" app will walk its users through the process to disable safe management features, all to fulfill the promise of showing cute cat gifs. You know that's how it is.
Then make it a contact that can be opened by removing a screw behind a "non reversible loss of warranty" sticker so that only users who know what they're doing would be motivated to proceed.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#594Musk now says that Tim Cook and Apple never threatened Twitter. Has Musk again violated SEC rules (market manipulation)?
SEC rules don't apply here given there's no market to manipulate given Twitter is private.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#595I 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…
There should be an option for users to opt out of the walled garden.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#596Earlier 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? Next thing that would happen is that every major "can't miss out" app will walk its users through the process to disable safe management features, all to fulfill the promise of showing cute cat gifs. You know that's how it is.
Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction? Locked down is good for you, you don't want freedom, we know better. On hacker forum. Seriously, basically any other topic we can discuss like adults here but when it comes to Apple and their restrictions/bad behavior it feels like the most upvoted posts are paid ones (not stating they are, but it certainly would look like that on more generic fo…
> Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction?
Because the only mobile OS provider which allows blinding tracking frameworks with a single click is Apple currently, and every software vendor will want its telemetry and ads for their "monies".
The application model evolved from "pay this to get that" to "train this AI implicitly which we gonna use against you, and ah, we also sell your every aspect of you" to see cute cat GIFs.
Some of us are seriously against this and Android doesn't provide that. Maybe it's because Google is an advertisement company which provides nice looking (free-ish) utilities which also acts as nice data funnels (incl. Android).
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#597Earlier quoted context omitted.
They aren't "not supporting any other OS", they're causing the hardware to damage itself to prevent that software from working. It's like your laptop's motherboard detected you installed another OS in place of the OEM-provided Windows installation, and overvoltaged your NVidia GPU to burn it out. "We have every right to not support high-performance graphics on any other OS other than our own - if you want to install…
Damaging the hardware is a bit of an overstatement. What people are calling fuses isn't really a fuse in the traditional sense. An eFuse usually is just write once memory. All the limiting features are implemented in software which reads out the state of this memory.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but once the eFuse is triggered (which, if it's write-only memory, still involves a physical change that could be interpreted as damage), it's effectively unfixable without replacing the whole motherboard, reflashing it with your original serial number, IMEI, etc. At least that's what I recall from reading about it - Samsung service can "reset" the Knox lock-out, but they do it by replacing the whole board.
In other words: there's no way for me to just take the phone to my workshop / local hackerspace, and fix it with a soldering iron. Even if I could source the right parts, it's going to be a PITA to make them work. I didn't investigate it further, but I assume that these days, cryptography is used for critical parts to attest each other as genuine (similar to what new iPhones do, which is why you can't just replace the "home" button if it breaks).
Additionally, since I haven't heard of people doing software workarounds, whatever in Knox is reading the state of the eFuse, cannot be trivially patched. I recall reading somewhere that triggering the eFuse somehow overwrites Knox itself - if that's correct, then they may not even be anything left to enable afterwards.
----
I'm going to concede here that my example was somewhat hyperbolic - burning a single eFuse isn't the same as overvolting the whole GPU. But only somewhat - the reasoning/intent behind the two cases is the same. Additionally, cryptography blurs the line between what's hardware damage and what's a software limitation. Take, for example, secure erasure of data: you can smash a hard drive with a sledgehammer and then microwave the remains to slag, but you can get the same result by keeping the data encrypted, and then... losing the keys.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#598Spotify is 100% right about Apple's fees being extortionate. On the other hand, Elon is such a loathsome human being that I can't respect anyone signal-boosting him. Stop giving him attention, he is absolutely addicted to it.
Spotify hasn’t allowed in app purchases on iOS for years.
That makes this doubly obnoxious on Spotify’s part, then. The media needs to stop giving Elon so much neutral/positive coverage, but someone as rich as Elon is surely paying for a lot of favorable coverage…
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#599Stop 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…
Governments have a responsibility to protect consumers from anti-competitive practices. Saying "just don't buy it" isn't enough, in fact if governments only protected people from things that nobody bought, that would be quite pointless.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#600Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like being able to trust my device and my kids device, if you wan't something to hack on get a pinephone or something the reality is that billions of people need to trust their phones with their most personal information, fininaces and lives and apple's policies while sometimes annoying do a lot to build that trust they aren't a big secret and if you don't like it you're free to not buy their products
Apple could still have a "developer" mode you have to jump through a complicated technical process to enable...just like MacOS let's you disable system integrity protection by running a terminal command and rebooting into a boot disk then running another terminal command. It could void support plans so it's not Apple's problem. That wouldn't affect your kids and telling Grandma how to do that over the phone is very d…
I've told this story here before, but "we don't support that" doesn't go nearly as far as you think. When they released the intel macs and boot camp, boot camp came with explicit "we don't support this or problems you have with it". At the time I worked for Apple retail and one of my most memorable customers came in steaming mad. She wanted to return her brand new macbook because it was having all sorts of problems. The sort of problems that shouldn't even be possible on a mac, and the sort of problems that were addressed by a firmware update 6 months earlier. I managed to get her to agree to demonstrate what was going on for me before we did the return and as soon as she booted the computer, it booted right into Windows. It turns out she'd bought her new mac and given it to her "computer guy" nephew to help get it set up. Nephew apparently thought that what she really needed was not a mac, but an expensive windows computer instead. So he installed boot camp, shrunk the mac partition to it's smallest size and then configured the system to boot into Windows by default. As a result, she had a macbook that had been without any recent firmware updates to solve some issues (because firmware updates run through the OS update software, and not in windows) and hadn't even installed an anti-virus software (because "macs don't need it") and so had a number of malware infections going too. From Apple's written perspective, we would have been absolutely within our rights to say "well you've installed boot camp, we don't support that and you need to use macOS instead" and sent the customer on her way and denied the return... and that would have been a shitty customer experience. So we spent some time getting the customer's computer re-configured, moving some of their important info to the mac partition, showing them the new OS, explaining what the heck happened in the first place (which involved explaining to someone who barely knew how to use email what bootcamp was and why a mac running windows isn't really "a mac" in the colloquial sense) and convincing them to give it a try for a while before deciding they wanted to do the return. Now that experience in the end turned that customer into a very good and reliable customer, but it also meant that "we don't support that" was a meaningless boundary. It also meant that the issue wasn't that the customer did this to themselves. They didn't. Someone who understands the implications of developer mode isn't what Apple is concerned with. It's the people who don't understand that, who will never see the "here be dragons" warning because they didn't enter developer mode, their "computer guy" nephew did.
Also, people already gripe about the fact that to "fully unlock" your mac these days, you need to disable SIP, and how that disables some things (but at least not your warranty). Do you really think the same people would be happy with "developer mode but no more warranty" on iPhones? Especially if someone like Epic or Facebook or Google insist that their apps need this unlocked mode and so the only way to use them is to void your warranty?