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

861–870 of 903 posts

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

#861

Post by heavyset_go »

edgyquant wrote: post #734
saiya-jin wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean browsing web, the freedom I talk about allows you on Android to install Firefox and ublock origin (and other plugins), which is more privacy friendly solution in-the-box than Apple will ever allow to be installed on any Apple device. If you mean apps installed its your choice what you put on your device. Lets not forget the stuff you (and most of us) so loathe is direction Apple is actively heading for fe…

You can install Firefox on an iPhone

Firefox on iOS is just browser chrome on top of Safari's browser engine because Apple bans all other browser and JavaScript engines on iOS.

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

#862

Post by YetAnotherNick »

GeekyBear wrote: post #752
sho_hn wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sibling argument is saying that if side-loading were opt in, major apps would move to require it from users. This has never happened on Android.

> This has never happened on Android. >When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title directly from their website, an effort made to avoid the substantial revenue cuts that Google takes from in-app purchases of Play Store downloads. At the time, the move was understandable for Epic, which was sitting on the hottest free-to-pla…

For me, it's not about companies right but individuals rights. If I paid money for a device and if I am willing to let go of warranty and updates, I should be free to do whatever I wish with it. I don't think this statement should be as controversial as people make it to be.

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

#863

Post by z3phyr »

dublinben wrote: post #811
z3phyr wrote: post #676

In the windows world I download the installer for whatever software I need, click next->next->next (or choose where I want my stuff in my filesystem, add it to the path, opt in or out of stuff) and it works out of the box. No stores. (Well there is one, but I guess no one uses that) In the linux world, I mostly look for package managers, or if not, its mostly just ./configure -> make -> make install (or choose my own…

Does software distribution on Windows really "work" for most people though? At best, you've given unlimited, unsandboxed access to everything on your computer to the author of whatever piece of software you've just installed. If you're unsophisticated or unlucky, you've also gotten some spyware or a virus along for a ride. There's a reason why ransomware exists on desktop and server OSes, but not on iOS, and it's bec…

> At best, you've given unlimited, unsandboxed access to everything on your computer to the author of whatever piece of software you've just installed.

That's the risk I take for very good returns and very high quality software. My stack is Visual Studio, Julia, Wolfram Suit, Emacs, Blender, MSYS2, some great video games, compilers for various languages, Firefox, Spotify, SumatraPDF.. I see no reason not to trust any of the authors of these software. And it is logically my decision to trust or distrust, not some helicopter parent company. Right?

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

#864

Post by jonathankoren »

scarface74 wrote: post #805
jonathankoren wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically correct, but no one had these things

The extension to read PC formatted disks came with System 7.

lol. Obviously there’s no monopoly power when the small company has to support the big company, but can’t actually format disks for the big company.

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

#865

Post by squeaky-clean »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #840
carl_dr wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Heck, if I could have a phone with iOS 1 (no third party apps) and the camera and screen of the latest iPhone, I would buy that. Well, you can - just don't install any 3rd party apps?

And people who want a hackable iPhone can jailbreak it or whip out the microscopic soldering iron. I basically don't install 3rd party apps but I want it enforced at the OS level. If even 5% of iPhone users were unable to install apps companies would think twice about ruining their website in order to force their mobile app on users.

Would appreciate if the drive-by downvoters actually left a comment. It's a discussion, not an "I don't like your opinion" button.

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

#866

Post by aussieshibe »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #858
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? I don’t want Apple to allow app-makers the freedom to provide apps that are anti-user. In practice, it seems to bethe lesser evil. I remember when Apple allowed Uber to give users the location preferences of “always” and “never,” before they req…

I'm not suggesting giving app developers greater control, but users. I agree that letting app developers demand whatever permissions they want will lead to stopwatch apps which always require precise location.

If I want the option to shut off Apple's controls and sideload a bunch of malware, that doesn't have to affect users who don't want to do that (assuming this option is gated behind some sufficiently stern warnings about the consequences). That Apple doesn't allow that has far less to do with protecting users than it does protecting their bottom line.

Having said that, Apple making these kinds of decisions for business reasons is (IMHO) a perfectly valid and logical way to operate. I'd just prefer we didn't pretend they're making this decision because allowing users to take more control over their devices is necessarily dangerous. That excuse has more holes than a slice of this fine Gorgombert.

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

#867

Post by kaashif »

xdennis wrote: post #498
kaashif wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment still doesn't answer the question "Why do you need to ban other people from buying them?" I think it's a good question that deserves an answer.

Because it's anti-competitive. Society is advanced when companies have to compete and not just collect taxes from other companies who are trying to do something. The Apple tax is not advancing anything. It's just a stranglehold on innovation promoted with FUD about how running programs is insecure despite the fact that this isn't applied to desktop/laptop computers.

If it's such a stranglehold on innovation, Android will out-innovate and outcompete iOS.

Or maybe Apple provides a platform that some users and businesses still find it worth paying for.

You're arguing for the government to ban products you don't like when you can just buy something else.

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

#868

Post by dzikimarian »

shuckles wrote: post #838
dzikimarian wrote: post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>without pre-installed garbage Like Apple Music? Each phone vendor including Apple does this to some extent. On Android you at least have some options (I had a few of them all were very close to stock), and usually you can disable these apps if there are any.

Comparing the system Music app which has existed since iOS 1.0 with an optional music streaming service that can be disabled as “equivalently bad” as carrier bloatware pretty much undermines your point entirely.

Honestly where I live, we usually don't buy phones from carriers(as far as I know it's not that common outside US - you guys seem to have outrageously expensive plans due to that), so I'm comparing to what manufacturers install.

Worst I had to deal with was shortcut to OnePlus community forum, which is arguably less offensive than Apple Music, which is often reported to bind to the Bluetooth play button.

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

#869

Post by notpushkin »

Aldo_MX wrote: post #753
notpushkin wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could have the open source microG and miss out only on Google Pay (and some bank apps that wanna validate SafetyNet for some reason). If you disable FCM / push notification support, your phone won't even need to interact with Google servers at all.

How do I install that microG thing in a Huawei Mate 50? Oh wait, I can't.

Tough luck! That said, Huawei phones don't siphon your information to Google (of course they leak it to Huawei instead :-)

---

If you want to install microG super easy and are still choosing your next phone, get one supported by LineageOS: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

Then instead of the official LineageOS build, get one from here with microG preinstalled: https://download.lineage.microg.org/

For low budget folks, a lot of Xiaomi phones are supported. You'll have to sign up for their account and wait for a few days, but otherwise the process is pretty straightforward. E. g. this is for my current phone: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/ginkgo/install

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

#870

Post by maccard »

flohofwoe wrote: post #777
maccard wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure there is. It's fragmentation, and it's not a choice. I can't buy my favourite Unisoft game and play it with my friends in steam, instead I'm forced to download uplay or the epic launcher. That's not a choice, and it's no better than being forced to use steam in the first place.

These are all business decisions by Valve, Ubisoft, Epic, etc... if it's too much of a hassle for me to play Ubisoft games, then Ubisoft has lost me as a customer, it's very simple (apart from that, Ubisoft has returned to Steam a long time ago: https://store.steampowered.com/publisher/Ubisoft ) But none of this is Microsoft's business. That's the important part.

So it's ok for it to be one companies choice but not another company? As a consumer it's not a meaningful choice if I have to use their platform, and I'd rather have the situation where the platform holder enforces consistency - they're not perfect but I know that having a Google account with Google Pay is enough to get me into 98+% of applications on android, and I'm not worried about having to _phone_ someone to cancel a subscription (looking at you NY times)
Post reply on HN