81–90 of 344 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nvidia? Which apple product had Nvidia in it?
MacBook pros did for awhile until they leaked some detail about an upcoming product and Apple switched vendors.
I only found one article about this from back in 2008. It was definitely a thing back then, I just can't find it.... But indeed likely second fiddle to the gpu issues around the same time, I totally forgot about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not supposed to cheer on companies by picking favorites like with sports team. Epic is on the right side of that particular issue.
No, they're not, and I just showed you why. Epic is a scummy company that employs dark patterns to extract as much money as possible from easily manipulated consumers and Apple kneecaps those strategies on iOS by having control. If Epic got their way, this is what you would have to deal with on iOS too.
If Apple wanted to, they could block bad practices and either allow external processors or charge a pure payment processing fee. Their current actions seem to be more concerned about the fees than the customers.
It's funny how the 30% tax and App Store nonsense automatically makes me want Apple to lose every single court case in perpetuity. Having such a monopoly on a device you purchase really means the legal system needs to take you down a notch.
> 30% tax and App Store nonsense automatically makes me want Apple to lose every single court case in perpetuity We can only hope that alternative app stores on iOS will force Apple to match Google Play's 30% platform fees: https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/16/google-play-drops-commissi...
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/02/apple-shocks-ios...
Now I'd like to be able to legally run MacOS on a virtual machine or on AWS or Azure or Google Cloud or something. I know you can rent a bare metal Apple Mini or something, but Apple's terms of service make this all basically illegal to use like any other VM. That means if I want to develop an app for iOS (beyond just what you can do in Swift Playgrounds), I can't just boot up a VM or AWS instance, I have to either b…
> Now I'd like to be able to legally run MacOS on a virtual machine or on AWS or Azure or Google Cloud or something Azure Pipelines supports macOS 11 and 12. GitHub Actions supports macOS 11, 12, and 13 beta.
It doesn't exactly open the doors for everyone to run iOS in virtual machines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has made billions (upwards of $300m in pure profit) from Fortnite. If you care about Epic's shitty qualities in that aspect (the case you're linking), surely you also care about Apple profiting off that exploitation as well?
Have you read the details of the judgment? Most of the dark patterns Epic used aren't possible on iOS. In fact, the reason they hate Apple's walled garden so much is because they add too much friction to the dark patterns they want to use, notably authentication for subsequent in-app purchases, so I don't know what exploitation profiting you're referring to. Apple protects consumers from shitty companies like Epic ab…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you read the details of the judgment? Most of the dark patterns Epic used aren't possible on iOS. In fact, the reason they hate Apple's walled garden so much is because they add too much friction to the dark patterns they want to use, notably authentication for subsequent in-app purchases, so I don't know what exploitation profiting you're referring to. Apple protects consumers from shitty companies like Epic ab…
You can offer safe payment authorization APIs that protect families without also forcing developers to pay you 27% on every microtransaction. One might even call that good OS design, rather than a subtly hostile pattern of funneling users through a contractually-obligated money siphon they have no control over.
Before anyone jumps to conclusions, all this ruling means is that this example of an iOS virtual machine (for the purpose of security research) counts as fair use. It doesn't exactly open the doors for everyone to run iOS in virtual machines.
> As to count one, we agree that Corellium is shielded by the fair use doctrine. First, Corellium’s virtualization software is transformative—it furthers scientific progress by allowing security research into important operating systems. Second, iOS is functional operating software that falls outside copyright’s core. Third, Corellium didn’t overhelp itself to Apple’s software. And fourth, Corellium’s product does not substantially harm the market for iOS or iOS derivatives—so Apple’s own incentive to innovate remains strong.
The important part here is that it proves Apple does not have the defacto right to claim infringement on iOS. If your emulator is transformative, offers functionality beyond default iOS, doesn't abuse their services and doesn't threaten the iOS market (eg. iPhones) it should be considered lawful. The interpretation is still open on the infringement of their wallpapers, icon and "contributory infringement", but this spells in pretty plain text that emulating iOS is fair game. Put another way, even a company that sells iOS emulators to hackers was found to not be in direct violation of Apple's iOS copyright.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MacBook pros did for awhile until they leaked some detail about an upcoming product and Apple switched vendors.
Can't reply to the child comment, but... I only found one article about this from back in 2008. It was definitely a thing back then, I just can't find it.... But indeed likely second fiddle to the gpu issues around the same time, I totally forgot about that.