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

Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

techradar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 344 posts

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#91

Post by brookst »

8note wrote: post #40
_kbh_ wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The steam deck is a way different value proposition compared to consoles though, console manufacturers take a loss for initial consoles sold until they can bring costs. Whereas the steam deck has likely been sold as a profit from day one.

This is why the steam deck is a good example? The console doesn't have to be sold at a loss in order to sell games. It would be better overall for competition for the games to be decoupled from the console. Same as with phone apps

You’ve made a fair point and that’s a reasonable opinion, but do you think it should be outright illegal for console makers to use a business model of consoles at cost, profits made on a share of game sales?

Because that was Epic’s end game.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#92

Post by zamnos »

jerry80 wrote: post #49
crazygringo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find anything online to support that. Everything I find says that to be illegal, something must be against the law, and that a contract is not law, so the word "illegal" doesn't apply to breach of contract because it's private. There is a difference between illegality and criminality however -- e.g. breaking the speed limit is illegal but it doesn't reach criminal, as one source uses as an example.

Actually, speeding is criminal in many states.

Almost all states have drinking and driving (DUI/DWI) as misdemeanors and it's a misdemeanor federally.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#93

Post by brookst »

smoldesu wrote: post #86
pb7 wrote: post #78

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.

Are you really complaining that the luxury store is declining to accept a cut of drug dealers’ profits for letting them operate on the doorstep?

Epic can be as skeezy as they want. Apple can be as prudish as they want. I can imagine disliking both, but I just can’t grok cheering for skeeze.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#94

Post by chrisshroba »

crazygringo wrote: post #51

Can someone remind me why Apple is so anti-VM in seemingly every instance? It just seems so arbitrary and unhelpful, and I have a hard time imagining that the amount of hardware purchased it forces outweigh the benefits from making macOS/iOS better platforms for development and computation. It just seems like such an odd stance to take.

One guess: if macOS could be virtualized, it would be even easier to run things like Messages, FaceTime, and Photos on non-Apple hardware, which reduces some of the lock-in effect that keeps people from leaving the ecosystem (i.e. Green Bubble Effect)

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#95

Post by thfuran »

cwp wrote: post #77
hackernewds wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The saddest event this generation is Epic vs Apple going in favor of Apple. It's tough to imagine Apple weren't a monolopy enforcing monopolistic policies.

I wanted Epic to win too, but c'mon, 57% market share is not a monopoly.

In the UK, that's over twice the minimum threshold for monopoly power.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#96

Post by dexterdog »

jerry80 wrote: post #49
crazygringo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find anything online to support that. Everything I find says that to be illegal, something must be against the law, and that a contract is not law, so the word "illegal" doesn't apply to breach of contract because it's private. There is a difference between illegality and criminality however -- e.g. breaking the speed limit is illegal but it doesn't reach criminal, as one source uses as an example.

Actually, speeding is criminal in many states.

Name two

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#97

Post by thfuran »

pb7 wrote: post #87
smoldesu wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Doesn't hurt consumers, doesn't matter to government. Simple as. Apple is allowed to make money off the platform they built. Developers knew the terms before they started developing for it - the terms haven't changed since their inception and match other similar platforms - but each one knows they get more value out of Apple than vice versa. I have no sympathy for them anymore after I have been deleting more and more…

Alrighty then, kindly send me money amounting to 25% of your annual expenses. I'm told such fees are harmless.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#98

Post by usernew »

dragonwriter wrote: post #50
crazygringo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find anything online to support that. Everything I find says that to be illegal, something must be against the law, and that a contract is not law, so the word "illegal" doesn't apply to breach of contract because it's private. There is a difference between illegality and criminality however -- e.g. breaking the speed limit is illegal but it doesn't reach criminal, as one source uses as an example.

> Everything I find says that to be illegal, something must be against the law. A breach of contract is against, and has remedies provided under, the law of contracts.. > A contract is not law No, but the law of contracts is law.

"contracts" is civil law. to be illegal it would have to be criminal law. defamation is legal. it's a tort, you can get sued for it and lose. in civil court.

there is contract law, but breaking contract law is not illegal. a tort for example, is a tort, not a crime.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#99

Post by pb7 »

thfuran wrote: post #95
cwp wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted Epic to win too, but c'mon, 57% market share is not a monopoly.

In the UK, that's over twice the minimum threshold for monopoly power.

"Monopoly power" is not a monopoly and in the UK, public schools are actually private schools, so maybe we shouldn't compare terminology across countries.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#100

Post by withinrafael »

musicale wrote: post #52
crazygringo wrote: post #51

Can someone remind me why Apple is so anti-VM in seemingly every instance? It just seems so arbitrary and unhelpful, and I have a hard time imagining that the amount of hardware purchased it forces outweigh the benefits from making macOS/iOS better platforms for development and computation. It just seems like such an odd stance to take.

Apple is not anti-VM. It is anti VM-on-non-Apple-hardware. ;-) Presumably they have determined that lost hardware sales would offset any increased app or service sales from allowing VMs on non-Apple hardware. Though I don't actually know what platform macOS and iOS VMs run on in GitHub Actions and Azure pipelines. Edit: apparently Azure pipelines uses Mac pros. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/pipelines…

GitHub uses macOS VMs as part of some agreement under NDA (that supercedes the terms outlined in the EULA).

See previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29419610

Post reply on HN