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

Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 389 posts

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#111

Post by spacedcowboy »

chmod775 wrote: post #25
jerjerjer wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look at how snubbing developers has worked out for the Apple Vision Pro. I think it's mostly the lack of users. Apple snubs mobile developers all the time, but since they gate access to a large chunk of well-paying customers, developers are ready to jump through any hoops. If there were millions of Apple Vision Pro users I'm sure the developers would have followed, but it's of course a chicken and egg situation con…

What killed the Vision Pro is the complete lack of support for the two main things people use VR for. Productivity is a distant third behind the likes of VR Chat and pornography. If Apple managed to capture only 1% of VR Chat's monthly userbase, they would've tripled their pathetic sales numbers. Apple tried to focus on productivity and some light entertainment and didn't even throw the other two a bone by supporting…

I bought the AVP for one thing only - long haul flights. It makes the experience completely and utterly different, and it's less than the cost of a business seat.

It "works for me".

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#112

Post by wtallis »

tomp wrote: post #92
nostromo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want Apple to protect me from app developers. For me, it’s a feature not a bug. I want them to prevent social media companies from tracking my device across my other apps. I want them to integrate billing so I can easily cancel subscriptions or get refunds. I want them to require Oauth that allows me to keep my email private from app developers. These features make my customer experience better not worse. I’m sorry…

All those are awesome features, and I use them all the time. But that's no reason to prevent them from being opt-out. It should be possible to not use OAuth, integrated billing, social media tracking etc.

If privacy or security protections are opt-out, Facebook, et al. will try to use any leverage they can to push their users to opt out. There's real value in a platform that doesn't give Facebook, et al. that opportunity. There are also obvious downsides; it's a tradeoff that might not be right for you but definitely isn't one-sided.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#113

Post by layer8 »

behnamoh wrote: post #90
philistine wrote: post #21

Tim Cook has overstayed his welcome. He should have left years ago at this point. That plus the fact that all his successors are built on the same nondescript mold he came out of, does not bode well for the strategic vision of Apple.

> Tim Cook has overstayed his welcome. This isn't the first time an influential leader (like Jobs) chooses the next leader only for everyone to realize the next person isn't a "leader" type, but rather someone who was put in charge to maintain the status quo, not tarnish the previous leader's legacy, and not come up with crazy new ideas.

It doesn't look to have achieved those goals this time around.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#114

Post by spacedcowboy »

rideontime wrote: post #89
vessenes wrote: post #79

In the words of a trial lawyer friend of mine, “Nobody in the history of the world has said, ‘You know what? The judge was right; I was an asshole.’ Definitely some of those vibes there. I’ve generally been on team apple for this case, and as Gruber notes, they largely won the case. Dunking on their power to set other contractual fees seems to have come back to bite them. That said, as a user, I strongly prefer to us…

I'm unable to find where Gruber says that Apple "largely won" (not that I would be surprised to see Gruber making such a claim). His latest headline literally begins with "Apple lost." Where are you seeing that?

It's in the text of his blog entry. Right there. In black and white. Word for word.

Keep in mind this whole thing stems from an injunction from a lawsuit filed by Epic Games that Apple largely won. - emphasis his.

And he's right, Epic "largely lost" that case, Apple only needed to concede the minimal things they didn't win and it would have been an epic win (as opposed to an Epic win) for them. Sweeney didn't get much of what he wanted, Apple mostly got everything they wanted.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#115

Post by yndoendo »

rideontime wrote: post #99
wtallis wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From https://daringfireball.net/2025/04/gonzales_rogers_apple_app... > Keep in mind this whole thing stems from an injunction from a lawsuit filed by Epic Games that Apple largely won . The result of that lawsuit was basically, “ OK, Apple wins, Epic loses, but this whole thing where apps in the App Store aren’t allowed to inform users of offers available outside the App Store, or send them to such offers on the web…

I don't buy into the analogy. Cable providers can't prevent you from watching free OTA channels on your television, but Apple prevents Epic from publishing iOS apps outside of the App Store. Considering Fortnite was removed from the App Store specifically due to offering outside payment options, denying its return will likely lead straight back to court.

[flagged]

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#116

Post by test6554 »

torben-friis wrote: post #7

>Internally, Phillip Schiller had advocated that Apple comply with the Injunction, but Tim Cook ignored Schiller and instead allowed Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri and his finance team to convince him otherwise. Cook chose poorly. The real evidence, detailed herein, more than meets the clear and convincing standard to find a violation. Judging by tech, apple is right now in deep water due to the failure of deli…

Apple might still appeal to a higher court and lean heavily on that donation to Trump for legal support. They as much as said they would appeal the decision.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#117

Post by bee_rider »

jofla_net wrote: post #95
joezydeco wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In 2013 i met a very close friend of Steve Jobs and i remember saying "there's one thing i absolutely have to know, it's really important to me" he responds "okay what is it?" I ask "what was all the money for?!" puzzled "what do you mean?" "Steve Jobs saved up like 200 billion dollars in cash at Apple, but what was it all for? what was the plan? was he going to buy AT&T? was he going to build his own telecom or mak…

Totally believable. My grandmother lived though the great depression, wherein she was lucky to get an Orange at christmas. The last few decades of her life she basically was a food hoarder, pantries overflowing with canned goods, and a freezer where you never saw the back.

When I was a kid I did odd jobs, and one of the odd jobs was cleaning out a semi-hoarder’s house after he’d passed away (iirc he’d lived through the Great Depression). Not like you see on TV, with the heaps and heaps of garbage. Maybe like your grandmother, tons of… basically well organized supplies and stuff.

I dunno. Toilet paper, some canned goods, lighters, I guess that stuff all lasts decades if stored properly. Takes up a lot is space, though, and your descendants might have to pay some kid to throw it all away if you don’t use it up in time…

But, some folks wished they were toilet paper hoarders during the pandemic I guess. Wonder what the kids of 2060 will be throwing away as a result of our life-experiences.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#118

Post by cyral »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #12

John Gruber has a good summary of the ruling: https://daringfireball.net/2025/04/gonzales_rogers_apple_app... . My favourite part: "Unlike Mr. Maestri and Mr. Roman, Mr. Schiller sat through the entire underlying trial and actually read the entire 180-page decision. That Messrs. Maestri and Roman did neither, does not shield Apple of its knowledge (actual and constructive) of the Court’s findings."

Great summary. I will add to this:

> Apple’s response: charge a 27 percent commission (again tied to nothing) on off-app purchases, where it had previously charged nothing, and extend the commission for a period of seven days after the consumer linked-out of the app.

Not only have they been asking for this, but the link to your external checkout could only be in once place in your app, and could not be part of the payment flow (where else would you put it??)

They also want rights to audit your financials to determine compliance

And this scary popup before going to the external payment page: https://d7ych6cwyfyiba.archive.is/AZrEz/0c8d40ed4a6886240370...

Not sure if such a large font is used anywhere else in iOS

The whole thing was so obviously designed to prevent any developer from seriously considering it, maintaining their anti-competitive advantage. Glad the judge finally had enough.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#119

Post by modeless »

WD-42 wrote: post #50
throwanem wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if I'm buying it as a devkit I'm sure my accountant and I will find a way to write that off, anyway. $3500 isn't quite pocket change, but it is close enough to petty cash. But why do that if there's no users? And even the day-one diehards among my colleagues stopped wanting to be seen in them before long. I think it isn't really chicken-egg, is what I'm saying. Devs were so hot to target iPhone from day one that…

What made the early apps great and viral on iPhone were the indie developers. The ones making flashlight and farting sound boards. They paved the way, and for them $3500 is a lot of money. Who cares if it’s pocket change for google or meta, nobody wants another Facebook app.

$3500 doesn't matter at all for developers. It matters for users. If there are a billion users, devs will pay $3500 for access no problem. But you can't get a billion users for a $3500 product unless it's at least as useful as a car.

Re: Judge rules Apple executive lied under oath, makes criminal contempt referral

#120

Post by MisterTea »

bee_rider wrote: post #117
jofla_net wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally believable. My grandmother lived though the great depression, wherein she was lucky to get an Orange at christmas. The last few decades of her life she basically was a food hoarder, pantries overflowing with canned goods, and a freezer where you never saw the back.

When I was a kid I did odd jobs, and one of the odd jobs was cleaning out a semi-hoarder’s house after he’d passed away (iirc he’d lived through the Great Depression). Not like you see on TV, with the heaps and heaps of garbage. Maybe like your grandmother, tons of… basically well organized supplies and stuff. I dunno. Toilet paper, some canned goods, lighters, I guess that stuff all lasts decades if stored properly.…

> Wonder what the kids of 2060 will be throwing away as a result of our life-experiences.

Likely old computers that could do anything the user wanted.

Post reply on HN