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

Apple vs the Law

formularsumo.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#231

Post by fsflover »

bzzzt wrote: post #93
amelius wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm seriously at a loss about why people would support this increasingly developer-hostile ecosystem and essentially work towards their own demise and perhaps even the rest of their profession. I'd suggest switching to a different source of income while you still can, even if only out of self-respect.

Because most people are not developers? Between ad-infested Google, enshittified Microsoft and still not ready for the desktop Linux the Apple ecosystem might be the most accessible and easy to use platform for most non-technical users. As a developer it's an annoyance but I have to admire the elegance in the way Apple uses their core software and hardware technologies over their entire stack. As a user I don't care…

> still not ready for the desktop Linux

This has been a myth for the last decade. I'm even using GNU/Linux on my smartphone, which is arguably not ready for the average consumer but can be good enough for the HN audience.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#232

Post by pieds »

johndhi wrote: post #189
Y-bar wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then show me the handful of European, medium-sized companies competing for customers. Competing in category chemicals: BASF, Akzo Nobel, Lanxess, Air Liquide, and a bunch others Competing in category engineering: Siemens, Bosch, ABB, Alstom, ThyssenKrupp, Airbus and a bunch others Competing in category metals: Aurubis, Umicore, Norsk Hydro, Gruppo Riva, ThyssenKrupp, and a bunch others Competing in category pharma:…

Where are the software companies that compete with apple though? Wasn't that the question?

No it wasn't. The question was that if regulation creates more competition with Apple what are the markets with this competition?

European companies compete with US companies, including Apple, in areas where there is competition. In music software, music streaming, engineering and finance software, services and so on.

Apple has around 33% smartphone market share in Europe. Where is the US competition? Google at 3%. The actual competition is non-US in Samsung and Xiaomi. You can argue that Google competes with the Play Store, but then there is no competition with the Play Store on Android from the US.

Big US tech companies don't compete with each other as much as one might think. Most of their revenue comes from dominating one area or platform, with little competition from the rest.

So therefor the common conclusion that Europe should be more like the US to have competition also doesn't make sense as the big US tech companies don't have serious direct competition in the US in their core businesses.

You can't compete with the big tech companies by creating a Google with 3% market share in smartphones to compete with Apple, a Walmart with 6% online retail market share to compete with Amazon, or a Microsoft with 4% search engine market share to compete with Google.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#233

Post by bjelkeman-again »

isodev wrote: post #153
FinnLobsien wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite: It actually makes European businesses worth off by continuing to make its regulatory environment so complex only massive companies like big tech or Europe's legacy players have the resources to comply. Add to that feel-good green initiatives like a packaging initiative that might lower packaging waste from European companies, but more likely will just make European goods more expensive and…

> regulatory environment so complex only massive companies like big tech or Europe's legacy players have the resources to comply This is a very inaccurate view. I’ve worked with multiple SMEs and no such “complexities” ever become operational challenges. Even as a indie developer, my compliance is a default provided I’m not trying to do something shady. Looking into the EU regulations, in most cases what they want yo…

In IT it may be the case. In foodtech it is a problem. This may sound reassuring, as we don’t really want much of the stuff being sold in the US here in the EU. But, for new approaches regarding food production the EU regulatory environment is unfortunately a morass. There are lots of regulation which is neither fact or experience based, for example around insects, or ecological labelling.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#234

Post by piva00 »

giingyui wrote: post #206
xandrius wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where would you place it? I'm curious because centre-right is quite spot on.

Socially and economically left wing. Progressive socially and interventionist economically.

I don't think you know what you are actually talking about, you are confusing the EU with Europe, if talking about Europe you are giving a blanket statement over 40+ countries with quite different cultures, societies, etc. If talking about the EU then you have no clue what the EU actually is.

I recommend using more precise language about what you are talking, at the moment you just sound very confused.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#235

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

cess11 wrote: post #223
giingyui wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socially and economically left wing. Progressive socially and interventionist economically.

Is this a joke? The EU is the product of large industrialists institutionalising their liberalist, capitalist values as an international bureaucracy. It hardly cares about unions beyond what the ECHR and ILO treaties demands, i.e. it's obviously not left wing. If it was inherently left wing it wouldn't have the kind of parliament it has, but rather something like Yugoslavia or the DDR did. It's also not conservative,…

It's funny, as the EU is normally bashed by left people for being too right, and right people for being too left.

Like, lots of the Treaties are pretty neo-liberal (private services, competition is always good, privatise stuff) but lots more are more left wring (the anti-monoploy stuff, the social charter etc).

Really though the EU is 27 governments in a trenchcoat, so it tends to reflect those governments (which change over time).

Re: Apple vs the Law

#236

Post by pastage »

mattashii wrote: post #211
b112 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this seems reasonable, and I see the value in keeping things competitive. I do have one concern though. Established markets are more entrenched, and hearing that smaller companies may have "slow and steady growth" here seems excellent. Yet emerging markets move incredibly fast, and the goal is to discover those trenches and occupy them. Being held back in such a market can be troublesome. So this is what I'd w…

> Yet emerging markets move incredibly fast, and the goal is to discover those trenches and occupy them. Well, only if you make it a goal to occupy all the trenches. The EU has realized that it does not want all possible trenches occupied. For example: There is a lot of market share to be had in waste disposal by dumping it in the rivers and oceans. Regulation generally prohibits this, because we don't want our river…

Bad example. Dumping waste cheaply illegally is a trench that is continuously filled with really bad stuff. Regulations needs more Oumph, it is just too cheap to do in an dishonest way.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#237

Post by thedevilslawyer »

fmajid wrote: post #225

FWIW, I was speaking yesterday with a friend who works on Big Tech antitrust at the European Commission, and he surprised me by telling me he considers Apple the worst of a rum lot, followed by Meta, Amazon then Google.

Makes sense. Google's stranglehold on phone/browser have alternatives for consumers, who generally don't choose them). Apple and Meta enforce staying in walled-gargens - all or nothing.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#238

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

bzzzt wrote: post #195
madeofpalk wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a competitor wants market share they have to build a better service. Except when Apple ensures that it always comes out ahead when competing. It's not a level playing field. Look at Apple Music vs Spotify - ignoring the self-preferencing iOS does to Appke Music, the App Store ensures that Spotify will always make less money than Apple Music. Spotify either has to hand over 30% to its competitor, raise its prices…

Not offering in-app signups doesn't seem to make Spotify less dominant. I'm in the Netherlands, almost everybody I know has a Spotify subscription, I know just one guy using Apple music. The 30% fee also drops to 15% after one year, and there are companies that negotiated lower fees. Also, 'doing it yourself' won't be free, you still need some party to do payment processing, customer service and returns which also ca…

The problem here is that Apple have a competing service that doesn't have to pay the money. That's the issue, and it needs to be resolved for Apple to be compliant with EU law.

Or they can leave, if they think that makes more sense for their business.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#239

Post by bzzzt »

grishka wrote: post #217
bzzzt wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see the problem by browsing old help forums and see how often people suggest 'disable SIP' as a solution to some problem instead of really fixing the problem. Also, the clueless user will -at best- just follow instructions and disable all kinds of security features making them more vulnerable to malware.

If someone is trying to help themselves by participating in forums and following instructions, that's already very much an above-average user. They'll be fine anyway. I'm talking more about the kinds of people who would download a .jpg.exe and run it. Or transfer their savings to a "safe account" because someone called them out of the blue and told them to do so. Or fall for scammy ads. You get the idea.

I'm more concerned about the 'good with computers' type people helping the average users. Those are the people who use google and forums and leave other peoples phone and/or computer in a less than optimal state which makes the .jpg.exe attack more likely to succeed.
Post reply on HN