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

311–320 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#311

Post by bmicraft »

MatthiasPortzel wrote: post #214
rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admire Steve Jobs as a visionary as much as everyone else, but I never thought it was fair for people to keep discounting Tim Cook as the “lesser” man between the two. He was the one who took the company to a trillion dollar valuation. He took on the operations and supply chain work that no computer nerd or product visionary ever wants to take. He did the hard, unsexy work that no one wanted to do and yet people se…

It's easy to assume that Apple is where it is today because of Jobs. But when you look back, there are actually a number of key decisions made by Tim Cook since Job's death that led Apple here. Cook has plenty of leadership vision. He's led Apple into the VR space with Vision Pro, and has pushed into services/content (Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Fitness+), and wearables (Beats acquisition, Apple Watch, AirPods). He…

You might call it ambitious to "so stubbornly fight regulation", I'd call it immoral and corrupt.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#312

Post by alt227 »

thewebguyd wrote: post #306
alt227 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO Apple have started to do the same. Their software is consistently getting buggier with worse user experiences, along with their reputation. Tech savy windows users that are trying out Apple are finding that it very much doesnt 'Just Work' anymore, and that sentiment is starting to creep out more and more. Take a look at Linuses recent evaluation of macOS by using only a Mac for a solid 2 months. His conclusion is…

> Tech savy windows users that are trying out Apple are finding that it very much doesnt 'Just Work' anymore, and that sentiment is starting to creep out more and more. Even with all the faults and degrading quality, it's still above any of proprietary alternatives, particularly Windows. I'm running the Tahoe developer beta, and in comparison to my Arm surface laptop 7, it's still light years better. I have no proble…

> Even Apple at its lowest is still a better experience than the alternatives because the alternatives just suck worse

Thats your subjective opinion based on what you do on a computer and how you like it to work. Thats absolutely fine, just dont state the like its a fact. The only real fact you can say is they both have pros and cons, and its up to each user to decide what their personal preference is.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#313

Post by alt227 »

shuckles wrote: post #292
alt227 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PWAs are the primary way for small busineses to have internal private apps for running staff services on local devices. Apples App Store has way too many hoops to jump through and has far too high a wait time to publish for businesses to move fast and update internal apps with bugfixes and new services etc. Android accomplishes this by allowing devices to connect to private app stores and repos, which enable companie…

Custom apps published for internal use by companies with fewer than 100 employees who aren't eligible for enterprise app distribution sounds like a niche of a niche use case, so it's pretty consistent with my view that they're more developer catnip and not a serious technology.

Thats a lot of assumptions to back up your own point.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#314

Post by eviks »

woah wrote: post #303
mathstuf wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also find editing on an iPhone to be an exercise in futility. Is it no longer possible to place a cursor in the middle of a word? I end up having to go to a word boundary and erase from there and retype everything. The keyboard touch areas also seem offset from Android and I end up one row off too much of the time.

I do more writing on my iPhone (it's the one with the largest screen) than I do on a computer. I can do about 40wpm. To move the cursor you just hold down on the space bar. These complaints kind of sound like someone from the 90's saying that the close window button is on the wrong side

> just hold down on the space bar

It's not "just", because you have to switch from the more natural "tap where you want to edit" to a separate gesture, which also takes longer and is less precise. You might also use a different keyboard with better layout/symbol visibility that doesn't support this gesture

Re: Apple vs the Law

#315

Post by itopaloglu83 »

grishka wrote: post #151
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a very good and valid question but did they sell the device with the premise that anyone can run any app they want or only the apps Apple approved can run? We believe in the same thing, our devices should be free like speech. But the whole thing turned into a show because some rich software companies don’t want to pay Apple 30% while they have no problem with other platforms like gaming consoles.

Apple does market the iPhone as a general-purpose communication and computing device. Not an appliance like a game console. Most iPhone users don't know what making an app is like, how asinine the app store review process is, and what kinds of bonkers rules developers have to follow. Apple initially did that to protect the ecosystem from malware and make sure all apps meet their quality standards. Also to make distri…

The Original iPhone didn’t have any apps and Apple later created their own ecosystem with an end user agreement which supersedes the ads.

The digital market should be regulated for sure but what’s happening is a bunch of companies who are in the digital market (and not regulated themselves) exploiting the public sentiment and the regulatory processes.

Spotify and others fail to mention that they were able to access billions of Apple customers without paying a single dime to Apple initially which is unheard of in business relationships.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#316

Post by Hikikomori »

jonnybgood wrote: post #209
pjmlp wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy, on the car companies that already exist with much better build quality. We don't need cars from fascists.

> We don't need cars from fascists. To be fair, that’s not what they said. I believe they’re asking where are the car companies of Tesla’s size and market position.

Old size or new size?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#317

Post by grishka »

itopaloglu83 wrote: post #315
grishka wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple does market the iPhone as a general-purpose communication and computing device. Not an appliance like a game console. Most iPhone users don't know what making an app is like, how asinine the app store review process is, and what kinds of bonkers rules developers have to follow. Apple initially did that to protect the ecosystem from malware and make sure all apps meet their quality standards. Also to make distri…

The Original iPhone didn’t have any apps and Apple later created their own ecosystem with an end user agreement which supersedes the ads. The digital market should be regulated for sure but what’s happening is a bunch of companies who are in the digital market (and not regulated themselves) exploiting the public sentiment and the regulatory processes. Spotify and others fail to mention that they were able to access b…

I keep seeing that argument made but it doesn't make any sense.

Yes, Apple may deserve a cut when a user was acquired thanks to the app store alone. Like in that case when you're an indie developer and the app store putting your app listing in front of potential new users is genuinely helpful. However, to many developers, and especially large ones like Spotify that do their own marketing, the app store is a hindrance. It's an obstacle they need to clear. It provides no value to them.

Spotify is able to "access billions of Apple customers" because Spotify spends millions on ads and because statistically some people who would like to use Spotify on their phone happen to have an iPhone. Apple has no part in this at all. Simple as that.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#318

Post by hnlmorg »

scarface_74 wrote: post #295
hnlmorg wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is Tesla an example of your point? It’s the biggest EV manufacturer owned by one of the world’s richest men. Perhaps the problem here isn’t that smaller brands don’t exist, it’s that if we give examples of smaller brands then you’ll argue “Never heard of them. Thus proof that the EU is holding them back” And if we mention household names then you’d argue “Those aren’t small companies” You’ve basically crafted an…

Tesla is not one of the largest EV manufacturers and sales are rapidly declining.

Name a bigger EV manufacturer in America.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#319

Post by EMIRELADERO »

itopaloglu83 wrote: post #315
grishka wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple does market the iPhone as a general-purpose communication and computing device. Not an appliance like a game console. Most iPhone users don't know what making an app is like, how asinine the app store review process is, and what kinds of bonkers rules developers have to follow. Apple initially did that to protect the ecosystem from malware and make sure all apps meet their quality standards. Also to make distri…

The Original iPhone didn’t have any apps and Apple later created their own ecosystem with an end user agreement which supersedes the ads. The digital market should be regulated for sure but what’s happening is a bunch of companies who are in the digital market (and not regulated themselves) exploiting the public sentiment and the regulatory processes. Spotify and others fail to mention that they were able to access b…

> The Original iPhone didn’t have any apps and Apple later created their own ecosystem with an end user agreement which supersedes the ads.

The whole "user agreement" thing is one of the biggest problems, because it means Apple thinks you buying an iPhone doesn't inherently entitle you to the advertised functionality of it.

Which is, to out it mildly, highly misleading and potentially illegal. The "small print" shouldn't contradict the big picture. You can't pretend you're selling a device and then turn around and declare that those sales were only about raw hardware and not actual functionality. That's not how products work, and most importantly, not how consumer protection laws see it.

The reason why Apple is so adamant in this line of reasoning is clear once you factor in the App Store rationale. From that perspective, any time a third-party app runs on a user's device and calls iOS APIs in order to actually function, it's not part of what the user actually paid money for. Any execution of any software that uses those APIs is an additional transaction altogether, dealt with separately through the iOS EULA. In short, Apple's position is that any time iOS does anything, either by default or powering a third-party app, it's not actually part of the functionality that was paid for in full by the iPhone's owner, because the owner never paid for ANY functionality at all, only the hardware.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#320

Post by fsflover »

tempodox wrote: post #296
fsflover wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a working Bluetooth on a Linux laptop: https://forums.puri.sm/t/bluetooth-stopped-working-on-l14-wi...

Proving my point. “Linux on the desktop” implied that you don't need to be a DIY hacker to get it working. Probably the reason why the poster you originally replied to called it “still not ready”.

PureOS is an FSF-endorsed OS without any propritary drivers and firmware. Any other GNU/Linux will run that module out of the box.
Post reply on HN