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

371–380 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#371

Post by tempodox »

msgodel wrote: post #343
frollogaston wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are like 100 people in our department using Linux, on Thinkpad laptops that officially support Linux, and cannot use Bluetooth audio reliably. And the problem isn't with the headphones, cause they work with Mac and others. It's a known thing, desktop Linux and Bluetooth don't mix, you use the jack if you're on Linux.

That's funny because only my Linux laptop running pulseaudio ever seems to work reliably with bluetooth headphones. I had to go back to wired headphones on my work mac because half the time when I needed them they just couldn't connect.

What's really funny is that I'm getting a working BT connection between Debian and the headset, but there's still no audio. Presumably I'm missing some driver, but I don't know which.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#372

Post by grishka »

stale2002 wrote: post #367
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to explain it, if you're genuinely interested. Apple designs and manufactures incredible hardware and software. The ecosystem they created is beautiful, secure, and intuitive to use. When it was first announced, many people started using it even before they allowed apps on it. Apple later launched the App Store and allowed 3rd party developers access to their platform in exchange for a percentage of the…

> . Apple is granting Spotify access No. Those users control themselves. They are not Apples users. They own their own device and they are free to do whatever they want with the hardware that they own. > the platform still belongs to Apple No actually. The device is owned by the user. > billions of Apple customers They aren't Apples. They own their own device. > e but that's not the contractual agreement they had wit…

Thank you for writing it all out for me :D

Re: Apple vs the Law

#373

Post by 827a »

scheeseman486 wrote: post #43
pyman wrote: post #9

Note: I know some folks working in big tech won't like this comment, but it's time we talk about the elephant in the room. Tim Sweeney is the only billionaire and computer scientist who's actually fighting against inequality. The big difference between him and folks like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Larry Page, and Marc Benioff, is that while those billionaires talk about universal basic income to make up for the mass layo…

Tim doesn't want open platforms, all he wants is EGS to be able to exist within a walled garden. As long as he gets that, he's golden. If he wanted to support truly open platforms he'd be putting more money and time into helping develop Linux into a stronger contender for desktop and mobile and fighting against things like Play Integrity API, which are just another form of vendor lock-in.

Who cares? He's still doing a hell of a lot more than Apple does, and he's fighting for a better world. It might not be a perfect world, but his world is not antithetically opposed to a Good and Righteous one, like what Apple fights for.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#374

Post by vkou »

carlosjobim wrote: post #277
cess11 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

The Soviet Union had large industrialists and so does China. Large companies and large industry is the defining aspect of both socialism and capitalism.

Large companies and large industry is the defining aspect of an industrialized society with quick travel and near-instantaneous communication across large distances.

As soon as it's possible to run efficiently a large enterprise (Thanks to the telegraph, and an extensive rail/road + automotive network), economies of scale will favor consolidation.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#375

Post by itopaloglu83 »

stale2002 wrote: post #367
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to explain it, if you're genuinely interested. Apple designs and manufactures incredible hardware and software. The ecosystem they created is beautiful, secure, and intuitive to use. When it was first announced, many people started using it even before they allowed apps on it. Apple later launched the App Store and allowed 3rd party developers access to their platform in exchange for a percentage of the…

> . Apple is granting Spotify access No. Those users control themselves. They are not Apples users. They own their own device and they are free to do whatever they want with the hardware that they own. > the platform still belongs to Apple No actually. The device is owned by the user. > billions of Apple customers They aren't Apples. They own their own device. > e but that's not the contractual agreement they had wit…

You must be thinking this is all wrong. I completely understand and agree with your sentiment, but we're talking about what the contract says.

I'm not allowed to install any software I want on my car's computer, the platform belongs to them. They don't provide the tools, libraries, the know-how, or even sue the people who share it online. And similarly, according to Apple's EULA the devices cannot run any app that is not approved by Apple and they can even revoke their approval or even disable the phone.

Those were the license conditions the hardware sold under, which sounds very user hostile. Regardless, nobody has to buy their products, they chose to buy it because the benefits it provided surpassed the limitations. When Spotify created their developer account they knew what the limitations were as well. This isn't an open platform. One can sue Toyota to get access to install Spotify to Corollas and get another 500 million customers, but that also wouldn't work either.

The only thing that can stop Apple is people not buying their products and developers not making apps therefore reducing the value of their ecosystem. Only then they will by themselves would open the ecosystem, which they should've done 5 years ago.

Regarding the EU forcibly taking stuff over. Well, if push comes to shove, do you think the US would allow a 3 trillion dollar American company to be bullied, go after European companies or would they react in a really unpredictable way?

Apple devices are successful because they provide a great value. They didn't just sell the hardware like Nokia did, they kept delivering software updates and spend billions of dollars sustaining the ecosystem. The limitations were put to improve user experience, for example they didn't allow apps to run continuously in the background so that users can have all day battery life. The high level of control they have allowed them to provide greater value than other ecosystems which brought more users and so on. This requires continuous work to keep it running and they're entitled to be paid for their work.

And again, nobody has to buy their products, you can buy other products and install whatever software you want on those, and do whatever you want there. Android has a bigger marketshare and some people still use Nokia or Blackberry.

---

A digital marketplace consists of everyone that participates in the digital economy not just Apple. All the websites, service providers, apps, hardware manufacturers, users, companies, and their interactions.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#376

Post by djaychela »

mathstuf wrote: post #113
neuroelectron wrote: post #91

I basically stopped buying "apps" almost a decade ago when Apple unceremoniously removed an app i paid for with no refund because the in app browser defaulted to a certain website. Btw I have always hated their "app" branding. But the benefit of it, at least for me, is it's a strong reminder that it's a childish analog to an application. The only exception to this is I bought the game, Vampire Survivors, no wait. It…

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.

Coming from android I have to agree, it's terrible. The only help I can offer is that if you press and hold the space bar you can drag to go through to where you need to be, but it's still painful. I can only bear ios because I am using SwiftKey - the default keyboard genuinely stopped me from switching to an iPhone, I found it that bad. And some apps force you to use the default ios one which is even worse!

Re: Apple vs the Law

#377

Post by ksec »

vegabook wrote: post #174
simonask wrote: post #46

As a European, I have to say I am generally impressed with the EU in these cases. I'm from a country that's rich and capable, but with a GDP a fraction of Apple's market cap. There is no chance that national laws and entities would be sufficient to protect my consumer rights from corporations this size. The EU is fundamentally a centre-right, liberalist, pro-business coalition, but what that means is that it is pro-c…

I wish people would stop comparing a stock (market cap) with a flow (GDP).

That is the whole point, to make company much bigger than they actually are and shift the power back to smaller player, in this case the state and GDP.

If you compare annual revenue to GDP all of a sudden these so called maegacrop are tiny.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#378

Post by nicoburns »

shuckles wrote: post #293
nicoburns wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple already implement everything needed. They just decided that they can clear client-side storage for PWAs whenever they like (deleting user data), making them useless for anything that needs to store data and isn't synced to the cloud.

The goalposts move every time Apple resolves some bug that PWA advocates promise is the one issue holding them back from taking over the world with crappy web apps.

Nope, it's been push notifications and persistent storage for a decade.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#379

Post by ksec »

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…

>He's defined Apple as a company that cares about privacy

My God, No. The privacy thing started with Steve Jobs. Steve was such a private person he would change his car every few months to avoid having car plate. He started the war against Android on privacy when 99% of media including HN thought Google was NOT invading on privacy and were the media darling.

>actually a number of key decisions made by Tim Cook

>He's led Apple into the VR space with Vision Pro

Engineer Led.

>has pushed into services/content (Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Fitness+),

Eddy Cue lead and actually worst decision ever. The services you listed are burning money. And as I have repeated again they are only there to dilute the real profits from App Store and Google Pay search.

>wearables (Beats acquisition, Apple Watch, AirPods).

Beats acquisition was about streaming. None of the hardware headset engineer actually made into AirPods. AirPods are done by old guards Apple who Steve brought in from B&W. Apple Watch was Willian's and Jony Ive project.

As someone on HN once said which I think sums it up perfectly, Apple has been left on AutoPilot since Steve Jobs passed away.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#380

Post by pjmlp »

scarface_74 wrote: post #291
pjmlp wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SAP, Spotify, Sitecore, Roche, Airbus, CERN (the ecosystem powers its research), CodePlay, SN Systems, BAYER, Roche,....

Spotify has never been consistently profitable and had Net income last year of a little over a billion. They are a nothingburger

Tell that to musicians, apparently they don't need Spotify after all.

I will just go to the record store get some vinyls.

Post reply on HN