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

421–430 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#421

Post by stale2002 »

itopaloglu83 wrote: post #375
stale2002 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> . 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…

> The only thing that can stop Apple is people not buying their products

Actually, we are quite literally in a thread where there is another option. That other option being to use the law to protect a consumers right to do whatever they want with the device that they own.

If Apple doesn't like it, then they can leave the EU.

> Regarding the EU forcibly taking stuff over.

They aren't taking anything over. They are simply protecting a user's right to do what they want with their own device.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#422

Post by stale2002 »

itopaloglu83 wrote: post #407
grishka wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep comparing appliances to general-purpose devices. You also act like the "accept to continue" legalese actually matters to anyone but the legal department that wrote it. Please stop. When someone buys a car, they usually don't expect to run third-party software on it. They use it to get to places. They expect to use the built-in entertainment system to listen to music and maybe use CarPlay or Android Auto, and…

If you’re not happy with the Apple products or the value you’re getting from them, then simply stop buying them or making apps for them. You don’t have to use an iPhone. You’re welcome to use any Android based phone you’d like and install anything Google allows on it. Or use any European based phone operating system. Oh wait, there’s none, because any phone company that became successful in Europe had to run away.

There is another alterative. People can use the EUs laws, and Apple can either follow the law, or be fined 10s of billions of dollars, or leave the EU.

Apple is the one who will have to get with the program and will no longer be able to force users to not have control of their own devices.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#423

Post by saagarjha »

Spivak wrote: post #340
saagarjha wrote: post #252

I attended the workshop remotely (one of my questions is in the recording, if you watched it) and IMO it was mostly a waste of time. I didn't even stick around past the App Store section. Partly because it was daytime CEST but mostly because the format was awful. Apple would spend half the time talking about how the EU was forcing them to make their OS worse and then the EC thought it was a good idea to make Q&A a ba…

And, honestly, if I was Apple and got dragged to a "workshop" that had no teeth and wasn't legally binding I would have even less decorum than Apple's lawyers. If you had the power to actually make me do "$wishlist" you would have sued or fined me already.

The goal here is that they show up here in good faith and fix things before they get fined.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#424

Post by scarface_74 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #418
immibis wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ford

Nope. Ford are a bigger automotive manufacturer but a smaller manufacturer of EVs than Tesla.

So would you also be satisfied if I argued that Ford was a larger manufacturer of pick up trucks to make Ford look better?

Tesla is failing both domestically and internationally with declining sales. Arguing that Tesla is successful with falling sales is like arguing that RIM was successful in 2009 when the writing was on the wall.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#425

Post by AnonHP »

microtonal wrote: post #205
jjcob wrote: post #65

The saddest part of this whole fiasco is that Apple itself is suffering from the lack of competition. Apple Watch for example gets a huge boost from being the only wearable that integrates with iOS. But it has a lot of quality issues, and is by far the worst Apple product in my opinion. Apple would have a lot more incentive to improve it if they had to compete with other smart watches on a level playing field.

Yeah. I recently got a Garmin Watch after years of using an Apple Watch. On Android you can enable/disable notifications per app. On iOS you are stuck with all or nothing because Apple does not permit the same amount of integration as they permit their own products.

> I recently got a Garmin Watch after years of using an Apple Watch. On Android you can enable/disable notifications per app. On iOS you are stuck with all or nothing

Are you referring to notifications on the Apple Watch? If yes, you can control them by app and decide which ones you want (or don’t want) on the watch. The default is to “Mirror my iPhone”.

You can change the notification settings for Apple Watch by app in the Watch App, opening the Notifications menu (the very first one below the watch faces) and then scrolling down to the apps.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#426

Post by oaiey »

concinds wrote: post #399
oaiey wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rule of law also means, that fair process is given. which takes time. It is a problem, 100% agree, but I prefer a slow enforcement because of this than a unjust enforcement.

Why is slowness synonymous with rule of law? Apple's implementation is overtly malicious. This malice is a publicly-known, conscious effort on the part of some of their trashier employees to make it as malicious as possible to please their execs ("Ohh, keep going"). All you need for "rule of law" is an independent judicial entity to notice this. Why give them months and months "to comply", when everyone on Earth know…

Preparation of arguments, making sure that it is well rationalist. In this case, making sure all parties are heard and that they can explain themselves.

I am not arguing pro Apple here. IMHO the right approach should be maximum penalty after this round. They act malicious and everyone with a little IT understanding knows it.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#427

Post by int_19h »

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.

Soviet Union certainly had industries, but the only large industrialists I can think of were some pre-WW2 experiments with foreign companies invited to set up shop there where it was deemed the fastest way to get access to some piece of tech and the associated know-how.

Other than that, can you give any examples of Soviet industrialists, large or otherwise?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#428

Post by int_19h »

jeroenhd wrote: post #49
vladms wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally they seem to be more expensive than competitors and have a more aggressive stance on openness (ex: compare PWA support on Android vs iOS, not to mention the multiple other things like no multiple stores, the browser engine discussion, etc). So, I am not amazed that people think "on top of all the other things that you annoy us with you also try to avoid the law?!".

While I hate Apple's anti-consumer practices as much as anyone, the PWA platform is a system set up by Google first and foremost. Take-up has been limited outside of Google Chrome. I wouldn't say Apple's PWA approach is necessarily an example of Apple's fuckery. This wouldn't be much of an issue, of course, if Chrome would just run on iOS like it does on any other OS, so Google can implement PWAs themselves.

Microsoft promoted PWAs pretty heavily back in Win8 days. That was the reason why HTML/JS was one of the "first class" (alongside with C++ and .NET) development stacks introduced there - the idea being that people would write cross-plat PWAs to target iOS and Android, but then they would already have something that's 90% of its way to a native Win8 app.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#429

Post by carlosjobim »

int_19h wrote: post #427
carlosjobim wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Soviet Union certainly had industries , but the only large industrialists I can think of were some pre-WW2 experiments with foreign companies invited to set up shop there where it was deemed the fastest way to get access to some piece of tech and the associated know-how. Other than that, can you give any examples of Soviet industrialists, large or otherwise?

The Soviet Union had some giant corporations with powerful leaders. The best known of these are the leaders of military industry, such as Pavel Sukhoi or Mikhail Kalashnikov, or Tupolev. Were they not industrialists? They performed the same functions as leaders of Western industry. Soviet military corporations even competed against each other for government contracts. The industrialist could also be a party functionary or minister, but for sure they had industrialists.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#430

Post by NotPractical »

dan-robertson wrote: post #400
microtonal wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today I care less about that and more about security and I mostly think that Apple’s preferred approach is better for security than what the EU proposes. This is mostly a false dichotomy that Apple likes to push. macOS has strong security with sandboxing, code signing, malware scanning, etc. I have never encountered someone among my direct acquaintances who had their Mac compromised. Yet, it's perfectly possible to m…

iPhones are a much more juicy target compared to macs.

No they aren't. They sync almost all of your data across the both of them; that's touted as a benefit of the Apple Ecosystem. Your juicy iPhone data is directly accessible via the linked Mac.

A better argument is that Macs are less popular and thus less targeted.

Post reply on HN