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

IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

ikamasutra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 170 posts

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#151

Post by rbarooah »

gcheong wrote: post #150
rbarooah wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I see how a successful suit against Apple would have any such effect. Google would simply say "we're open already", and become the dominant platform while Apple was reeling from the legal damage.

I think it would be pretty easy for Apple to allow apps to be installed on their devices without having to go through the app store. You can already jailbreak to do this so the capability is there Apple just needs to allow it. Not sure what legal damage you think they would incur except whatever they would pay to fight the suit.

The legal damage would be the fact that each design decision they made around the store would be under court scrutiny.

But so far, you haven't explained why this should be done given that Android offers what you ask for. What's wrong with letting people decide for themselves?

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#152

Post by gcheong »

rbarooah wrote: post #149
gcheong wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android is more open in the sense that there is more than one market and anyone can build a marketplace for apps. Yes, there are places where Google is not open with Android as well but my main problem is there is only one app store for iDevices. My thinking is that if Apple is forced to open up in terms of allowing more than one channel to sell apps through, or to sell directly, that it won't cede the market to Goog…

It sounds like you are saying that you want Apple to be forced to do what Google has already done. Doesn't this mean the the precedent has already been set but Google? That leads back to the original question: Why is it so important for Apple to be forced to operate like Android when people are free to just buy an Android phone if they want that kind of environment? What's wrong with Android in your opinion?

Yes, that is what I am saying. Google has set a precedent but not a legal one. So leading back to the question there seems to me to possibly be a case that Apple has a monopoly of sorts and that it is not allowing proper competition because of the power they hold to arbitrarily delete a developer's app without recourse. I don't know if the argument would hold up in court of course and it's certainly not a straightforward argument for reasons you have pointed out, namely people can switch to Android, but I think it should be tried. As for what is wrong with Android - nothing really. I don't use it as I prefer the iDevices so far but if Android does at some point become dominant then what is to say they won't try and close off the market in a similar fashion?

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#153

Post by rbarooah »

gcheong wrote: post #152
rbarooah wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you are saying that you want Apple to be forced to do what Google has already done. Doesn't this mean the the precedent has already been set but Google? That leads back to the original question: Why is it so important for Apple to be forced to operate like Android when people are free to just buy an Android phone if they want that kind of environment? What's wrong with Android in your opinion?

Yes, that is what I am saying. Google has set a precedent but not a legal one. So leading back to the question there seems to me to possibly be a case that Apple has a monopoly of sorts and that it is not allowing proper competition because of the power they hold to arbitrarily delete a developer's app without recourse. I don't know if the argument would hold up in court of course and it's certainly not a straightfor…

I do now understand what you mean as far as a legal precedent is concerned, but if a ruling were based on the idea that Apple had a monopoly then by definition it wouldn't apply to anyone else.

[edit: removed point about Apple not having a monopoly]

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#154

Post by chris_wot »

glenra wrote: post #117
chris_wot wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah. Obviously more than one of Steve's folly! Try this one: http://www.cultofmac.com/125623/the-best-revelations-quotes-... "Steve Jobs’ obsession with aesthetic details could be taken to ludicrous extents. For example, when they built a state-of-the-arty factory in Fremonth to manufacture the Macintosh, Jobs wanted all the machines repainted in bright colors. Apple’s manufacturing director, Matt Carter, fought him o…

My top google result on the phrase was this, FWIW: http://radleymarx.com/blog/steves-folly/

Doh! Not an instance of folly :(

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#155

Post by excuse-me »

batista wrote: post #133
excuse-me wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple could care less about the hypothetical CEO you mention" The old fringe player Apple could - the new $trillion corporate Apple might "think different". Remember once upon a time Microsoft was a cool fashionable young persons software company fighting against the established corporate monopolies I'm sure this was just a new employee who was probably still in high-school when the Appstore launched and thinks anyt…

> The old fringe player Apple could - the new $trillion corporate Apple might "think different". I seriously doubt it. Especially since they became the "$trillion corporate Apple" by not caring about those things --so why change a winning strategy?

Because being a niche underdog is different from having saturated one market and looking for a different one.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#156

Post by glenra »

dhimes wrote: post #136
glenra wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPhone is as much a music player as a phone, so every iPhone comes with a special microphone headset with some external controls in the chord. Many iPhone users (myself included) prefer to talk on the phone via this headset. Using the headset you get better sound quality for both parties, can hear with both ears, can move more freely and be more comfortable and can use the phone to take notes or check your calend…

My iphone didn't come with this. Maybe it's because I am a business customer and had to buy it through the ATT store? I'm in the Boston area, in case that's pertinent.

According to Apple, an iPhone includes "Apple Earphones with Remote and Mic":

http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html

The standard set looks a lot like plain white earbuds, but there's a tiny clicker thing on one of the headphone wires. In recent models that is (1) a microphone, (2) an up/down volume control, (3) a sort of generic action button - single-click to answer an incoming call or hang up an active one. When listening to music, single click is pause/resume, double-click skips to the next track, triple click backs up a track. press-and-hold gets you Siri.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#158

Post by waqf »

hef19898 wrote: post #15

Are we all going nuts nowadays? Really, to remove a product from your store (which also happens to be a monopolistic sales channel) after it was there for years and recieved several updates since without any dialog with the producer of the product is bad style, really bad style. Especially if the producer is willing to change the product to fit your requirements. Some time ago almost everyone agreed that Nokia failed…

The problem "nowadays" (meaning, with business models like Apple's or Google's) is that common sense is an expensive commodity compared to the opportunity cost of making one arbitrary decision or another on an individual app.

And the legal system just hasn't yet caught up enough to keep them in check. They're the robber barons of our age.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#159

Post by ricardobeat »

phil wrote: post #128

The crazy thing is the #4 paid app is this violent fantasy about shooting people with a sniper rifle and that's apparently OK: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/clear-vision-17+/id500116670?... The #5 paid app is a scam designed to confuse (check out the reviews): http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lock-my-screen/id507265508?mt...

That's really curious. The "lock-screen" app has a Rated 4+ indication, yet it's actual ratings are 1-star. There's something fishy here, how come this doesn't get the appstore lords' attention?

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#160

Post by batista »

excuse-me wrote: post #155
batista wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The old fringe player Apple could - the new $trillion corporate Apple might "think different". I seriously doubt it. Especially since they became the "$trillion corporate Apple" by not caring about those things --so why change a winning strategy?

Because being a niche underdog is different from having saturated one market and looking for a different one.

Good point, but they normally wouldn't cannibalize their existing markets (consumer) and their existing strategy by taking on a new market.
Post reply on HN