AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem • Hacker News Board

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#421

Post by isodev » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 12:04 PM UTC

wkat4242 wrote: post #410

isodev wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re being slammed, the DMA is not going away. Just a few weeks ago, Apple had their latest court hearing. https://fsfe.org/news/2025/news-20251015-01.en.html

Well, the EU is trying to undermine its own GDPR now in an attempt to suck up to Trump :( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45882203 And DMA/DSA are also getting nerfed :(

These are both very long-term games. I think preventing a trade war is definitely better on the short term so I'm not opposed to a softer flavour of these directives (it's not permanent after all, they can be adapted again). Than trying to push all the levers at the same time.

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#422

Post by pmontra » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 12:10 PM UTC

intrasight wrote: post #334

thewebguyd wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's backwards. It's not AirPods being closed that's unfair. Apple should be able to sell first party tech that only works with their own products. What's unfair is Apple locking everyone else out. Not allowing or documenting for third parties to use the same APIs to enable something like automatic device switching in third party bluetooth headphones is the unfair part. Same goes for the watch. That the Apple Watch…

"only works with their own products" == "lock-out" Or am I missing something that distinguishes between these two in your view?

I'm not the person you're asking to but this is my reasoning:

1. If I'm building a gadget for my line of products, I want to be able to test it only with my products. I don't want to spend money to make it work with anybody's else products. There are standards but there are bugs and non compliant products from known and unknown parties, their problems.

2. However I might also want to be able to build gadgets for somebody's else products, so I appreciate if those companies stick to standards and don't go out of their ways to make their products incompatible with gadgets of third parties. BTW, this reminds me about cartridges for inkjet printers.

So I think that it would be fair for Apple to say, "these earpieces are tested to work only on these products of mine: ...; if they happen to work on something else: congratulations! you got lucky." It won't be fair if they make their products incompatible with every other earpieces and at the same time claim that they are compliant to a standard.

But fairness and business are often at odds.

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#423

Post by BrawnyBadger53 » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 12:16 PM UTC

4dm1r4lg3n3r4l wrote: post #415

thewebguyd wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only works with their own products is lock-in. Lock-out is Apple preventing third parties from making accessories that can match the first party ones in feature parity and seamlessness. Apple Watch only working with iPhones=lock-in No third party watch being allowed to use the same APIs the Apple Watch does or not being allowed to access iMessage, Apple Pay, etc = lock-out.

By locking their products "in", they're also locking third parties "out". How on earth would they be able to "lock-in" the Apple Watch to the iPhone while at the same time NOT "locking-out" third parties? It's the same thing.

I think they're suggesting that lock in implies apple didn't write the code to help support 3rd parties. Lock out implies they actively wrote code to prevent 3rd parties.

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#424

Post by kiitos » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 1:35 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #367

kiitos wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would apple do this? it's all cost and no benefit. companies actually can build and ship stuff that isn't inter-operable with the world, this is Actually Good for user experience

> why would apple do this? it's all cost and no benefit. Imagine if every human on the planet would operate like this. We'd be back in the Stone Ages. > companies actually can build and ship stuff that isn't inter-operable with the world, this is Actually Good for user experience ...

what? stone ages?

god forbid someone prioritize concrete user experience over abstract interoperability

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#425

Post by philipallstar » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 1:40 PM UTC

bloppe wrote: post #291

philipallstar wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no issues with airpod pros 2 on a nice cheap OnePlus phone. They also pair with my Linux PC through a random Bluetooth dongle and that also works fine.

Can you see the battery level?

Ah! I cannot. Interesting. What you never had you never miss (-:

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#426

Post by wkat4242 » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 1:49 PM UTC

isodev wrote: post #421

wkat4242 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the EU is trying to undermine its own GDPR now in an attempt to suck up to Trump :( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45882203 And DMA/DSA are also getting nerfed :(

These are both very long-term games. I think preventing a trade war is definitely better on the short term so I'm not opposed to a softer flavour of these directives (it's not permanent after all, they can be adapted again). Than trying to push all the levers at the same time.

I don't agree there. These tariffs hurt the American people a lot more than they hurt us.

All this is pretty much inspired by the fears of the big car companies. But we're also buying a lot less American cars, Tesla for example has been decimated in Europe. And besides them there's only really Ford.

Besides Trump constantly changes the rules. For example with his 'trade deficit' he's only looking at goods, not services. When you consider the huge amount of money going to Microsoft, AWS, Google, there's not really any deficit. Trump just makes it all up as he goes along. You can't really respond seriously to that because you don't know what will happen tomorrow, he could change his mind again.

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#427

Post by orphea » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 2:04 PM UTC

hluska wrote: post #350

nirava wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

good god man, just accept that this is objectively an EXTREMELY easy thing to do for anyone. Yes theoretically there are things that are easier for OSS devs than large companies, THIS AIN'T ONE OF THEM. Ugh, trillion dollar market value doesn't mean they are incapable of making a basic android app. Check their move to ios app if you have any doubts.

It doesn’t matter how frustrated you get or how many times you write capital letters, Apple is a private company and can do exactly what they want to do. If you would like Apple to do your bidding, acquire a controlling interest - it’s public so there’s nothing stopping you.

  > Apple is a private company

https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/aapl

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#428

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 2:21 PM UTC

tass wrote: post #418

TylerE wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or… just report whichever one is lower, which is the value 99% of people care about 99% of The time.

I use mine in meetings and often end up in a situation where I need to remove and charge the one which is about to go flat for a few minutes. I need to know individual levels to do that

[deleted]

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#429

Post by extraduder_ire » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 2:33 PM UTC

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #283

vee-kay wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason Apple ditched Lightning port and finally gave USB-C port in the iDevices, is because EU forced Apple to do so. But do you think your oh-so-common USB-C cables will work with a new iPhone? In my country (India), Apple still doesn't sell charger and cable along with its new iDevices, even though those gadgets are exorbitantly expensive. And Apple doesn't allow custom repair here, even though my country…

The higher end iPads started coming with USB C long before the EU mandate

That was a much easier way to get usb3 on them than the special lightning port + cables they tried earlier.

Re: AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

#430

Post by Vegemeister » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 3:46 PM UTC

gumby271 wrote: post #355

happyopossum wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hearing aids are highly regulated in many markets, as they are medical devices. Not building and getting certification / approval doe software to support every operating system is far from ”criminal”

I think the point is that selling a medical device that also requires you to use that vendors mobile device or lose access to them is just a little scummy. My motivation to keep using an iPhone shouldn't be that I'd need to buy new hearing aids if I left. Apple knows how this works, they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

A set of airpods + the Minimum Viable iPhone to configure the them to work as hearing aids is way cheaper than standalone hearing aids. Regulatory fetishism around "medical devices" is exactly what enabled hearing aids to become a racket and to remain one long after the relevant electronics became a mass-produced consumer product.