491–500 of 1001 posts
At first I was surprised Epic's shareholders tolerate CEO Tim Sweeney – Epic had this all wrapped up, they got a large portion of what they wanted, but Sweeney just couldn't help but keep the drama going, at risk of their business. But then I realized that Tim Sweeney owns more than half of Epic. If he wants to risk his company for a fracas/kerfuffle, then that is between him and his minority shareholder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t quite understand why they happily subscribe to this model with Xbox PlayStation and Nintendo, but are adamant about getting their way with Google and Apple.
The arbitrary limitations on computers that are obviously general purpose is more clear than the arbitrary limitations on general purpose computers that are marketed as special purpose computers (gaming machines). In reality they're all equally bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But as of iOS 17.4 they do allow alternative app stores in EU.
In iOS 17.4 Apple allows you to apply to create an alternative store. Apple can still deny your request and kill your alternative store, and this is exactly what happened. Epic opened a developer account under their european subsidiary company, which applied for this, and Apple just banned that account, so Epic can't create a store. Perhaps if someone else (Google, Microsoft, Meta) made a store, Epic might be able to…
Most companies won't deal with actors who continually do this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We own this platform, (we built this platform), we make the rules I don't see the issue with this... it's not like they're exploiting an inherited platform like Oracle with (everything), IBM with Red Hat or Broadcom with VMware.
Would you also defend Microsoft of the 90's with the same argument for the similar issue? At least Microsoft had no way of stopping you selling apps for Windows but Apple is a next level of nefarious.
Phil Schiller accuses Epic of intentionally violating its agreements and concludes "Please tell us why we should trust Epic this time." Epic founder Tim Sweeney replies that Epic "will comply" and offers to provide "any specific further assurances."
Finally, Apple's lawyers tell Epic's lawyers that Apple is terminating the account because a judgement in Epic v Apple says they can, and that Tim did't sufficiently plead his case in his reply to Phil.
I wish there was button I could press so the eu/courts would address this immediately. So I don’t have to wait months/years.
This is egregious and deeply disturbing behavior from Apple. At this point it feels wrong to own an iPhone. I'm at a loss for words describing what Tim and their leadership team has done to this company that I used to admire so much.
Couldn't agree more. I think the iPhone 15 Pro may be my last iPhone. Apple's entire reaction to the DMA has left an incredibly bad taste in my mouth. I used to think these were my devices, but Apple has been making it crystal clear lately that they consider them to be their devices. "We own the customer" is the new mantra of Apple. Maybe it was always that way, with the iPod and iTunes, etc. Thankfully I've never fe…
The raw emails are linked at the bottom of the post. Phil Schiller accuses Epic of intentionally violating its agreements and concludes "Please tell us why we should trust Epic this time." Epic founder Tim Sweeney replies that Epic "will comply" and offers to provide "any specific further assurances." Finally, Apple's lawyers tell Epic's lawyers that Apple is terminating the account because a judgement in Epic v Appl…
I used to use an iPhone, then switched to an android a few years ago, and I felt like there was basically full feature parity between the two of them. I'm not aware of any "killer app" or other use case that elevates one significantly over the other. They both have app stores with all the most popular apps, web browsers, nice cameras, phone calls and messages, etc. So it seems to me like there are plenty of alternatives if you don't want an iPhone that are just as good and often more affordable.
Globally Android has a larger market share than iPhone, but iPhones seem to have a "social" factor that pushes them heavily in certain demographics (particularly any intersection of wealthy, young, and US American). Something about this social factor makes it feel to many people like a complete monopoly with no alternative even though there are tons of alternative phone models made by many other companies.
For me, of course I think it would be great if iPhones were better compatible with things like RCS chat, open app stores, USB instead of proprietary chargers, etc. But I feel like that can all be worked out long term by the market instead of pushing regulation on one specific company. If any of those things bother you just get a non iOS phone, and if they're truly bad things over time more and more people will gravitate away from the company until they change. If Apple wants to make certain decisions around remaining a walled garden I think they should be able to (and there are arguments that their strategy could make their product better for certain audiences rather than worse, even if we might disagree with the take).