551–560 of 665 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not convinced opening up the platform to Chrome skins is good for the web, we’ll just end up with one browser that much faster
Are Safari skins any better? If they opened it, you could run Firefox.
I think I haven't asked them but I was just trying to do it and I am so frustrated the best I have got is that there is a way to get a curl command with proper cookies etc. to get text written in the comments section but that text is (rightfully) encrypted and I don't know how to decrypt it... I am not sure.
A really dead simple api or library would be.. wonderful. I wish proton could also go like cloudflare except way way more private and could have some proton s3 or proton workers or something tbh.
every developer knows safari is the new ie6 but we all just shrug and build native apps anyway because what else are you gonna do. leave 50% of your users on the table. classic embrace extend extinguish but in reverse. embrace web standards then purposely not extend them so you can extinguish competition
Chrome is the new IE6 if anything. Tons of websites fail to work on safari.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
iOS is not the Internet anymore than Jitterbug is telephones.
Nobody made such a claim. If you serve web pages, you likely serve many of your users on their Apple devices. And you can’t support features of the web for those users if Apple doesn’t want them to have those features, and prohibits browsers with other engines that do support them on their App Store, and prohibits other sources of web browsers. That’s called “gatekeeping”.
And no, it isn't. Not supporting certain browser features does not direct traffic or even deny access. So you obviously don't know what gatekeeping is.
I'm not an Apple enthusiast—my rarely used iPad mini is my only Apple device—but let me play devil’s advocate. If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it? Why should I be forced to open up the carefully designed ecosystem I’ve built? If my pitch is premium, high-speed hardware and intuitive software so user-…
For companies, there are civil outcomes. This may be undesirable if you have a large financial interest in the company, but it's a tradeoff for the same legislative body allowing you to create a shield from personal liability and taxation.
If you are able to create an ecosystem on your own, do what you like with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really the most interesting thing I read in this screed, the rest of which seemed to be clueless BS like, "changes to App Store policies that will improve the state of the internet." No. Unlike Google, Meta, and Amazon, Apple is not a gatekeeper to the Internet. They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store. It's tiresome to hear the same anti-"big-tech" hysteria aimed at Apple. They aren't a monopol…
> They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store. They also control the OS and don't allow side-loading or other app stores (without putting absurd obstacles in the way) So in the end they completely control the devices they sell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>held accountable for predatory behavior? Apple is held accountable by people choosing not to use their device. If iPhone is too expensive for the value it provides people won't use them. >The thing with this 30% tax the private company Apple imposes on a majority of US adults is reasonable? By this logic grocery stores have been applying a 30+% tax to all of America since the country was founded. >but not allowing o…
It might not seem predatory to the end user, but to all developers who want to access these people it's another thing. They can't deliver a mobile app to 60% of Americans without going through Apples little LARP government where they set the tax to 30% and arbitrary rules they see fit to increase their profits. And in the end that affects the end users because more things become useless adfilled crap because it's mor…
Developers don't have a right to access other business's customers. If you want to sell jewelry you don't have a right to have your jewelry put into a nation wide jewelry store chain to be able to access most Americans. Customer relationships are a vary valuable asset of a business.
>passively making 30%
It's only passive if you ignore the billions of dollars they dumped into building the ecosystem and growing a customer base that they can monetize to developers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At that point consumers would be free to make a choice to switch away from Apple if they value their privacy enough. The problem right now is that Apple is 'abusing' the fact that privacy-aware consumers are drawn to their platform to charge onerous fees to app developers. They're leveraging their (de facto) monopoly on high-end mobile privacy-aware devices to restrict competition in mobile app fee charging. It's tha…
> They're leveraging their (de facto) monopoly If it's necessary to put a qualifier on the word "monopoly", it's a great indication that it's not a monopoly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might not seem predatory to the end user, but to all developers who want to access these people it's another thing. They can't deliver a mobile app to 60% of Americans without going through Apples little LARP government where they set the tax to 30% and arbitrary rules they see fit to increase their profits. And in the end that affects the end users because more things become useless adfilled crap because it's mor…
>to all developers who want to access these people it's another thing Developers don't have a right to access other business's customers. If you want to sell jewelry you don't have a right to have your jewelry put into a nation wide jewelry store chain to be able to access most Americans. Customer relationships are a vary valuable asset of a business. >passively making 30% It's only passive if you ignore the billions…
Do you also prefer lightning over USB-C?
I'm still stuck on the whole 30% tax. How is that considered even remotely reasonable?
Nintendo for example has NDA where you cannot even share online how much they take.