Apple loses copyright battle against security startup Corellium • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple loses copyright battle against security startup Corellium

#61

Post by ProAm » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 10:12 PM UTC

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #32

ProAm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iOS is not a licensed product like Windows Do developers not need to pay $100 a year to write code for it? (for software that will run longer than a couple weeks on a device). To run IOS no, it develop for it, yes?

That’s an interesting way to ask that question. GP claimed that iOS is not a licensed product while your question is about developing for iOS. While the answer to your question is: > Membership includes access to beta OS releases, advanced app capabilities, and tools needed to develop, test, and distribute apps and Safari Extensions. You must be 18 years or older to join. essentially: yes. You need to pay to develop,…

yeah its interesting, and that is why I asked it that way to see if people smarter than myself could argue it (either side of the discussion). I find it weird that if I were to buy and apple device, and I wanted to write my own program to use only for myself on it I would have to pay an annual fee to Apple to get permission to run it. I think it does sort of boil down to a semantics argument about what is a license for a device you own or not own? Or if you want to want to sell and distribute something you need to pay an annual fee plus 30% of every sale (or 15% if you do their multi-year subscription magic, Or are large enough like Netflix).

Apple is very hostile towards their customers and developers/business partners.

Re: Apple loses copyright battle against security startup Corellium

#62

Post by fakedang » Sat, Jan 02, 2021, 7:49 PM UTC

nacs wrote: post #60

macintux wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Apple stopped supplying chargers, they also dropped the prices on chargers. That's the kind of thing I mean: soundbite analysis of Apple's policies makes it very easy to cast them as the big baddies.

Also Huawei and Samsung are now doing the same thing with no models -- no chargers. As with most "controversial" things Apple does, like removing the headphone jack, the other companies then follow suit.

Because Apple is a prime example of a money grab. Once other companies see the profit motive, they too decide to join the bandwagon. It's not like they saw some environmental positive and decided to act.

Re: Apple loses copyright battle against security startup Corellium

#63

Post by fakedang » Sat, Jan 02, 2021, 7:50 PM UTC

macintux wrote: post #57

fakedang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extracting profit under the guise of environmental activism, which actually ends up causing the opposite effect? I mean, the charger fiasco just happened... Likewise there are many examples of how Apple works against the public interest.

When Apple stopped supplying chargers, they also dropped the prices on chargers. That's the kind of thing I mean: soundbite analysis of Apple's policies makes it very easy to cast them as the big baddies.

So if the prices dropped, that's supposed to be a good thing for the environment? Tell me exactly how?

Re: Apple loses copyright battle against security startup Corellium

#64

Post by enos_feedler » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 9:09 AM UTC

fakedang wrote: post #62

nacs wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also Huawei and Samsung are now doing the same thing with no models -- no chargers. As with most "controversial" things Apple does, like removing the headphone jack, the other companies then follow suit.

Because Apple is a prime example of a money grab. Once other companies see the profit motive, they too decide to join the bandwagon. It's not like they saw some environmental positive and decided to act.

Do you think other companies suddenly see a profit motive because Apple does something? I think it's an insult to other vendors if you think they can't come up with an idea like "don't include a charger". Obviously everyone has the idea.

You need to understand Apple's position in the market vs. everyone else to know why Apple goes first. Apple's retention is off the charts. If you are Xiaomi, you can't give your user any reason to buy an iPhone or you've lost them forever. It would be suicide for other vendors to take these kinds of ticky tack steps first.