681–688 of 688 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is response to Spotify's site which has the timeline - https://timetoplayfair.com/timeline/ Spotify launched on Desktop after the App Store launched.
> Spotify launched on Desktop after the App Store launched. Your link seems to say the opposite.
In academia, scientific papers and scholarly debates are always presented by individuals, not by their employers. If professor X from Harvard disagrees with a claim by professor Y from Yale, the argument isn't framed as a dispute between Harvard and Yale.
On the other hand, in the business world debates like this are usually presented as a dispute between faceless corporations. Is there is some legal reason for this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it costs 100 euros to get a proper Windows license.
No, you don't need a Windows license to develop for Windows. That's the whole point here. You can code and compile binaries for Windows, Linux, Android, etc. from many IDEs and virtually any platform under the sun. You can code and compile binaries for Apple products from exactly one IDE and exactly one platform: Apple's.
If you mean cross compiling from other OSes into Windows, good luck creating anything beyond CLI apps based on POSIX.
Ah but there is Wine! Not really, there are tons of Windows features that it doesn't support, and probably never will.
And if you mean Web apps, then I also develop Webapps for Mac without having one around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The app literally can't send you to the Web page so you can sign up there. It has to say something vague for Apple to approve it for publishing. Here's an example from Kobo [1]. They apparently can't even tell you the domain name. [1] http://imgs.fyi/img/7hut.png
And how does that actively prevent people from using Spotify on their desktop?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon is free to sell books in their app, they just need to pay a portion of their revenue for the privilege of doing so much like in the mall.
Do malls take a portion of the revenue generated from the stores? I assumed they just paid rent and kept the money generated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I don't disagree, the difference was that Microsoft had a monopoly on computing. Not just on PC but take computing as a whole and microsoft was hugely dominant. From a legal standpoint there is a huge difference.
Desktop computing -- in the 90s in the server area there was more competition, primarily from Netware. It wasn't until the end of the 90s when macs started making an impression on peoples desktops, with the imac, but oddly enough if https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operati... is to be believed, windows still has a 95% share of the desktop/laptop market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's not. You can buy a PC from many different vendors, HP, Lenevo, Dell etc. They compete and the price goes down, and customers get a choice. You can also run linux for free and use VSCode for free which also runs on Linux. With Apple I have to buy the PC from Apple at it's marked up price since no competition. So it is a fair point.
What do you mean no competition? Why on earth would you want to develop Mac software without buying a Mac? This argument really does make no sense at all. It’s like complaining that if you want to drive Porsche, you have to buy a Porsche from Porsche. Er, yeah. That’s how that works. Please quibble about renting and dealerships or something. Please. I dare you. I double dare you! I swear I won’t stop laughing for a w…
It would be more like a mechanic being required to buy his tools from Porsche to be able to work on a Porsche.
And it's good you bring this up, this too is a problem in the auto industry world. Car manufacturers are pulling these stunts and creating locks for their cars so only approved tools can be used with it.
To continue the analogy, it would be like buying an Epson printer and being force to use Epson ink. Or buying a house and being forced to buy your DIY suppliers from the real estate agent.
We can keep going with analogies all day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect spiderfarmer meant that Apple is trying to prevent "[Using] spotify and netflix without going through apple", at least on iOS.
How? I use Netflix on my iPad all the time and not once has Apple tried to stop me.