Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 903 posts

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#791

Post by jonathankoren »

satvikpendem wrote: post #222
jonathankoren wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a huge difference, including from a privacy perspective, between subscriptions and internet targeted advertising. How are you the product, when you’re giving money? That’s like saying, when you buy a ticket to Black Panther, you are the product Hollywood is selling, not the movie.

> How are you the product, when you’re giving money? Why can't you be both? After all, an advertiser's best target is someone who already has a propensity to spend. Companies can and do sell you stuff then also target you for ads.

I shouldn’t have to say this, but those are two different things, and just because you on tape them together doesn’t mean they’re identical.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#792

Post by satvikpendem »

jonathankoren wrote: post #791
satvikpendem wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How are you the product, when you’re giving money? Why can't you be both? After all, an advertiser's best target is someone who already has a propensity to spend. Companies can and do sell you stuff then also target you for ads.

I shouldn’t have to say this, but those are two different things, and just because you on tape them together doesn’t mean they’re identical.

I don't understand what you're saying. Why can't a company sell you something then also advertise to you?

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#793

Post by [deleted] »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #786
HDThoreaun wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think netflix or fortnite would force you to use a third party app. Too much negative press and loss of customers.

Epic games has done exactly that with Fortnite on Android, which is only available in the Epic Store or Samsung Galaxy Store.

[deleted]

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#794

Post by RHSeeger »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #784
RHSeeger wrote: post #779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone that isn't on an unlimited data plan, being able to play music located on the device is critical.

All of the major streaming apps let you download songs for offline playback

It seems that for Spotify it's only premium that allows for download for offline playback.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#795

Post by skinnymuch »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #499
aussieshibe wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? I heard an argument like this a lot at the start of discussions about whether we should be able to choose to WFH in the longer term. "I don't want to WFH because..." Ok, sure, but nobody is trying to force you to. It might just be me, and I'll de…

> Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? You can always Jailbreak your device? I think Apples response to your argument would be that it isn't the technically aware user that is trying to get control over their device that is the problem, its apps being used by those with no technical…

You can’t jailbreak the last two iOSes. It’s possible full jailbreaking is a thing of the past. This is the longest time it has taken to get a jailbreak for new iOS versions (for the one from last year)

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#796

Post by phpisthebest »

squarefoot wrote: post #781
phpisthebest wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>removing a screw behind a "non reversible loss of warranty" sticker Well that would be in violation of existing US Federal Law

I'm not familiar with those laws, do you mean the protection screw or the loss of warranty? I think many devices implement the latter in their EULAs, in case of tampering, use of non original parts etc, and the former as a protection is commonly used for example in some Chromebox PCs models to prevent flashing other operating systems. I think many tinkerers, including myself, would be more than happy to surrender any…

Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ban such stickers as the manufacture has to prove a modification directly led to the failure before denying a warrany claim. the FTC sent out in 2018[1][2] a letter to several manufacturers, including Apple I believe, that deployed such stickers on their products

The common example I give is that if you replace the radio in your car, and then the water pump fails the manufacturer of the car can not refuse the warranty because you change the radio

Similarly, if in this instance you remove the sticker to turn on Dev Mode and then the Screen fails it would be incumbent on Apple to prove some software or something you did directly cause the screen failure before voiding the warranty claim, they can not simply relay on a sticker

[1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ftc-warranty-sticker... [2] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2018/04/...

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#797

Post by HDThoreaun »

542458 wrote: post #118
Yujf wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple can ask 30% all they want IMO, as long as they allow side loading. Don't use their app distribution platform? Don't pay their fee. That is how it should work, which is how it does work on android (and yes most companies still use the play store, because it is hard to convince consumers to use another store, but at least the option is there. Also you can not auto update apps installed from outside the play store…

Apple’s non-hardware expenses aren’t limited to the distribution platform… They make the OS, the libraries, the APIs, the development tools and continue to maintain those even after the hardware is sold… Why should third parties get to free ride on that? I don’t see why we should compel software authors to add hooks and features and provide tools for non-paying third parties.

Because I already gave them $1000 for the device...

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#798

Post by fleshdaddy »

dublinben wrote: post #740
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, it would, because will require you to opt-out of Apple's ultra-managed experience to use their app. So, which " " is making you do this on android, where you can actually sideload apps?

Fortnite was removed from the Google Play store in 2020 for violating the in-app purchase policies, so Epic publishes it in their own sideloaded app store.[0] [0] https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/fortnite-removed-from-g...

Is this really such a bad thing? Following technical walk throughs are the sort of thing that get people interested in the kind of education that is more likely to protect them and even make them someone who “knows what they’re doing.” Most of the people I know who got interested in tech didn’t do so from some Apple approved stem app, it was from this sort of independent exploration to get something they want. These arguments start to feel like prohibition over education, and in a lot of ways just plain technocratic.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#799

Post by tpmoney »

lelanthran wrote: post #782
tpmoney wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am well aware of the megasquirt project and others like speeduino. The existence and popularity of that product no more speaks to its legality anymore than the existence and popularity of illegal drugs speaks to theirs. Federal law prohibits tampering with any part of your vehicles emissions control systems, which includes the ECU and any aftermarket parts must comply to all relevant epa standards and almost always…

So, according to your argument, which you've stated twice now [1], it's okay for regulation of consumer devices. Once again, I have to ask, why do you feel that phones should be exempt from regulation? > Additionally megaquirt themselves repeatedly remind you their products are not legal for road use [2]: Yeah, but they're perfectly legal for owners of the cars to use , as long as they stay on the track. You're argui…

> So, according to your argument, which you've stated twice now[1], it's okay for regulation of consumer devices.

I have said no such thing. I was challenging the assertion that we “demand [the option to control our devices] of almost all non-phone appliances”. I said nothing at all about the “good” or “badness” of regulation. The rest of your comment continues this bad faith interpretation of my argument and puts words in my mouth, so we’re done here.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#800

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

aussieshibe wrote: post #479
bayindirh wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand where you are coming from, and support you on that. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with the default state of an iPhone. It just manages itself, and all that hard problems (backups, updates, ease of use, experience homogenity, etc.) are solved. I manage more than enough servers at work, and I don't want to manage another server in my pocket, do nitty-gritty settings, allow selected apps background ac…

Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? I heard an argument like this a lot at the start of discussions about whether we should be able to choose to WFH in the longer term. "I don't want to WFH because..." Ok, sure, but nobody is trying to force you to. It might just be me, and I'll de…

Tangential...

World of Warcraft has a day/night cycle, but it runs in a full 24-hour cycle just like the real world. This meant that if you were like me and mostly played at night, you mostly only ever saw the game world at night, and rarely saw the beautiful daytime colors.

I found forum threads of people asking for the option to either disable the day/night cycle entirely (it was 100% cosmetic and had no effect on anything in the game), or perhaps change it to something shorter like a 6-hour cycle.

And in every one of them, there were people arguing against having it as an option because they wouldn't use it. It seems people struggle to understand what "optional" means.

It's a mindset that I just absolutely don't understand. I could maybe see someone coming at it from the standpoint of "I don't think devs should spend the time on implementing an option I won't use when there are so many other things to work on", but in the specific case of WoW's day/night cycle, I can't imagine it would be much of an effort.

Post reply on HN