or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by schmidm77

When you buy a CD player at Best Buy, you aren't required to only buy CDs at Best Buy. Apple has made itself the owner and gatekeeper to any access to 10s of millions of potential customers of other software and service companies. When Apple then creates restrictions and barriers for these other companies to sell their products to these users and wants to charge a mandatory 30% vig on all transactions, which the software can't even tell the user how to avoid, then I will...
Predatory pricing, if it could be established, is... and has been since the Sherman Act
"... even though Amazon was actually paying more money to the publishers than it was charging customers for the books." I love these stories. So Amazon was selling below its marginal cost to maintain its position in the market, which is itself a violation of antitrust law.
  You are quite the critical thinker. Posting other people's words because you have no capacity to develop your own earns you an A+ on the Internet.   Or maybe you wish to imply that because Linus Torvalds is a person of importance in the tech industry that I should just bow to his viewpoint without having one of my own?
  You mean like the notification center in iOS?
Hiding interface items until some event occurs, for whatever reason, is not even close to an original concept. So Apple applied it to scrollbars, big deal.
  The whole point of patents is to grant a monopoly. I agree that this patent is ridiculous, but I don't agree that software patents should never enjoy patent protection. Similar to if you develop a new type of pump that is 20% more efficient at pumping water (which is patentable), if you develop a clever new technique for video compression that is 20% more efficient, I think that should be equally patentable.
  Please tell us, oh wise one, where this mythical "other store" exists where developers can sell to the 100+ million iOS users that doesn't rely on exploiting security flaws in iOS to jailbreak?   Again, Apple does not own you just because you bought their phone, and it telling developers they cannot sell their software to you unless they agree to its onerous terms is going to go down as well as AT&T preventing people from using Carterphones did.
  This is more akin to John Doe selling a pie tin through iTunes and then Apple insisting that they forever in the future have a claim to 30% of the price of the cherries to make a pie and John Doe can't even tell his customer where cherries can be bought elsewhere.   All of these "Well, if it was your store" comments are complete nonsense because you can't show me another retail setting where this ridiculous scheme exists.
    Apple does not own you as a consumer just because you bought their stupid phone; even if they seem to think they do. Your sidewalk analogy is not valid.
New Posts  All Forums: