or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by lkrupp

Yep, the attitude seems to be that a snap of the finger fixes these things. The ‘other’ side of the story is that none of these recently announced nasty’s have gained any traction in the wild, no mass exploits reported. Could it be that these exploits are much harder than the security researchers imply? Many need physical access. I also question the ethical logic used by researchers in giving companies like Apple six months to fix something before releasing it to the bad...
And the really sad thing is we’ve read those exact words right here on AI by actual members.
Anti-competitive. Bad Apple. Where’s the government when you need them to slap the bully? Maybe Michael Bromwich can stop this illegal act before it damages Monster any further.   Well, that’s what the iHaters and trolls will say. I’m surprised we haven’t read it yet.
I always like Apple’s advertising because they concentrate on what their products can do for you, how their products can make your life a bit easier. They typically don’t say anything about competitors, and they don’t trumpet technical specs like they are some touchstone for making a buying decision. 
  For Apple news maybe but the News app is going to be much more than that.
If you are chaffing that much over the walled garden perhaps you should just move along and find a different platform to complain about. Sounds like Windows would suit you nicely. And we wouldn’t have to pass over your negativity all the time.
Since OS X 10.11 has already been announced I’m seriously doubting it. And there are plenty of California landmarks to choose from for naming.
 So Apple will pay more to the labels than Spotify but I’m guessing the government will consider that to be anti-competitive behavior and sue Apple anyway. If Spotify or other streaming services begin to suffer or fail because of Apple Music I’m sure they’ll be whining to the FTC. Could the FTC force Apple to provide a free tier to make it all even and such, accessible by poor people? I’m being sarcastic here but I wouldn’t put anything beyond the low-life bureaucrats that...
So why have the content blockers in the first place? And the first part of the article spends time discussing what might happen to websites that live or die by advertising dollars, sort of like the net-neutrality arguments. If all browsers include the capability to block ads how will the little guy survive on the meager ad-click income they depend on? To me it all boils down to the false premise about ‘free’ services, apps, cloud storage, and the like. There is NO such...
 Which the government could interpret as anti-competitive behavior? Not that it actually would be but the government seems to have put a bullseye target on Apple’s back recently. They are currently investigating the new music service before it even goes live. I personally think the government has decided that Apple has gotten too big for them to tolerate.
New Posts  All Forums: