or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by lightknight

I vI think we have causes to defend, but we get too busy with unimportant squabbles to pay them the attention we should.Some would add: "everything according to plan".
I vI think we have causes to defend, but we get too busy with unimportant squabbles to pay them the attention we should.Some would add: "everything according to plan".
I'd reword that as "It is mainly because Apple proved to be superior", which makes your argument untrue (it's healthier to have the superior option win out than have mediocre offerings drown the better one, and Apple's fully integrated experience is more pleasing to the user, right?)
See my previous response why it's precisely where it would go afoul of "monopoly" rules. At least in my understanding, it s not what happened.
If Apple really rejected the app for "selling songs" then it would be newsworthy (and much more courtworthy than DoJ's ridiculous suit on iBooks). Apple rejected the app for using In App Purchases for real world purchases, right? I can understand why they would do that, and I can understand the developer assuming that those "real world purchases" being digital files, it would be fine to use IAP. It's not, too bad for them...
Thicker customers, for sure. Slimmer wallets, certainly.
It's not communism, it's the result of capitalism: plutocratia. Here, the winner is Amazon.
I think that was the point. Sure was mine ^^
God doesn't exist. Does that mean Apple is now CEO-less?
 I agree that it is fine for a lot of people, I'm talking marketing here. If you sell a good phone at its price at 600 and a better phone at only 700, people will get the better phone.  If you sell a good phone at 600 and a much better phone at 800, people will think twice. Do they need more features and more space? Should they go for the 5C? For the looks/features: as I said, people complain about the looks, the features are pretty welcome... but the looks aren't. Might...
New Posts  All Forums: