or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by lightknight

I understand your position!
Anyway, I'll get the Watch itself. It seems a much better product to me, and it looks miles better...
Yes, you're likely correct! It would be pretty annoying to have several products, some of which are "more compatible" than others... Then again, you find things like EverNote on the Store, which requires an online account instead of using iCloud Drive (and possibly an iTunes-based subscription), so you can't really say Apple is consistent there...
As a user or as a stockholder, I don't see how you can NOT care about what "people" (e.g., customers, people-with-money-who-may-or-not-buy-products-and-contribute-to-profits-and-hence-more-products-get-it-now-or-are-you-asleep) think. I'm not taking of "I buy Android because I'm poor" people. I'm talking of high-revenue, exactly-Apple-target people.
Of course it does. Just like Microsoft has the right to bundle whatever software they want with their OS. /s Note, I partially agree with you. Of course Apple wants to showcase products that work 100% with their hardware, so do we, and that's what I expect as a user on their store. I'm just concerned about perception in a market where Apple is increasingly seen as the bully rather than the underdog. I was talking to a few friends (designers in advertisement and developers)...
I'm not convinced that Apple only sells in America. I would believe they'd have some kind of store somewhere in those irrelevant markets, Europe, Asia, South America etc.
sefeOne of two things is true. 1- This article is irrelevant because Apple's Store is too small to matter.2- This article is relevant, because Apple's Store is big enough to skew the market, and this might be a monopoly abuse situation.  Note I never said it was, I said it might be perceived as such. Get off YOUR soapbox. Also, learn to read.
Except the Chromecast doesn't have an app for iPhone and wasn't initially designed to work with the iPhone until Apple pushed a new, incompatible with their business model, software API. The only thing that makes the situation problematic is Apple's own success, since pulling their competitor (which used to be a partner and now, through Apple's own decisions, has turned into a competitor), means that this competitor is bound to die. It's doubly damning due to the fact that...
Monopoly behaviour or healthy curation of not-good-enough products? Fitbit was, even a year ago, touted as a highly valuable partner. I don't care for them (I don't use their stuff and am planning on getting the iWatch) but I'm a bit  queasy about Apple's general behavior. They remind me of MS 15 years ago. Am I the only one to remember when Internet Explorer was monopolistically pushed because it was "in the interest for consumers"?
New Posts  All Forums: