nealc5

So they will buy Samsung or LG phones instead? A very RED and patriotic US police department would rather buy from a foreign company than a US company (yes, they build their phones in China too)? Apple is not AGAINST law enforcement.  They are FOR individual privacy and the constitution.  That's why we have a Bill of Rights.  That's why the police have to issue Miranda warnings, to tell people that they actually have rights when they are arrested, unlike some other country's. We, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, actually limit the power of government from interfering with individuals' freedoms.  Yes, if it were up to the police, they would put cameras in everyone's home, just in case someone in the neighborhood might be doing something illegal behind closed doors.  However, we have laws that prevent this.  

Apple is doing the right thing in saying NO, and then hopefully having this hashed out in the courts and laws changed.  The changed law may not favor Apple, but at least it will be clear.

I love Sign in with Apple.  Use it all the time. I don't want to give developers access to my entire Facebook or Google contacts. I suspect that Facebook and Google pay developers for this personal data, and Apple doesn't, so developers don't like it.

Apple is trying to protect my privacy. They should be applauded, not investigated.

How would Apple explain why a USB-C iPhone needs a certification program, while the current USB-C iPads do not? Doesn’t seem to make sense to me. I can plug my 2020 iPad Pro into any USB-C cable and it charges. I’m not sure that rumor is going to come true. People think Apple needs the revenue from a MFi program. It does not.

maciekskontakt said:

sflocal said:

So if I build my own phone and my own os, and sell it as a single product, I would be barred from loading my own apps on it?

F**k you politicians.  

I see no scenario where Apple would ever let this happen.  If passed, it will be forever tied up in the courts.  The iPhone has plenty of competition.  There is zero point to this.

This is no different than Microsoft in the end of ''90. Start using brain. It was bad that time and it is bad now. You people are so blind that you blame Microsoft and then 20 years later it is okay for another large corporation to try and monopolize market. Are you born fairly recently with last year brainwash problem or you did not put enough study to know prior cases like this one and ruling on them?

Microsoft used hardball tactics to force PC hardware makers to pre-load Windows. Some wanted to pre-load Linux and Microsoft tried to deny them licenses.  Microsoft actively tried to kill Internet Explorer competitors. Apple is not doing that. Apple created the "walled garden" iPhone to purposely limit the virus-riddled free-for-all software industry that plagued computer systems for years. When I had a Blackberry in the early 2000's, software downloads were terrible, and some software crashed my phone a few times. The constraints make it work better.  I do agree that now that it is mature, they could open up to competing app stores. But if you don't like the Apple approach, then buy an Android phone (or Windows PC). That's the competition. There's nothing stopping anyone from buying a Samsung phone. Many people do.

How hard would it be for Apple to include all of the AirTag electronics, including a separate battery, into the Vision Pro? Seems like that could be squeezed in somewhere.

atadams said:

BMW is stupid. They could have increased the price of the car the same amount and made CarPlay standard and no one would have blinked an eye. Now they have a bunch of negative press.

Exactly this.  You're buying a $60,000 car, and they tell you that the "super duper double extra high end" package for $3500 is needed to get the heated leather seats, back massage, Gucci trim, GPS, high end speakers and CarPlay, and nobody will care.  But if they tell me that I need to spend $80/year to support CarPlay, that's just nickel and diming people.  I'm sure its purely an accounting issue to deal with their recurring costs after the sale is made.  But it sounds stupid and petty.

I've had to buy the damn navigation system (which I never use, because I use my phone with CarPlay) in my Chevy Volt just to get the better sound system. Every year I get a notice to "update my maps" for only $139.99. Never do it.  

cloudguy said:

Gaby said:

The majority of hardware features that make it onto Android first are simply ideas Apple patented years ago but either haven’t perfected yet, or because they need them in such vast quantities that it’s easier for Android device makers to rush to market when by comparison they sell very few handsets! Beyond that they bring pointless fad features that Apple purposefully leaked as a distraction. Don’t get me wrong it’s not always the case and sometimes Apple may introduce features that genuinely debuted on other handsets, but 90% of the time that is exactly what happens. 

100% wrong and utterly delusional. Most Android innovations are developed either by Google's software division or Samsung's component division. Other than the Ax/Mx chips Apple doesn't do basic components. Never has. That sort of basic physics/chemistry/solid state electronics stuff has never been their cup of tea. Samsung meanwhile is currently the best in the world at it. And no, Apple has never done software innovation either. They are a hardware company, plus OS because that is hardware implemented as software. Apple's software deficiencies are what cost them the market share against Microsoft and Wintel, and it is what cost them the market share against Google and Android. If you believe otherwise, then you are no different from those sports fans who are convinced that A. their team is going to win the championship every year and B. that it is going to happen because their players and coaches aren't just better athletes than the competition but better people with better fans, traditions, institutions etc. In other words, total nonsense.

I don’t want to start a PC vs Mac or iOS vs Android war.  However, Apple’s low market share in Mac or iPhones are simply due to their business model. They make the hardware and software together as a bundle. You can’t run (officially) MacOS on any other hardware than Apple’s. You can’t run iOS on any other hardware other than Apple’s. This naturally limits their market share, no matter how good they are. It’s not their “software deficiencies” causing lower market share. I will admit that when their software really sucked (late 90’s), their market share was MUCH lower. But iOS doesn’t suck, so their market share is higher. But will never top 50% worldwide. 

AppleZulu said:

Next up, let's not allow automakers to include factory sound systems in cars. Instead, they have to leave the hole open for any after-market radio you want to install. For that matter, they shouldn't be able to pre-install any component for which there is a third-party competitor. Tires, wheels, brakes, fog lights, headlights, floor mats, shocks, turbos, tailpipes, seat covers, seats, wiper blades, wipers, windshields, sunroofs, moon-roofs, batteries, belts, oil, coolant, the list goes on. Let's break the automakers' monopoly on car components they want to force you to take preinstalled on your new car!

Why stop there? What if I want a Toyota hybrid drive train, but I want that in a Chevy. Shouldn't GM be forced to sell me a car without an engine? Why not get Costco to stop selling "Kirkland" brand items.

Apple's business model has ALWAYS been, since the birth of the Macintosh in 1984, to provide a turnkey solution. Operating system and hardware together, from the same company.  And that combination has to appeal to users, or they will go to their competitors, who work on the open hardware model (Windows PC's and Android devices). Apple almost went out of business in the late 1990's because they DIDN'T make the hardware/software model compelling.  That changed, and we are where we are today. What's next? They won't allow Apple to use their own silicon in their products, because it forces out competition with Intel? Let's get real.

Forcing a company to change their successful business model won't help competition.  They may be able to force Apple to allow competing app stores...I can see that coming.  Those of you that had Blackberries may remember the multiple app stores that had variations of the same app, and not knowing which one was the one you wanted.  What a mess. You don't have to buy apps from the Google Play store, but how many do that?

But to sell an iPhone without 1st party apps? Apple gives away iMovie with every phone and iPad.  Apple doesn't stop people from buying Adobe Premiere.  If Congress forces Apple to sell a "bare bones" iPhone, all Apple will need to do is to e-mail a new registered owner with a list of "essential" apps to download.  What a waste of time.

Everyone is comparing the AirPods Max to Bose or Sony noise cancellation headphones, which were initially targeted at frequent business travelers ("$300 for headphones??? You people are crazy for spending so much!") I have had a succession of Bose noise cancellation headphones over the years, and I love them for airplane travel.  However, they have never been considered "audiophile" quality.  Their main point is the noise cancellation.

Apple may be trying to compete in the audiophile space, for lower money, with more features, including noise cancellation.  Their competition may be some of these headphones: https://www.moon-audio.com/headphones/full-size.html

When Audi comes out with a $114,000 car (https://www.caranddriver.com/audi/rs7 ), Audi doesn't get trashed for making a high end car to compete with other high end Mercedes or Porsches, they get congratulated.  Because car enthusiasts know that if you don't have the $114,000 to spend on a car, you'll buy a cheaper one.  But the high tech that's in high end cars usually finds its way into lower end cars.

Apple is likely doing the same.

shareef777 said:

Some people STILL want to cry "get an android if you don't like it" when they don't realize the the Playstore has the same issue and these states are going to apply any possible regulation to BOTH stores. Just fanboys thru and thru. Only cry about regulation when it comes to Apple.

What would you say if your local gas station wasn't regulated? "Just use electric cars if you don't like the outrageous prices gas station owners would surely raise their prices to, or good old fashioned horses!"

I have news for you. Your local gas station ISN'T regulated on a pricing level. They have to put all the required taxes, but they can set the price and the profit margin they want. So if they feel like charging 30¢ more per gallon and give out free hot dogs with every fill, they can.