spheric

About

Username
spheric
Joined
Visits
264
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
3,763
Badges
1
Posts
2,624
  • Apple formalizes 8-pin 'Ultra Accessory Connector' for switching headphones from Lightning...

    This is not a new connector, and it is apparently nothing Apple themselves intend to use. They've merely certified it to be used for "Made for iOS" Lightning adapters and accessories. It's in use by various manufacturers as yet another standard USB connector. https://arstechnica.com/apple/2017/02/no-apple-isnt-developing-an-all-new-port-for-accessory-makers/
    gatorguydoozydozenphilboogiecalimattinozcornchiprandominternetpersonpscooter63Solinetmage
  • Apple debuts $549 AirPods Max over-ear headphones


    MacPro said:
    I am sure these are aimed at professional studios, they will be followed next year by a lower-cost version for the great unwashed.
    Music studios have no use for Bluetooth headphones, except maybe for reference purposes — you need to check your mixes on consumer-grade equipment to make sure they work across a variety of playback environments. 

    The latency of Bluetooth audio makes it completely useless for recording, and the lossy compression of the audio stream means you're hearing everything through digital artefacting and noise masking algorithms, which is simply not an option for production.  
    GeorgeBMacequality72521harry wildCloudTalkintokyojimuphilboogierazorpitwelshdogAlex1NMacQuadra840av
  • EU has very serious issues with Apple, says competition chief

    rhbellmor said:
    Whenever the EU needs money for budget overruns 
    Which "budget overruns" would that be that you're referring to? 

    The theory that whenever the EU overruns some budget, they just go out and fine someone is kinda cute.

    It's like a five-year-old trying to understand government budgeting. 
    avon b7gatorguyiOS_Guy80blastdoorMisterKitRonnyDaddy9secondkox2muthuk_vanalingamVictorMortimerwilliamlondon
  • EU has very serious issues with Apple, says competition chief


    rob53 said:
    I have very serious issues with the dictatorship called the EU. 
    The fact that a democratically elected government is "dictating" rules that all businesses — even foreign ones — need to follow (we call them "laws") does not make them a "dictatorship". 

    You'd just rather not have to follow the law. 
    avon b7nubusRonnyDaddy9secondkox2muthuk_vanalingamVictorMortimerwilliamlondonAlex1NScot1
  • EU has very serious issues with Apple, says competition chief

    spheric said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    nubus said:
    Vestager is ultra pro open markets. It seems not all here get that part. She is pushing for competition all the way by keeping competition fair. If you're like Apple doing tax evasion with a "Double Irish with Dutch Sandwich" model then you can expect to take some heat. And EU is by the way not keeping fines. Those fines are 1:1 deducted from what the countries pay and EU can't charge taxes on their own. EU is not like the US government.

    If Apple can't handle a person running things by the book, fighting for open markets, and being passionate about fair competition then the person replacing Vestager later this year will be a nightmare to Apple. The election earlier this month gave nationalistic parties more votes. Trade protectionism is high on their agenda. Tim Cook shouting at Vestager has all the way been very unprofessional. You don't see him like that when working with communist dictatorships.
    Apple has always been an open market player. 

    So your fluff piece is moot. 

    Apple operates a store. Apple gets its commission. Boom done. 

    This is how it’s been done in the history of stores to this day. 

    What stores dont do:

    A) host signs and banners telling you to go to one of your vendors house to get a shirt for cheaper. 

    B) use Billy bobs payment system since Billy Bob sells sandals in your store. 

    C) let vendors put up their own store inside of your store and not pay a commission on sold items
    and rent) 

    it’s flat out criminal what this corrupt organization has done. They’ve basically robbed Apple and then made them pay to operate other people’s marketing, hosting, and discovery. The heck out of here. 

    Try selling something through Walmart and pull these things: you’ll ba banned from selling through them and all affiliates and partners for life. And that’s what should have happened here. Penalize the contract-breakers, the thieves, and the hijackers, not the store operator. 

    Common sense does not exist in European government. 
    The store itself isn't really as much of a problem as the platform it is on. A platform that limits competitors. 

    It's not about a store in a store. It's about alternative stores on the platform. 

    As Apple has the keys to the gate it was deemed a gatekeeper. It got away with that unfair for years. 
    So, you're saying that Apple should be able to sell music through Spotify without paying them anything right? After all, with by far the largest share of the streaming market in Europe, the Spotify platform is a gatekeeper for music, and they don't currently allow anyone else to sell music on their platform, thus limiting competitors. I mean, it's all about alternative stores, right?
    What Spotify platform? Where are most Spotify users listening from? Its own platform? Is it limiting users to its own platform? 

    Are you implying Spotify has a captive audience? 


    So, you don't think its competitors deserve a fair shake inside the Spotify streaming ecosystem? Where's the consumer choice in that? I mean, surely Apple should be allowed to sell music/streaming inside Spotify? I don't get it, do you want to eliminate barriers to competition or not?  
    If you don't get it perhaps it's because you don't want to get it.

    You've moved from a Spotify 'platform' to a Spotify 'ecosystem'. I'm not seeing either of those. 

    I'm seeing a service and a limited service at that because it's mainly audio that has no captive control over its users. 

    Right, because you, like the EU, want to define those terms (frankly, I see them as synonymous for practical purposes) in such a way that they only apply to large US tech companies and not to companies like Spotify. Captive control? What a joke. Apple doesn't have captive control over anyone, unless of course you also define that in such a way that it only applies to Apple. People don't use Apple products because Apple has "captive control", they use them because the are typically best in class. The EU doesn't like that — I suppose they are looking nostalgically back at the heyday of Nokia, for example — because there simply aren't EU companies that typically have best in class products. The propping up of Spotify, which actually has majority marketshare and doesn't need propping up, simply highlights how entirely dishonest the rhetoric from the EU on this issue is, and makes clear what their intent really is — to hobble American companies as required to maximize the success of EU companies.
    Would it really be asking too much to require that users sign off on the restrictions prior to purchase?
    Is this something that EU has asked Apple to do and Apple has refused to do so far? Why is this even relevant to the discussion?
    He's just raising a lot of pseudo issues — i.e., blowing smoke — in an attempt to gloss over the lawless, autocratic, protectionist behavior of the EU. The bottom line is, if you are going to require companies to do specific things to do business in the EU, a) those requirements need to be explicitly enumerated in law, and b) unless you are just running a protectionist racket, you don't "craft" them so as to only target large US tech firms.
    You haven't read the law. 
    Perhaps you can cite the specific sections of the law that spell out, in explicit detail, exactly what DMA compliance consists of?

    I actually DO recommend reading the law. It really helps with figuring out what you're talking about, you know. 

    (40)

    "To prevent further reinforcing their dependence on the core platform services of gatekeepers, and in order to promote multi-homing, the business users of those gatekeepers should be free to promote and choose the distribution channel that they consider most appropriate for the purpose of interacting with any end users that those business users have already acquired through core platform services provided by the gatekeeper or through other channels. This should apply to the promotion of offers, including through a software application of the business user, and any form of communication and conclusion of contracts between business users and end users. An acquired end user is an end user who has already entered into a commercial relationship with the business user and, where applicable, the gatekeeper has been directly or indirectly remunerated by the business user for facilitating the initial acquisition of the end user by the business user. Such commercial relationships can be on either a paid or a free basis, such as free trials or free service tiers, and can have been entered into either on the core platform service of the gatekeeper or through any other channel. Conversely, end users should also be free to choose offers of such business users and to enter into contracts with them either through core platform services of the gatekeeper, if applicable, or from a direct distribution channel of the business user or another indirect channel that such business user uses.

    (41)

    The ability of end users to acquire content, subscriptions, features or other items outside the core platform services of the gatekeeper should not be undermined or restricted. In particular, a situation should be avoided whereby gatekeepers restrict end users from access to, and use of, such services via a software application running on their core platform service. For example, subscribers to online content purchased outside a software application, software application store or virtual assistant should not be prevented from accessing such online content on a software application on the core platform service of the gatekeeper simply because it was purchased outside such software application, software application store or virtual assistant."


    Which of these bits do you find overly vague or difficult to understand?

    There's rather a lot more equally clearly-worded scenarios and explanations. I suggest you read all of them; that should resolve most all of your confusion. 
    nubusmuthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondongatorguy
  • Jean-Louis Gassee doesn't know who an iPad is for, and thinks you don't either

    Use case 1: my daughter is in tenth grade. Her iPad and iPhone are her only computers. All of her schoolwork, notes, and schoolbooks are handled on the iPad/Pencil. 

    Use case 2: The live music industry has been largely revolutionised by iPad.
    a) Remote mixing is the norm. A sound engineer will walk through the venue during sound check and adjust the mix using his iPad to control the mixing console. 
    b) Our onstage monitor mixes (making sure the musicians onstage hear the other musicians, click tracks, cues, and talkline, etc.) used to require a dedicated engineer, or be handled as extra duty by the front-of-house mixer. It has become the norm to have a wifi-enabled rack mixer for monitoring, with each musician using an iPad (or smartphone) to control their own individual mix. 
    c) Paper notation is a thing of the past. Cover bands with massive binders full of sheets for a six-hour gig are a very, very rare thing these days. iPad completely replaced paper for most of us. 
    d) it's not just paper replacement, but sound program changer, synth remote control, and, for a number of us, actual sound engine, as well. 
    badmonkchadbagmacplusplusgregoriusmmattinozlolliverlogic2.6FileMakerFellerwatto_cobracornchip
  • EU tells Apple to open everything up to its rivals

    jdgaz said:
    Now I completely understand why England left the EU. 
    No, Britain left the EU because rich crooks wanted the freedom to keep hiding their money in offshore tax havens after it was clear that the EU would eventually crack down on them. 

    So they lied to the public about supposedly overreaching EU legislation — despite the fact that most of the legislation was for the large part (co-)written by Britain. Plus a lot of bullshit about 350 million £ a week sent to Europe that could be used for the NHS instead (which was a blatant lie, but Blojo escaped criminal prosecution for it). 

    Farage has dual citizenship with an EU state, so he can just choose whatever suits him better financially and personally — in contrast to all the stupid sheep he hoodwinked, and all the others who didn't fall for it but have to live with the consequences anyway. 

    ALSO: Have you seen the shit the British government just tried to pull on end-to-end-encrypted messengers? Screw interoperability — they tried to force all operators to BREAK encryption. Thankfully, they backed down after it became clear that all messengers would have to pull out of Britain, or compromise encryption globally. The EU toyed with that, as did the USA, but it never left the idea phase. 
    Post-Brexit Britain actually wrote it into law and tried to pass it. 
    avon b7Alex1NbaconstangSkepticalblastdoorPauloSeraaauxioFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • UK's latest embarrassing technology demand centers on phone thefts

    PLEASE make a clear distinction between "News" and editorialising content. 

    This is obviously the latter, but it's not always as easily distinguished. 

    Clearly delineating between reporting and opinion is a BASIC tenet of reputable journalism. 
    williamlondonGrannySmith99command_fmaccapoisednoisewatto_cobrarmasperotokyojimu
  • Tim Cook may have met with Trump during WWDC to discuss second term priorities

    melgross said:
    Trump winning its a given at this point.

    The world needs it.
    Fortunately no. The world needs for him to be put in a home.


    It’s almost cruelty that Jill and co. Haven’t set up Joe in a nursing facility already. There has been FAR too much embarrassment from the guy. Not only can he not ambulate safely, but routinely spaces out and needs handholding and direction for the most basic things. Recently have you seen the looks on the Italian and Canadian prime ministers faces as Joe basically disappeared without going anywhere? The guy needs to retire and get consistent care. He may only be a little older than Trump, but he’s declined so much faster. Meanwhile trump is holding his own and then some with master manipulators and fast talkers like Logan Paul. 

    You may not like Trump, but he is clearly the far more sound candidate than Biden - and pretty much everyone else in that side of the aisle. 
    "Religion is such a great thing it's so it keeps you know there's something to be good about you want to be good you wanna it's so important I don't know if it's explained right I don't know if I am explaining it right you know you want to be good you want to go to heaven when you have something like that you wanna go to heaven OK so you want to go to heaven so if we don't have heaven OK you almost say what's the reason why do I have to be good let's not be good what difference does it make"
    ~ Donald J. Trump~ June 2024
    gatorguy9secondkox2ilarynxtmayronnmuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • EU has very serious issues with Apple, says competition chief

    "Well, we have a number of Apple issues [and] I find them very serious," [Margrethe Vestager] said on CNBC.

    Chief of which is that Apple isn't paying enough graft to keep the EU off its back.
    I know the United States is devolving into some kind of corrupt banana republic where positions on courts and in government are handed out on a donation/friendship basis and Supreme Court Justices make millions in undisclosed "gifts" from "friends", but please don't assume that other places work the same way. 

    Thank you. 
    9secondkox2muthuk_vanalingamVictorMortimerroundaboutnowAlex1NScot1