JonG

There will be problems created by anybody.  This legislation already exists for something a lot more complicated and dangerous than our stupid phones: Cars.

Would you like to be told that the only person who could fix a Ford is the Ford dealership.  Then the dealership near you closes, and the next closest dealership is 75 miles away.

What happens to all those people that don't live near an Apple Store?  Oh... go to Best Buy.. where they never have the appropriate parts in stock. And why should Best Buy be "blessed" any more than any other technician?  They aren't trained by Apple Inc., they are trained by Best Buy (and having worked there I can give you first hand information of the uselessness of their training).

Right to repair legislation gives access to owners and repair centers for the documentation on how to fix something.  It also gives access to purchase genuine parts.  It doesn't make Apple "bless" the repair center as authorized, it just means that consumers have a choice.  They have a choice now, but the problem is that the choices get limited because those repair people can ONLY purchase 3rd party, crap, parts.

For anyone that is against this, please explain how users would be harmed by having information and genuine parts access?  Bearing in mind that users and repair centers can already access cheap, knockoff parts that make "your phone explode".

I think there is a case for anticompetitive behavior, which does not require a monopoly.  All of these comments about "monopoly" address Epic's case (which I agree is rather laughable).  The Cydia case rests on anticompetitive behavior, not a monopoly.

Apple does not OWN the platform, since they sell it to me and do not rent it.  None of these EULAs have been tested in court really. Note that Apple continues to tell me what I can do with something I have purchased. No one would accept this logic in a car; here's the only parts, oil, and gas you are permitted to use. Or how about a lightbulb; you can only use it with the light fixtures that I make, or vice-versa.

How about selling a refrigerator and then saying that it is monitored and will shut down if you buy certain foods that aren't on the approved list?

I'm an Apple user, and even an admin for a company that predominantly uses Apple.  I'm very submerged in their ecosystem, but that doesn't mean I have to defend all of their behaviors.  This all harkens back to a few years ago when everyone who is defending Apple right now was up in arms because Sony started going after hackers who modded their PS systems to run linux.

Also, everyone can remember a few years ago when it wasn't a government regulation that once you had paid off a cell phone, that the original carrier, at their own option, could keep it locked to the network.  Now, once you own it, you own it and a carrier can't tell you that you have to use their service.  You can't call Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile a monopoly, but they CAN engage in anti-competitive behavior that freezes out smaller businesses in the same space.

The simple basis is this:  All of these devices are computing platforms and laws have to be universal for computing platforms. Either platforms need to remain open so that you have a right to do with a hardware platform as you please, or we have to agree that all computing platforms can be locked down and companies are allowed to dictate how their product is used after you purchase it.

"Law abiding..."

And which countries laws would these be?  North Koreas?

The previous comments on this seem to be non-sensical.  It is 100% arbitrary to disable FaceID when a 3rd party replacement is done.

Look at the car example.  What if Ford/Volvo/Nissan (or anyone with a Pilot Assist System with a front camera) said that if you got a 3rd Party Windshield replacement that they would disable Traffic Aware Cruise Control in your vehicle without any testing. They do have warnings that if you get the wrong windshield you could end up with the system not functioning, but that is up to be as the vehicle owner to decide my own risk.  And that is a direct risk of my life and those riding in my car, not just that someone might be able to look at my web-browsing history.

Putting up a warning that you have used recognized 3rd party parts for a repair and that you have to absolve Apple of any liability for security breaches due to that would be one thing.  Removing functionality that I already paid for is something else.

If they want to do this, then increase the cost of the phone and require AppleCare as part of the purchase, or just reduce the price of screen repairs at any certified center to a small fixed amount with no profit to prove that they aren't soaking people.

ihatescreennames said:

alandail said:

Anilu_777 said:

One of the many reasons I will never buy a Tesla. Having CarPlay available means I’m getting access to what I already pay for: Apple Music - plus messaging etc that I use many times a day while commuting. No CarPlay, no sale. 

There is no need for CarPlay on a Tesla.

My car has CarPlay and we use it all the time. One thing I like about it is if I ask my HomePod for the hours of a store and then head there, when I get into the car CarPlay offers to give me directions to that store. That works great for me at our second home where I’m less familiar with the area and tend to use navigation more often. Another thing it does is offer to give me navigation to the next appointment on my calendar. That works without having to share my calendar with a third party. We also use the HomePod  Intercom feature quite a bit. For example, if I’ve run out to pick up some take-out I can send an Intercom announcement that I’m almost home and then the table is set and everyone is ready when I walk in the door. Does that stuff work with Tesla?

I've owned my Model Y since 2019.  Originally I had a separate screen for CarPlay because I thought I couldn't live without it.  I was wrong.  Sold the adapter after 3 months of not using it.  I miss CarPlay a little, but the navigation in the car is much better for an EV, because of the automatic integration of the charging network.  When I need to charge on a long trip (charge at home when I am not traveling far) it automatically routes me and pre-heats the battery for charging.  I've run it alongside Waze and others, and the routing is just as good if not better.

It syncs my calendar via the app and auto-routes to my next appointment, and will automatically pick up my habits and route me to the train station first thing in the morning, and back to the house at night.  I have a bunch of Shortcut automations as well that pre-heat/pre-cool the car before I leave in the morning, remind me to charge at night if I am below a certain level.  In addition I can use Siri to open/close the trunk.  The auto-tie-in with my garage door means that as I pull into the driveway the door opens for me, and after I pull out of the garage it auto closes (unless I manually cancel either).

The voice command inside the Tesla is lacking, I will totally admit.  But Siri works fine.  To your example about take out, I have a Shortcut that I've setup so that when I say "Hey Siri, Take-Out Coming Home" it both sends a pre-recorded message to the whole home intercom as well as texting my wife and kids, for the same reason you mention.  It also auto shares my ETA in the message so they know when I'll be back.

The integration isn't perfect, but it certainly works well enough that I only miss CarPlay when I'm working with Podcasts and Audible.  However, Apple Podcasts is coming out native before the end of the year, so at least one down!

Apple is not the government, nor are they law enforcement, I don't want them trying to act as either.

Also, these groups can bleat all they want, but are they going to ban Math classes in college?  Anyone with a bit of math knowledge can make an encryption scheme (or simply grab one of a few hundred thousand apps out there) and encrypt the files themselves.  They can put their illegal files into an encrypted archive, or into an encrypted disk image.

Would these groups like to try to ban encryption?  What they are asking for goes far beyond a "slippery slope", it is willful stupidity about the way the world, and computers, work. There is no silver bullet that will stop the abuse and exploitation of children.  It is a repugnant crime that has gone on throughout history.

Apple is not facilitating these crimes, people are using their services while they commit a crime.

Are we going to start ordering car companies to limit the speed a car can travel?  I mean cars can go far faster than the speed limit, and it is super easy for the car to know the speed limit of the road it is on, so why don't we simply prevent cars from going faster than that?  What about all the cameras in cars, should we also demand that those are networked and monitored by the car companies so that if someone injures someone with their car, they can be caught by the car company?

Never allow private companies to do the job of police, they aren't trained for it, and then when they inevitably turn over a parent for taking a picture of their baby in the bath they will get gutted by a lawsuit for defamation.

Jobs originally opened Apple Fifth Avenue in 2016, and since then it has received over 57 million visitors.

Umm. Might want to correct your last graph typo as I’m pretty sure zombie Jobs didn’t open the store 5 years after he died. 

It's not just about being able to use the mouse when it is dead.  There is also interference as an issue.  We have our offices in Times Sq. and have quickly moved all of the "Magic Mouse"s that we own out of service.  Why, you ask?  Of course employee productivity is affected if they are unable to use their computer because they forgot to plug in their mouse, or maybe they did plug it in, but the dock that they use with their laptop doesn't provide charging power unless the laptop is homed into the dock.

In any case, the power scenario is one thing, but now we use decent quality Logitech Mouse(s) that cost 50% of a Magic Mouse and can still use a dongle or Bluetooth and they have a charging port on the front side (like the Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad I might add).  It isn't all about charging, like my Magic Keyboard in my office, I keep everything plugged in almost all the time because when I disconnect, if it is a particularly bad day, then the mouse and/or keyboard lag because of signal interference.  

If you wanted to defend your design like that, saying "why would people ever need to use it while charging," then why do the Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad both function over the hard-line while charging?  Obviously Apple recognizes that this is necessary functionality, they just have a total corporate blindspot when it comes to the Magic Mouse.

I, for one, am glad that almost no product includes it anymore, and those that do I can opt for the a trackpad instead.

Skeptical said:

All vapor ware until it’s on a phone. Why announce something then say it won’t be released FFS?

Vaporware is defined as :  

• software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.

The technical definition almost fits, but since this wasn't advertising, but a developer conference to allow outside companies/individuals to begin programming integrations for release on Day 1.  As a company that develops for both MacOS and iOS/iPadOS I will state that it is invaluable to see the roadmap.

The fact that you wanted to listen in to developer information as a consumer matters very little to me as a developer.  In the history of Apple's information releases to date, there has been relatively little unrealized vaporware put out.

By your argument, unless an item is in-stock for you, it is vaporware.  So iOS 17 itself is vaporware and by your argument should be kept under wraps until it is released, preventing anyone from testing and developing for it.  Also, we should do away with CES as well, since all they do is show what is coming soon.  Car companies shouldn't ever announce new models until they are at the dealers.  Tesla shouldn't take online orders, because they build cars to order, they are vaporware until they are delivered.

This isn't about when a product is delivered, but if a company has a history of announcing items that never come out.  Or if they announce items just to drum up funding for them (Shark Tank, Kickstarter, Indiegogo, etc.), which I very rarely back because I've been failed too many times.

To be clear, they aren't "paying" anything.  They are offering a discount on future billing for the inconvenience.  So if you terminate service with them, you don't get anything.

That is not a payment, it's a very cheap sounding credit.