neoncat

mike1 said:

It was inevitable, but hopefully, nobody is going to "rejoice" because a connector changes.

Sorry/Not Sorry. I'm delighted that Lightning is finally in its death throes, although I save the idea of "rejoicing" to the broader goal of Apple finally being cured of their proprietary connector fetish. From NuBus to ADB to ADC to Micro-DVI to the 30-pin connector to Lightning and everything in-between. 30+ years of annoyances, adopted then abandoned as it suited them.

There's so much garbage reporting about this ruling among the sycophant Apple press that it's refreshing to see such a measured and information-dense version. Kudos to AI. 

I've seen some legal discussion about Apple's chances on appeal and the consensus (that I've seen, at least) is slim to none. The nature of Judge Gonzalez Rogers' ruling means that there will be a significant burden on Apple that, in light of the accusations of perjury, may be impossible for them to meet without further implicating themselves in false testimony. 

And speaking of: It is exceptionally rare for a federal judge to accuse a party of perjury and to forward it for possible prosecution. The barriers placed on judges to make those accusations are formidable, and so such an action should be taken extremely seriously. Whether or not the Justice Department intends to pursue it is a whole other question, of course. 

EDIT: spelling

This may be semantics, but it's not really "native" support. Access will be via Safari, not via a native app, with all the implied limitations as a result. It's not a lot different than how you're able to use any one of a number of game streaming services on the iPad already. 

FCP is an afterthought in the general video production industry at this point. It exists as fanboy service for people who absolutely have to have an entire Apple stack. There are much better, more faster moving options with far more aggressive and interesting development pathways and much larger and more active support communities that run just as well, if not better, on Apple's excellent hardware. The profile in this video doesn't surprise me in the least. 

Only responding to offer my full-throated support for the use of the word "imbroglio." Fun to say, fun to spell!  

The purpose of this statement wasn't to suggest winners or losers, just speculation on how much impact the move will have. That 50% still use IAP is a sign that Apple has a chance to make the courts happy and still make money

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I just meant that we already have some data (however limited) that shows,interestingly, it's not as simple as everyone prefers Apple's system or everyone can't wait to be free of it. The choice seems to be giving people options that meet their individual needs and in the end that's s net-win. I'd rather Apple pivot to selling and promoting the benefits of its system (compete on merit) than working so hard and spending so much goodwill and PR trying to keep it locked down.

Let's say a clothing manufacturer imports 1M units a year from Vietnam, responds to tariffs by producing those 1M units in the USA

Except they won't. Because there's no reward for doing so. The PR benefit is momentary, if it even exists.  Corporations will chose to lean on foreign partners, moving manufacturing around as needed (not unlike Apple, shifting from China to India) to make sure they continue to serve both domestic and international customers with product and efficiencies of manufacture are maintained. Tariffs will be passed on to the consumer, like any CODB. Why would they do otherwise? Economic policy changes, administrations come and go. But maximizing profit and lowering barriers to purchase through effective pricing and marketing will ultimately outlast the political noise du jour.

Putting this in the same PR spin pile as Qualcomm's modem "study."

The more Apple twists and turns and tries to control the narrative about their stupid little App Stores, the less inclined I am to care. The war is already lost, they just won't admit it. The sooner they pivot to thinking about how to take advantage of what comes after the feudal rent seeking, the sooner we all benefit. Because it's just a matter of when it will be torn down, not if.

Or, they can keep insisting on how piously right they are, and end up giving the entire farm away like the did with both the eBook trial and the earlier Look-and-Feel lawsuits. Learn from your crushing mistakes, Apple. 

AppleInsider said:

Apple's services revenue could take a hit, but it remains to be seen how many users will actually take advantage of the external links when in-app purchase is still an option. Customers could become confused by being pulled out of an app or game and suddenly asked to fill out a payment form.

It's not that big of a mystery, at least in the case of Fortnite. Sweeney indicated the split of purchases since its return to the App Store is about 60/40, in favor of Apple's in-app payment system, although it continues to trend toward 50/50. Seems some people like having a choice, and some people like sticking with what they know. Everyone wins? 

charles1 said:

I had to laugh at the "controversy" about the Wallet Ad. Gruber said your real wallet is sacrosanct and he never sees advertising in his wallet. He obviously never looked. I examined one credit card in my wallet, it displays four corporate logos advertising their companies. Some cards are one big advertisement. Even the minimalist titanium Apple Card has three logos on it. I have a receipt in my wallet, oh no it has advertising printed on the back! [facepalm]

don't hurt your back knocking over that strawman there.