Kierkegaarden

About

Username
Kierkegaarden
Joined
Visits
20
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
542
Badges
0
Posts
179
  • US DOJ attacks nearly every aspect of Apple's business in massive antitrust suit

    gatorguy said:
    Madbum said:
    gatorguy said:
    davgreg said:
    This is Jonathan Kanter's work. Total Socialist.

    Guess Biden should hire Hunter to apply his law degree as a consultant on Government Relations. Or maybe buy a few pictures to hang up at Tim's house.

    Biden's mis-Administration is the most blatantly political since the Jackson administration. 

    The facts are quite simple- consumers are free to buy Windows, Android, Roku and whatever hardware they wish.
    Every significant cloud service is easily available to any consumer.
    Every significant productivity app is interoperable.
    Same for Maps, TV, Music, Books and all the rest.
    Consumers are free to use any search engine they want to: Bing, DDG, Brave, Ecosia.... Yet that didn't stop the Trump administration, with wide support from a Republican legislative branch, from filing antitrust charges against Google. But that's OK because it's some other big homegrown American company being attacked and not Apple?

    I don't think it matters what party holds office. They both have emboldened the FTC and DoJ. 
    Google suit is different , that had to do with information censorship and Google was and is the dominant search engine.

    iphones are at best 50/50 in  USA market share and 4 to 1 world wide 
    Huh?? Google LOST an antitrust case involving the Play Store, and that's despite Google allowing third-party stores, sideloading, and having under a 40% share of the US smartphone market. Yet you believe Apple having a far larger share, approaching 65%, not allowing 3rd-party app stores in the US, and allowing sideloading only under very specific enterprise conditions, should make them immune? 
    This is what I found on that lawsuit:

    “Google reached the settlement with the state attorneys general in September, resolving litigation that the AGs brought in 2021, and the terms were disclosed in a filing Monday (available at this link). The states’ lawsuit alleged Google Play was an illegal monopoly that stifled competition from other app distributors on Android devices. Specifically, the states claimed that Google signed anticompetitive contracts to prevent other app stores from being preloaded on Android devices, paid off key app developers who might have launched rival app stores, created technological barriers to deter consumers from directly downloading apps to their devices and imposed monopoly prices on in-app purchases.”

    Very different situation from the App Store.  Google has allowed consumer side loading from the beginning, but tried to stifle competitors from taking advantage of this (allegedly) — Apple has never allowed consumer side loading, and they have been consistent with this.  There are other platforms that only allow for one app marketplace — is this illegal? 

    thttmayAllMdanoxradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Heavy Apple Vision Pro leads Apple to lighten future headsets

    If Vision Pro is indeed around 450g, that isn’t too far off from AirPods Max at 385g.  I’m sure they are experimenting with different materials — possibly titanium or carbon fiber.
    FileMakerFellerbyronlHonkersmayflywatto_cobra
  • Ordering Apple Vision Pro gets more complex with face scan

    Rogue01 said:
    Yup, we've known about the required facial scanning for proper fit since June.
    I'm curious how big of a fiasco it's going to be to go into an Apple Store to demo a unit. They should do it by appointment with a required face scan before the appointment so everything is ready for you to try out. If they're just allowing everyone to come in to wait around in the store for one of the scarce demo units to be available, then having to go through a fitting and set up process along with being trained how to use it, man that will be a disaster with the time involved and so many waiting around to try it. But on the other hand, I can see people going to the store to try it out and being told, oh you have to make an appointment, the next one is in 3 weeks, and that not going over too well with customers either, so who knows.
    At $3,500, no one is really interested in this at all.  So probably won't be any lines of people waiting to try it because people would rather spend $3,500 on anything else.  This product does not solve any problems and AR/VR has never been a popular item for decades.  People don't want to wear googles to run apps or watch movies.  The battery is about 2 hours unless you are physically tied to a power source.  Apple created something that no one really has any desire for.  Maybe super rich people that have nothing better to spend money on.  No one bought iPod Hi-Fi, and that was only $349.  No one bought the $10,000 Apple Watch Gold either and Apple said you had to have an appointment to see it.  The iPhone captured the smartphone market.  This captures no market at all.  Big difference.  I love Apple and have been using Apple products since 1989, but you have to wonder why Apple even made this product when consumers are not really into that product category at all.  Very few consumers use AR for games.

    And remember, most consumers wear prescription lenses so another $150 for special lenses will a big deal breaker, especially when prescriptions typically change year after year for people that do wear glasses.
    I’m interested, and I would be even if it were twice the price.  You seem to think that everyone is you — can’t afford it, doesn’t understand it, no imagination.  
    williamlondondamn_its_hotbaconstang9secondkox2iOS_Guy80watto_cobrajwdawso
  • Unsurprisingly, Mark Zuckerberg believes Meta Quest 3 is the 'better product, period'

    Mark is delusional, period.
    AfarstarigorskybaconstangwilliamlondonForumPostwatto_cobra
  • EU antitrust chief ready to get on Apple's case about fees and safety warnings

     Vestager sounds both arrogant and ignorant — not a good combination.  She doesn’t like warnings?  Why is that we have cookie warnings on websites?  Is it to scare users, or is it to inform them?  And how did this requirement come about exactly?

    And she doesn’t like fees?  How exactly did all of the APIs and developer tools get built, and how are they maintained?  She doesn’t understand any of the technology that goes into the platform and the costs of building and maintaining it.

    Does the EU have the power to dictate what a company charges for their products or services?  What system does that sound like?
    tmaythtwilliamlondonAllMwatto_cobra
  • Analysts mostly nonplussed by DoJ suit, and believe Apple will win

    Fred257 said:
    IWatches will soon be available on Android. 
    Because I have kept up on a daily basis with Apple News and innovation since 1997 on a daily basis.
    Apple Watch will never be available on Android.  On the other hand, “IWatches” might — whatever the hell those are.

    You sound like you’ve become a real expert on “Apple News”, on a daily basis.
    ihatescreennameswilliamlondoniOS_Guy80radarthekatronn40domijbdragonwatto_cobra
  • US DOJ attacks nearly every aspect of Apple's business in massive antitrust suit

    Total joke of a lawsuit, coming from a totally corrupt department.  The points are so weak, as others have pointed out — it’s as if they worked off notes from 2019 and didn’t bother to see if anything changed.  And regarding the 30% — besides being an industry standard rate, they have been consistent with it since 2008 and have only reduced it under certain circumstances — regardless, many of the apps do not pay the fee.
    iOS_Guy80williamlondonAllMthtbaconstangradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Consumers pile on Apple with App Store monopoly class action suits

    It is alleged in the suits that Apple suppressed technologies for messaging apps, wallets, and similar functions and features. If it had made them more open, Apple could've increased competition in the smartphone market.

    What technologies were suppressed, and in what way would there be more competition in the smartphone market if Apple had “made them more open”?  Did Microsoft bail on the smartphone market because of any of this?

    Consumers were not harmed in any way.  Software has only gotten less expensive since Apple created the App Store.  Nothing will come of these garbage class action lawsuits from these scumbag lawyers.
    hecalderForumPostBart Ytmayjahbladewatto_cobra
  • Spotify upset over 9 day App Review, cries antitrust to EC

    Did the EU stipulate how much time Apple is allowed to approve any apps or app updates?  No.  So stop whining about every little thing already — NOBODY GIVES A DAMN.
    teejay2012NickoTTstompywilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • UK denies Apple's bid to dismiss App Store lawsuit

    What a waste of time.  It is easy to see that 30% has been the established rate used by the industry, not to mention the fact that this is much lower than what developers used to pay before the App Store.  And as Apple pointed out, most app developers don’t pay anything, and a large amount pay just 15%.  

    If you want your app to exist on the iOS platform that Apple created, it is only fair that you pay for that privilege and use of the tools and resources that Apple provides.  The UK government taxes its citizens for the right to live in their country and enjoy the tools and resources it provides.  The top income rate in the UK is 45% — how is this not “excessive”?
    tmayAlex1Nwatto_cobradavidlewis54