- Last Active
Dogperson said:List all the states so people can contact their representatives. Actually do something about this BS.
Or go on your state gov website and look at pending legislation!
The crazy thing is the California court could only use state law to claim anything for Epic - on every Federal guideline they found for Apple. That is why I suspect this might be little more than political pandering as I can't see the Ninth Circuit overruling the California court. Never mind any legislation could turn into a 'let's open up everything' boondoggle.
davidlewis54 said:It is entirely reasonable for Apple to set a standard by which app developers comply. Why should Apple provide the App Store free? It has cost Apple a huge amount to create it. Plainly many developers are happy enough to pay a fee. When you go shopping, you pay a sum which covers the store’s overheads. Where does £200 billion come from? That is obviously completely fanciful. If the apps are free, the amount of compensation is obviously nil: any percentage of nothing is nothing. To me such a claim is vexatious litigation and the court should throw it out.
roundaboutnow said:MplsP said:Great. Now let’s get back to making the iMac all it can be.Would love to see:
1) hefty cpuGPU core counts with architecture improvements.2) massive amounts of RAM.3) ultrawide screen of 34 inches or greater. It’s time. Everyone loves ultrawide.If Apple really wants to make an enduring splash with the new Mac of Macs, it’s time to show the world how ultrawide is done.And while you’re at it... make it touch capable. I’d rather not have to use a Microsoft surface to control concert lighting...4) colors: silver, space, gray, blue, gold, green, and brilliant white.5) a minimal and industrial design aesthetic.
personally, I’d rather not have a touch screen - a touch screen on an iMac isn’t really convenient and just leaves fingerprints all over the beautiful screen.
HD/SSD upgrade without having to remove the screen would be nice too...
If, for whatever reason, the SSD ends up being soldered in, I like your idea of having a place to add a 2nd SSD. Perhaps a removable panel to provide access to an area that would allow attaching a Thunderbolt drive inside. Or, given that SDUC-I Express cards can have SSD speed and capacity, maybe two SD slots--one external and one internal (you wouldn't want to inadvertently eject an SD card being used as an SSD). Frankly, I doubt either of these would happen, but we can dream, can't we?
Their is no antitrust. No monopoly. No breaking of the law going on. How the previous judge went above their pay grade and basically legislated from the bench is beyond rational thought.Let’s see a judge on appeal who actually does their job snd simply rules based on right snd wrong according to the law.
To be fair to the Judge that one point Apple lost on seems to be due to California state law not federal law. I have no idea how well that part will hold up via appeal.
Stabitha_Christie said:OutdoorAppDeveloper said:Does anyone else think that paying $400 for 32GB of RAM or $200 for 512GB of SSD space is a bit expensive? Like perhaps four times what the parts should cost? I guess we will just have to upgrade them our... oh snap!Of course we know what things cost. And of course we feel gouged when Apple pulls this stuff.
One only has to go to statcounter to see this is a total BS lawsuit: (For India) Android 72.81%; Windows 17.9%; Unknown 3.86%; iOS 2.73%; Linux 0.97%; OS X 0.91%
Limited to just the mobile market (for India): Android 95.53% iOS 3.43%; KaiOS 0.81%; Samsung 0.11%; Nokia Unknown 0.04%; Tizen 0.03%
The very idea that Apple dominates anything outside of its own brand is so insane that the CCI should regard the Together We Fight Society with the same contempt the Ninth Circuit regarded the Coalition for App Fairness (nothing but a mouthpiece/sock puppet and not worth the government's time to even listen to)
gerrit said:Around the world Apple is currently being investigated in 8 different antitrust investigations, has already been found guilty of antitrust violations for their iBooks Store in the US, and in 2019 lost a Supreme Court ruling on how the App Store is run (Apple v. Pepper). Epic may be self-serving, but most developers I know agree that Epic is on the right side of this and are hoping that Epic wins. Self-serving or not, they're on the side of the developers. The big question is really if anti-trust legislation will force Apple to change before the lawsuit is even decided.
The US Supreme Court can make boneheaded rulings Another 5-4 one was the now infamous Kelo v. City of New London. All these years later then the promised economic development has not materialized and the city is out the property taxes it would have earned over the years.
Marvin said:Apple has a choice. They can either keep fighting this battle to the bitter end and, if what has happened over the last year is any indication, get something really bad imposed on them. Or they can accept where this is going, get out ahead and control the result. The world has changed. Attitudes have changed. Apple needs to change too or they will have something bad for them and their customers forced upon them.
It’s far better to control the landing than to fight to stay aloft and end up stalling and crashing.
The original argument was about Fortnite being accessible on iOS without Apple's control, it can be accessed via the cloud, this was always an option via a browser and here it is currently running on iOS:
Apple doesn't set the prices for in-app purchases. No developers have been monetarily harmed by Apple. Here's the letter they are presenting:
They talk about the ruling undermining antitrust law but they aren't being honest about what their motives are. For a lot of these politicians, this is about Parler being removed from the store, getting retribution for it and laying groundwork for it not happening again and for some it will be Apple not allowing backdoors on iPhones. They want the ability to install backdoors on iPhones without Apple's permission. There was an article today about this:
The proposed legislation has been specifically targeted at companies with over 50m US store users to deliberately target it at Apple and Google. If it ever moves ahead, Apple can easily block access to the store in the 34 states that pushed for this to get the number to stay below 50m. If it moves ahead and they choose to go the route of allowing 3rd party stores instead, they can just create an entirely closed off sandbox for each store possibly running a separate copy of the OS in a VM so that malware is isolated from the boot capability of the device.
Apple has plenty of options to go for but before this is even worth considering, the complainants have to prove what they are arguing about - that Apple is stifling competition and harming developers and users. They haven't demonstrated this at all. The fact Fortnite is currently capable of running on iOS without Apple doing anything discredits the entire argument.
You know, I get the feeling that “Big Tech” is where the “Big Three” automakers were in 1962. Fat, abusive, turning out a decent if not great product, complacent. I just get a feeling that some little company will come out of nowhere and introduce a new way of doing things. Maybe a new phone OS, maybe a new online hang out, maybe a new way of putting customers and businesses together. I don’t know. If I did I’d be jumping all over it. But I get the feeling that for all the people who love Amazon, and gush over Android, or yes pine for the next Apple thing, there’s an undercurrent of discontent. Somebody is going to come in, be the next little upstart company that is “for the rest of us”. Someone will come in and drop the 21st century equivalent of the Toyota Corolla, or Honda Civic, or Apple II. When they do “big tech” will be caught completely flatfooted. They’ll disregard the little guy until one day they find that a lot of their customers, died in the wool Windows and Mac fans, hard core Android and iOS users have jumped ship for something better.
It’ll be the best thing that could happen to them.A changing marketplace is Operation Normal. Intel was king of the PC world until they got complacent and proceeded to do a series of boneheaded moves that allowed AMD to make headway and then thanks to Intel producing an insanely buggy CPU Apple said 'screw it, we'll design our own based on that ARM CPU we have had in our iPhones and iPads'. Now everybody and his brother either are on the ARM bandwagon or have announced they are getting on...even Intel (though Intel is still trying to hold on to the increasingly clunky x86 with a weird x86/ARM hybrid)I firmly believe if Sears had been run more intelligently they could have been Amazon. Heck, Sears last general catalogue was in 1993; in 1994 Amazon (then Cadabra Inc) opened its doors.
dantheman827 said:Child sexual abuse is bad, but trying to prevent it should never mean taking away the privacy of everyone using a online services.
Trying to get this passed by using the "it's for the children" argument is despicable.