avon b7

9secondkox2 said:

It’s not chickening out. 

It’s doing the right thing. 

For once. 

In this case, the EU doing nothing is doing the right thing. 

The whole DMA fiasco needs to be reversed ASAP. 

This isn't about the EU or the DMA. 

DAalseth said:

Rogue01 said:

People already use their iPads or iPhones for home automation, assuming they actually use HomeKit devices.  Most don't. 

That’s the big part of this most don’t want to admit. I realized it was the case when my local Rona and Home Depot, were reducing the number of connected lights, locks, bulbs, and such, and filling the space with old style ‘dumb’ devices. They aren’t selling. The fancy Home Automation Connected devices are selling to a small tech crowd, but most people don’t want the hassle. Most people just want things to work and have no problem using a programmable thermostat like they did 30 years ago, or walking over to the light switch, or using a key to open the door. Most of the devices seem like solutions looking for a problem and not finding one.

Yes. Any solutions have to be near on 'invisible' in terms of human interaction to make things not only usable but to make users want to use them in the first place. 

Plug and Play for digital lifestyles. 

Systems must absolutely be 'self-healing' on the software side and shouldnt be thrown off by power outages causing corrupt files or whatever. 

AI for configuration and troubleshooting can work well here. 

Another vital area is device support. No one wants to fill a home with smart gear and have a manufacturer do a SONOS and drop support of perfectly good equipment just because it doesn't play well with a newer system.

In this case, maximum attention needs to be paid to chipset security and standards in IoT and then to the security support for the lifetime of the device. 

foregoneconclusion said:

Why wouldn’t Apple just put the Face ID notch in the center of one the folded sides? Unlock and then unfold.

Probably because many people will see the screen lock in unfolded mode (due to absence or whatever) and come back and want the FaceID to kick in immediately.

If it wasn't available in the unfolded device state and people had to either 'fold and unfold' or turn the device around it would be a pain.

A simple solution would be to not use FaceID at all or a combo FaceID/power button biometric solution as we know some people aren't able to use FaceID well. 

decoderring said:

SuntanIronMan said:

jfreedle2 said:

Side loading is moronic and stupid, and only an idiot would suggest it. I feel sorry that some idiot is attempting to “require” it. 

Anybody remember when “side loading” was simply called… you know… “loading”?

Before centralized app stores owned by the OS makers was a thing, downloading an application from wherever was simply what everybody did. It is what you can still do on MacOS (and typically we don’t start calling people “idiots” for doing that).

Also, be nice. Calling everybody an idiot doesn’t make you cool. You can disagree while still being nice. You don’t have to. Nobody can force you. Do whatever you want. But… it would be nice to be nice.

Major thumbs up to this response — thank you!!!

I'm not a fan of the term either. Never have been. 

For me 'sideloading' is the installation of a freely distributed installation file on a mobile device through means other than an official app store.

IMO, if an app is installed through an official app store it isn't sideloading, it's loading as per the general rules and is therefore a normal install. 

9secondkox2 said:

avon b7 said:

phillyfanatic09 said:

“CheeseFreeze said:

jfreedle2 said:

Side loading is moronic and stupid, and only an idiot would suggest it. I feel sorry that some idiot is attempting to “require” it. 

I guess I’m that “stupid guy”, and with me all EU citizens. And you know what? The experience has been amazing so far. “

I suspect not a lot of side loading is happening in the EU or elsewhere, even Android side loading is a minor part of app usage on that platform.

In the end, side loading is about money and where that money goes - to Apple for providing and developing the platform or software developers for developing their products. Both deserve compensation. Consumers gain control but probably won’t save money and, to the extent that Apple loses money to developers and seeks new revenue streams from consumers, may pay more.

Apple is completely free to limit its platform to its own first party apps. Apple can then try to charge its customers even more for using a walled off store that has its own paid apps on top of what is included in the price of the device (because those operating costs are factored into the device price to a degree. 

However, If it wants to open up its platform to outside developers then things change a lot. That is what we are seeing here. It is simply another jurisdiction applying these measures. 

Apple has chosen wisely (even if it was nudged to allow third party stores in the EU and current compliance efforts might be fined) and allowed third party stores. 

Now it simply has to persuade developers and users to use its store over others. 

No one chooses to be extorted. Shameful what is happening. 

No one is being extorted. What the judge is requiring is not only perfectly reasonable but has already been required in other jurisdictions. The US may follow suit.