avon b7


avon b7
Last Active
  • Apple's Cook addresses App Store monopoly, Apple TV+ launch, iPhone 11 in interview

    sarthos said:
    avon b7 said:
    Cook didn't deal with the App Store monopoly issue. He skirted it.

    The question is not that Apple offers this or that and users can get content that Apple doesn't offer via a web browser.

    The question is that there is no other App Store and Apple is therefore the only one taking a cut, deciding what the cut is and deciding what is allowed and what isn't. On top of that, it is competing in the store with its own apps. The proportion of those apps is irrelevant.

    Maybe he had a beer too many but if these are his arguments, they don't hold much water.
    Fortunately, that's not for you to decide so rant away!  A business model is not the same as a monopoly.  Get over it.
    I'm not deciding on the business model. Where did you get that from? I rarely rant either.

    A business model is for the company to decide - but only up to a point. Beyond that, It has no say. Just look at all the companies that have already been hit precisely because of their business models.

    Cook skirted this issue.  There is a formal complaint (more than one I believe) on the table. Believe me, they are not looking at what is, or isn't available via a web browser. They are looking at things Cook didn't cover in his reply because he skirted it.
  • Apple's Cook addresses App Store monopoly, Apple TV+ launch, iPhone 11 in interview

    sflocal said:
    As a developer myself, it just irks me how other app developers are whining about Apple's curated App Store.  Look at the cesspool that is Android and it's easy to see why Apple has NOT adopted such an open model.  I find it hard to believe that any app developer worth their weight would complain about Apple's App Store and its policies.  They were probably still in diapers when the "old" way of marketing one's own software independently and hoping that marketing would be enough to actually sell it, and in any decent quantity to make a profit.

    Apple makes a lot of money for developers.  If you're not making much - or any - money, it probably has something to do with your app being crap, and not Apple.  The ability to make an app and have it available to hundreds of millions of people with little to no effort by the developer still amazes me to this day.  There is no way I would ever want to go back to the "old days" of going to CompUSA and buying software in big boxes.

    Whiners should just go to Android if they want the Wild West.  I'm happy Apple keeps the store to themselves.  To open it up to 3rd party stores would open the iPhone to the limitless security problems that is Android.

    No thank you.
    The issue is not a curated app store. Apple can have that without question from anyone.

    The issue is if Apple's store should be the only store on iOS devices.

    We'll see how the different investigations come down on that question. It isn't a given that they will rule against Apple but the question needs to be asked and answered at a 'competition' level.
  • Editorial: Apple faces entirely new challenges with Apple TV+

    I'm somewhat divided on this. Streaming is a young industry that is now becoming commercially widespread in certain markets but is already oversaturated. There is far too much content out there already, making the subscription itself, and not the specific content, the final goal. The avalanche of content won't stop coming any time soon and quantity isn't the same as quality. I think subscribers could grow tired of subscribing and fall back on what they already know which could be services with large back catalogues of tried and trusted content.

    Jumping into a saturated market is going to be hard and free subscriptions or low cost initial subscriptions don't last forever. Pumping money into the business makes sense to gain traction but if things don't stabilise over time and the investments are the same (or increase) you have to ponder how far you are willing to go.

    The good news is that 6 billion is loose change for Apple and all content created will retain some value years down the line and there is a long term return to be had if you free it up to other providers at some point.

    In an oversaturated market with huge subscriber fragmentation, blockbuster revenue earners like Friends or Big Bang Theory etc would have a hard time today gaining such a huge following.

    Convergence would appear to be the only way to stabilise things and convergence comes at a price. If Apple is willing to put more big money on the table it could end up with a huge chunk of the pie.

    I think the risk is worth it, as things stand today but it needs time to get a real foothold.
  • Apple TV+ will struggle to meet European quotas for local content at launch

    rob53 said:
    I guess the US could do the same thing to France and other EU companies, force them to include 30% of US created whatever for them to be able to sell in the US. Now I just have to think about what French items I actually purchase. Lets also force France to set aside 16% of the sale of their wine (what else?) in the US for developing American wineries. Let's just be fair.
    The quotas exist to safeguard cultural areas.

    I'm normally against quotas as they only guarantee quantity and not quality but I do understand they are a necessary evil in some cases and this is one area.

    Using English as a first language gives us many advantages that we take for granted. In the past, you would hear people in foreign countries ask the natives 'do you speak English'? Now, more often than not, people in Europe just speak English and almost 'expect' the other person to be able to speak it. That's great on some levels as communication barriers are being reduced but on another level it can be seen as a cultural threat, as language often isn't just a simple vehicle for communication, it often comes attached to a certain way of living. 

    It can also create  certain conflicts. The major studios will often dub films into Spanish for example (for countrywide release in Spain) but not into the the Spanish regional languages as they say the cost/benefit ratio isn't favourable to them when everybody understands Spanish. That is a perfectly logical viewpoint but the Catalan government for example will take issue with that stance as they think Catalans should be able to see the film dubbed into Catalan on the same terms as the Spanish version (equal screenings, same prices etc) and things quickly snowball out of control and you realise that the subject has to be tackled in some way.

    To give you a possible U.S angle on the situation, imagine a few decades from now, we suddenly realise that Spanish starts to nudge English aside as a preferred language. The government would definitely take measures to protect the main native language of the country.
  • 2020 iPhone could kill the notch by moving Face ID to the bezel

    With the release of the iPhone X I suggested this same solution but with existing technology. It meant taking the notch elements out of the screen and placing them in a tiny hump (like the Pismo curves) at the top of the phone. If the elements can be miniaturised to eliminate the hump, it's another way to succeed in getting them out of the screen.

    I've always loved the Pismo curves, though (but hated the clamshell shape).