roundaboutnow

I agree with many posts here that a larger iPad would be very useful for music, graphics/CAD and other visual arts professionals. But so too would a larger size come in handy in many commercial, customer facing applications such as information and check-in kiosks, point-of-sale, and museum/visitor center interactives.

avon b7 said:

roundaboutnow said:

AppleInsider said:

...
The Sonos chief legal officer also took aim at Matter, a new standard for smart home connectivity backed by Apple, Google, and other tech giants.

"One could imagine, furthermore, a Trojan Horse aspect to all this. Those who control the standard and its evolution effectively control the nature and pace of innovation, including the innovations dreamed up by their competitors. The standard Matter is working on, as I understand it, is basically a creature of Google and Apple code. That is hardly a formula for fair competition or more creative invention. It's a formula for further entrenching the dominance of the very few," Lazarus said.
...

I don't doubt that Apple/Google/Amazon will have major influence on how Matter develops, but it doesn't appear the Sonos guy understands correctly:

1. Matter is an open standard to promote inter-operability, with many other companies participating.
2. The big companies didn't make up Matter on their own, from scratch -- it is "built on proven technologies and guided by the Connectivity Standards Alliance (formerly Zigbee Alliance)."
3. Getting these big guys to agree on any standard is a very positive development that should benefit consumers.
4. Any company -- including Sonos -- is free to join Matter and participate in its development.

This isn't what you seem to think it is.

The EU is also looking at the Matter state if play and had also raised concerns which it is investigating.

It highlighted the costs involved and especially certification, which can be hugely expensive. 

So are you saying Matter is not an open standard? That's what I think it is...

However, I realize "open" doesn't mean "free." Certification and/or licensing fees are part of other standards. I can think of one example: HDMI -- a physical connector and data signal format "standard" that costs something ($5K-$10/yr I think) for each implementer to use, not counting whatever other testing, etc required.

I searched a little bit to try to find out the costs involved with implementation or certification of Matter, but came up blank. Do you have any idea what this might be or what specific concerns the EU have?

One thing that my search did come up with is interesting testimony to the U.S. senate by Jonathan L. Zittrain that discusses IoT, anti-trust, and a brief mention of Matter (although I have to wonder if his testimony went over the heads of his audience):

https://www.justsecurity.org/76936/the-internet-of-things-moment-my-testimony-before-the-senate-judiciary-committee/

AppleInsider said:

...
The Sonos chief legal officer also took aim at Matter, a new standard for smart home connectivity backed by Apple, Google, and other tech giants.

"One could imagine, furthermore, a Trojan Horse aspect to all this. Those who control the standard and its evolution effectively control the nature and pace of innovation, including the innovations dreamed up by their competitors. The standard Matter is working on, as I understand it, is basically a creature of Google and Apple code. That is hardly a formula for fair competition or more creative invention. It's a formula for further entrenching the dominance of the very few," Lazarus said.
...

I don't doubt that Apple/Google/Amazon will have major influence on how Matter develops, but it doesn't appear the Sonos guy understands correctly:

1. Matter is an open standard to promote inter-operability, with many other companies participating.
2. The big companies didn't make up Matter on their own, from scratch -- it is "built on proven technologies and guided by the Connectivity Standards Alliance (formerly Zigbee Alliance)."
3. Getting these big guys to agree on any standard is a very positive development that should benefit consumers.
4. Any company -- including Sonos -- is free to join Matter and participate in its development.

JWSC said:

...

Some have and have largely gotten away with it (yea we’re looking at you Bill Gates). 
...

"Buy 'em out, boys"...

 

xyzzy-xxx said:

That's the right thing, users should be able to choose.
I don't think it would harm Apple really hard, but it would bring freedom to the platform.
When Apple allows third party app stores, it could be done with maintaining the iOS security model (only app review is done by another company).

You "don't think" is the most accurate thing you said -- you don't know it would not "harm Apple really hard."

How do you know "it could be done with maintaining the iOS security model?" Are you an expert on how Apple manages iOS security?

Who is this other company that would do app review? Why would we trust them? Who pays for their time to review a gazillion apps? 

Choice may sound good in theory, and as others have said, there already is choice in the marketplace, along with a certain amount of confusion (how to decide what is the best choice for our individual needs is not always so easy for many people). What you are suggesting just puts more confusion into the marketplace.