22july2013

A lot of people use Chrome, Safari or Edge because it's the default browser for some device. If you removed all the people who were using default browsers, which browser would be the most popular then?

The main reason Apple would have rejected EA is that less than 20% of EA's game catalog runs on Macs or iOS. Why would Apple want games that are almost entirely made for Windows, Xbox, Nintendo, Playstation and Android?

Market cap of EA is $36B. So they were probably asking $50B.

Until now, online streaming services were not controlled or monitored because they didn't use the public airwaves. If the UK wants to change the rules and start applying controls to private communications, that opens up a can of worms. For example, will books being sold on Amazon's Kindle service be monitored and controlled the same way? No? Because they are "books?" What if some of the books contain video clips? What about audio books? Is streaming audio exempt from this monitoring system? What about podcasts... lots of podcasts now contain videos. What about music? A large portion of all music on the Apple Store are labelled with an "E" for explicit lyrics. Are they going to be monitored too?

Since they said that "smaller services in the UK" are exempt, this looks like unfair trade rules. The WTO could step in and declare that the rules have to be applied equally.

I tend to count the number of people in the credits after a show ends. This one had three times as many people in the credits as they had in The Wizard of Oz.

Let me explain the above comment: I was making two points: (1) They put a lot of work into this. (2) Old movies don't list all the people who worked on them.

As the article says, it's not that the developer has to update the app, but that "the requirement to update only applies to the App Store listing itself." In other words, old apps haven't updated their App Privacy information on the app store in years. It's not that the app is bad, it's that the app developer has not told potential purchasers what data the app is obtaining from the user. It makes me wonder if developers of apps like Motivato are obtaining user data and sending the data to FaceBook for a bounty fee. Indie devs who complain about privacy label requirements are probably Facebook shills. It's like driving public roads without a driver's license, and then complaining that Apple has infringed on their "rights" because they are "sovereign developers."

The move doesn't impact me because I would never download any app that doesn't have an App Privacy section in its App Store description. Apple's motivation here is simply to plug one of the holes in its walled garden. They should have done this over a year ago. Shame on Apple.