cropr

About

Username
cropr
Joined
Visits
160
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
3,373
Badges
2
Posts
1,149

Reactions

804Like4Dislike350Informative

  • Apple Ireland worker wins unfair dismissal ruling in explosives case

    croprcropr
    thrang said:
    It's been common practice at least in the US (at least in metro NY and NJ,) to have to show the contents of your bag prior to entering an arena or stadium, given the number of ill-minded people out there (and pass through metal detectors, at least at Madison Square Garden and Prudential Center). This is general knowledge.

    Why resist it? There is no harm to you, and in fact, the collective action is making a safer environment.


    This is not the US but Ireland and this is a work related issue. According to the working laws in the EU, employers have not the authority to search the personal items of employees, unless it is explicitly stated in the work regulations how and when this can happen .    This is general knowledge.

    Generally speaking, only law enforcement services (police, customs, airport security, ...) have the authority to search the personal items of people. 

    Apple is so concerned about the privacy of people, but when its employees are involved, that concept is not that important anymore.  

    muthuk_vanalingamlam92103elijahg

  • New York State Senate passes right to repair legislation

    croprcropr
    d_2 said:
    Is this really in the interest of consumers?  And, Who’s pushing this ?

    One would think the NY state legislature has a few more important issues to address. 
    In 2017, the HDMI port of a Macbook Pro of my company stopped functioning.  I went the official Apple dealer and repair center in my region, and it costed me 169 Euro + 21% VAT  to get it fixed.    When 6 weeks later my company had to file its VAT declaration, I noticed that the shopkeeper had made an administrative error, as such that my company could not recuperate the VAT.    I immediately informed the shop, requesting a corrective action.  The response was not what I expected: they recognized that they made an error, but it was too late to make a correction because their IT system did not support it  (which was, of course, BS). 

    So for the next repair of one my Macs I went to an unofficial repair center.  The people there were very professional, and they lacked the arrogance of the staff at the Apple repair center.  The repair went well and although I took a (relatively) small risk, I was a happy customer

    So the right to repair is indeed in the interests of some customers.    

    If you don't want to go to an unofficial repair center or do the repairs yourself, that's fine, but give me at least the choice.
     
    williamlondondarkvadermuthuk_vanalingam

  • Apple faces higher taxes after G7 agree to global tax rate changes

    croprcropr
    lkrupp said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder how many of those that insisted "Apple never did anything wrong" and that "politicians should focus on closing loopholes rather than going after Apple" are going to be singing the same tune now that politicians have worked together to close loopholes.
    Get ready for higher prices for your Apple gear. The end user winds up paying those taxes just like the middle class always winds up paying for every dollar the government spends. That’s how the world works, or didn’t you know that.
    Not necessarily.     Taxes for companies are paid on the profit they make on all products and services combined, including the profit/loss of acquisitions. The taxes are due long after the sales have been made, typically in the next year,   It is very difficult for a large company like Apple, offering multiple products and services, to estimate upfront the tax it will pay.

    The profit generated from the products and services can be impacted by too many external factors or by a changed mix of products. The impact of planned acquisitions is impossible to estimate correctly, because acquisitions can be delayed or not allowed by the authorities.    In most countries losses from previous years can be subtracted from the profits, blurring the picture as well.  On top of that there are market dynamics.   If a company increases the prices of a product but others companies don't follow, some customers will change supplier.     

    Just to give an idea. Suppose this G7 tax would have been applicable in 2020 and companies would have wanted to increase the prices starting January 2020.  How on earth could anyone calculate by the end of 2019 how much the prices should increase, totally unaware of the Covid 19 pandemic?


    muthuk_vanalingam

  • Spotify legal chief doubles down on 'unfair' Apple App Store bullying claims

    croprcropr
    AppleZulu said:
    cropr said:
    sdw2001 said:
    The problem with all of this is Apple does not have a monopoly.  There are plenty of viable alternatives to using Apple products, namely Android.  A user is making a choice to be in Apple's walled garden.  Developers are making a choice to access that market.  This is the problem with the EU's initial conclusion as well. They claim Apple has a monopoly for "iPhones and iPads."   That's like saying Toyota has a monopoly on Camrys and Rav4s.  Their reasoning...that people won't change devices just because things are more expensive, blows their entire conclusion out of the water.  The consumer is actively making a choice.  Moreover, the notion that Apple's system has somehow harmed consumers, developers or innovation is comical.  The entire ecosystem (including GooglePlay) wouldn't even exist without Apple.  Apple literally created the entire market.  
    Form an end user perspective this is correct. But from an app developer point of view the App store is a monopoly: it is the only allowed way an app developer can distribute his iOS app.  

    Making an app only for Android is in most case commercially not an option.  A lot of apps only make sense if they run on all popular platforms.   

    That's not how monopolies work. App developers can choose not to put their app on iOS, and they can choose to sell on other platforms. Certainly there are some that don't sell on iOS, just as there are some that only create apps for iOS. There are millions of potential customers available via Android, Windows, X-Box, or other game platforms. Just because a developer doesn't like the terms at any given one of those does not mean that the platform represents a monopoly. 
    I am an app developer and my most successful app is an e-voting system used during general assemblies of large organizations and companies.  The customers (the organizations) are requesting that the app must support all eligible voters, independent of the device of the voters.  This means that my app must be available on iOS, Android, Windows, Mac (and some require also Linux).  An IOS only or an Android only e-voting app is commercially seen suicide:  I would have $0 sales .

    I assume that Spotify can only attract artists to its platform if Spotify  can guarantee that all people can listen to these artists and not the IOS users only or the Android users only.  It might even be that this is the main reason that Apple Music is available on Android.
     
    muthuk_vanalingam

  • Spotify legal chief doubles down on 'unfair' Apple App Store bullying claims

    croprcropr
    sdw2001 said:
    The problem with all of this is Apple does not have a monopoly.  There are plenty of viable alternatives to using Apple products, namely Android.  A user is making a choice to be in Apple's walled garden.  Developers are making a choice to access that market.  This is the problem with the EU's initial conclusion as well. They claim Apple has a monopoly for "iPhones and iPads."   That's like saying Toyota has a monopoly on Camrys and Rav4s.  Their reasoning...that people won't change devices just because things are more expensive, blows their entire conclusion out of the water.  The consumer is actively making a choice.  Moreover, the notion that Apple's system has somehow harmed consumers, developers or innovation is comical.  The entire ecosystem (including GooglePlay) wouldn't even exist without Apple.  Apple literally created the entire market.  
    Form an end user perspective this is correct. But from an app developer point of view the App store is a monopoly: it is the only allowed way an app developer can distribute his iOS app.  

    Making an app only for Android is in most case commercially not an option.  A lot of apps only make sense if they run on all popular platforms.   

    muthuk_vanalingam