citpeks
About
- Username
- citpeks
- Joined
- Visits
- 333
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,010
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 270
Reactions
-
Apple's Epic gamble: birthright citizenship ruling cited to overturn antisteering mandate
Rodgers' original ruling basically gave Apple the win against Epic in all respects but the steering.I'm puzzled at why Apple is being so stubborn at belaboring the issue. And whose legal team is now resorting to tactics like this.Actually, I'm not, because it is a fight between two greedy corporations as to how much they can squeeze out of users, in or out of the iOS ecosystem.Apple could have simple conceded on this one point, and tried to compete on a platform on which it already holds many advantages. It could have said to users (as well as developers), our way may cost a little more, but it works better, is more private, and safer; basically the way it has marketed its products overall. And many have responded positively to that, and made the company wildly successful.Instead, it is choosing to hope that obfuscation, and refusal to allow its partners to offer users other options they find might find attractive, is the way the company want to compete. Worse, it validates all those who throw around the tired buzzwords like "walled garden," "sheep," and the like. And it implies that Apple doesn't respect its users enough to allow them to make decisions of their own, by trying to not give them those options at all.Tim Sweeney has some presumptuous assertions of his own, hoping to leverage someone else's platforms to make more money for himself, and thinking that he can set up shop in someone else's mall, and act like a landlord of his own, without paying rent.Neither are saints, and neither had the common sense to try to strike a deal, and keep it out of the courts, where the lawyers are the ones who will benefit most.Apple's continued recalcitrance, if not intransigence, serves to keep its tactics in the news, in the crosshairs of regulators, and could lead to the company ending up in a worse situation than if it had simply complied with the judge's original order. A judge who mostly agreed with Apple's case, but became angered after Apple didn't comply.It's not smart to piss off a judge, and now try to undermine their authority. But I guess that's how the Apple of 2025 operates. Every slice of cake shall be theirs.
-
'F1' is Apple's biggest hit with $55M+ opening weekend
jetpilot said:Have you been into the Chase wallet app lately? It’s littered with ads that can’t be removed.
I just opened it up and just one page there’s an ad for Straight Talk Wireless, Wilson Shoes, Total Wireless, Orkin Pest Control, Whirlpool Appliances, Hello Fresh, Lululemon, and dozens of ads from other companies I’ve never heard of right on the main page. Granted they are below my transaction list rather than above it, but there are a total of 51 companies advertising in the Chase wallet app this morning.
The AMEX wallet app is the same. At least AMEX hides the ads behind an “offers” tab.
Meanwhile people are handwringing because the Apple Wallet app has ONE ad that can be dismissed away and never seen again. Give it a rest.Couldn't tell ya. I don't use captive apps because I know companies love them as advertising vehicles and data collection tools, as you describe.Apple Wallet is a supposed to be a neutral ground, electronic version of your physical wallet, not a vehicle for companies to hawk their wares, Apple or not.I hold held Apple to a higher standard, but I guess not everyone does. Just because you've already capitulated doesn't make those haven't have opinions that are any less valid.Same reason I have an Apple TV, and not a Roku, or a cable box, where ads are part of the UI.Enjoy your corporate shilling. -
'F1' is Apple's biggest hit with $55M+ opening weekend
charles1 said:I had to laugh at the "controversy" about the Wallet Ad. Gruber said your real wallet is sacrosanct and he never sees advertising in his wallet. He obviously never looked. I examined one credit card in my wallet, it displays four corporate logos advertising their companies. Some cards are one big advertisement. Even the minimalist titanium Apple Card has three logos on it. I have a receipt in my wallet, oh no it has advertising printed on the back! [facepalm]Yes, credit/debit cards typically have logos or wordmarks on them.• Card branding, including the issuer (Apple, AT&T, Costco, Green/Gold/Platinum/Black, etc.)• Card association (Visa, M/C, AMEX, etc.)• Issuing Bank (Citibank, Chase, B of A, etc.)• ATM networks on debit cards (Plus, Star, Co-op, etc.)All pertain to the identity of the card, who will accept it, and how it can be used. Somewhat essential information, no? An average American has four credit cards. Without the logos, how would they tell them apart? You've already applied for, received the card, and are therefore already a customer. What are they trying to sell you on?That's branding, and while branding is part of the larger overall discipline of advertising, it is not explicitly advertising unrelated products, or services.If your Chase credit card also had "Chase Home Loans. Low Rates. Apply Today." emblazoned on it, that would be advertising, of a different service from the same company, and different type of consumer loan.Apple trying to hawk a movie from one of its other divisions inside your wallet, which many consider neutral ground, so to speak, is advertising.I guess the company didn't learn from the U2 experience.Attitudes like this are exactly why companies think they can get away with worming greater and greater numbers of true advertisements into users' lives.
-
Five ways macOS Tahoe makes you radically more productive
Clipboard History is said to only retain items for 8 hours.Those expecting to recall history items from the morning before might be a little disappointed.
-
Apple execs explain Apple's position in the AI race & how it isn't necessarily 'behind'
Nobody is seriously asking Apple to directly compete with Amazon, YouTube, or Google Search.Federighi takes it a step further, explaining that Apple doesn't need to deliver every technology on Earth. No one asked why Apple wasn't a shopping destination like Amazon, or why it didn't build a YouTube competitor, so it seems odd that everyone is clamoring for Apple to supply a chatbot.What people do expect is for Apple to deliver on the promises it made itself last year with Apple Intelligence, and it has thus far failed to do.At its best, Apple runs its own race, and doesn't let others define the rules. Even when it does, it finds ways to bring something different to the table, and win. At its best.So, there is truth in what they say.But as successful as Apple has been, it has not been free of missteps, and failing to fully develop technologies it helped bring to the market.Siri, of course, is most famous, and not being able to deliver on AI is in danger of following that same path. Redemption still awaits.HomeKit could have enabled Apple to grab a much larger share of the IoT market, even rule it as far as its own users go, but its success was left in the hands of others.In both cases, Apple squandered whatever lead it held, and is now forced to play catch up, by trying to make Siri smart, and developing home/IoT products beyond a speaker. Even with a rumored launch of a home hub product later this year, HomeOS was MIA from WWDC. So what, an iPad married to a HomePod? How will developers be able to enhance it and make it essential, or will they be shut out of a closed shop, at least until WWDC '26, '27, or whenever Apple feels, or is forced to open it up to others?The company was prescient, in incorporating ML, and ML hardware into its products, but again, for a company that has in the past skated to where the puck is going, not where it was (or in the words of Jobs, "giving people what they want, before they know it") the whole Apple Intelligence effort has been reactive, not proactive.It's not difficult to see, however the execs want to spin it. Nobody forced the people at WWDC '24 to go on stage, and make the promises they did. Apple dug its own hole there, perhaps out of an uncharacteristic bout of pressure, if not panic.None of this is to say Apple is "doomed," to steal that old joke. Far from it. But for a company that usually manages to put most items in the Win column, it would be foolish to ignore those in the Loss column, especially big ones that has cost it new markets, and the benefits they bring.One would also be foolish to bet against Apple, but today's Apple is not the Apple of old, and there is no magic CEO to lead the company like before. We've seen what happens before when Apple was in that situation.As a user, my response to these two would be -- don't tell me, show me. Apple's employees knew that would be the standard going into every meeting where Jobs was in attendance. Do they still know, or have that fear and hunger? Or is the company slowly drifting into mediocrity and complacence again, just with a much larger financial buffer this time around? It wouldn't be the first tech giant to do so.For these two guys, and Apple to be able to later say "I told you so" it first has to deliver on its own promises.
