mike1

gatorguy said:

anonymouse said:

gatorguy said:

thrang said:

gatorguy said:

rob53 said:

avon b7 said:

This:

"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."

And then this:

"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.

Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing? 

Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year! 

Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple. 

Basically FUD on the part of EU-loving commenters. Apple has a right to provide whatever capabilities it wants to in whatever country/region it wants to. You're buying a product with certain features. There's nothing that says Apple has to provide the EU with everything it has the capability of including. The EU can demand Apple provide everything but that's not the way companies work. This is a brand new Apple capability and Apple has the right to provide it when they feel it's ready, not when a corrupt EU demands it. At this point, I feel Apple is well within its rights to start charging for features in countries it wants to. As far as I'm concerned, Apple should start charging for macOS, iOS, tvOS, iPadOS along with every Apple app and feature it wants to. I'd like to see the EU try and force Apple to provide everything for free. It isn't going to happen.

Vestager is not suggesting that Apple needs to deliver AI features to EU users. What she notes is that Apple's statement seems to imply they are not anxious to offer features where competition will be required. Not that it matters in the real world since Apple isn't rolling out some of those features this fall outside of the US and in English anyway, correct? If so, why did Apple say anything at all? My sense is it's a negotiating tactic.

Apple could care less about straight and fair competition. The EU is mandating nothing of the sort. It is forcing them to aide and abet competitors to sell within its IP boundaries, mandate that it has to happen, determine if they can charge or how much they charge for the ability to do so. Its a virus-level intrusion to an alarming level.

Apple is not the only tech required to abide by the DMA as a condition of selling in the EU market. They are not being singled out with rules that apply only to them.

Remind me, which EU companies have been ruled gatekeepers?

None as far as i know, but which EU company has a rich closed or semi-closed ecosystem of first-party services which might be artificially preventing competition, Name a specific one and then any discussion yo want to have might have relevance. 

fastasleep said:

Pema said:

This all looks great. What isn't great is that the Vision Pro is too expensive. There are no tiers like with any other major Apple product. [...]
I cannot begin to imagine Apple releasing just the one iPhone model

That's literally what happened with the first several models of iPhone, aside from tiered storage, which the AVP also has. ¯\(°_o)/¯ 

Just because you can't afford it (or don't want to) doesn't make it too expensive. It's priced appropriately for what it is. 

The other problem is the buyer needs to go into the Apple store to be fitted for the product. Another impediment. 

You don't have to though. You probably should to ensure getting the best fit possible, but you don't *need* to.

There is no trade-in for the Vision Pro! to bring the cost down. 

What are you talking about? You can trade in any of your Apple devices at any time for store credit. 

I would suggest that somewhere along the line Apple botched this product from wow to go. Tim Cook needed a headline grabbing product and pushed for its release before it was ready.

The first iPhone didn't have MMS, copy and paste, or App Store, etc. Clearly they shouldn't have released it until it was the iPhone 4! 🙄

The iPhone is a different paradigm. I often do think of the next release and what it can do for me. The iPhone 16 looks like a winner. And I will be upgrading. And after the trade-in it will run me appx. $900 USD. I can stomach that. 

The iPhone 16 that nobody has seen yet outside of Apple? Sure, looks like a winner! You've clearly established the cost/value of the iPhone is worth it for you. It's not there for the AVP now or anytime in the foreseeable future. Maybe never.

What doesn't make sense is declaring a new product/platform as a failure because you don't want to pay for it. I didn't spend years ranting about OLED TVs being failures up until the time at which I felt like the price had come down enough to make it an attractive purchase for me. It's like the ridiculous questions in forums like "Is a MacBook Pro worth it?" which of course is meaningless without knowing what your use case is, the value you'd get out of such a device, your financial situation, so forth.