spheric

badboybubby said:

So Samsung bad but fake bokeh is good, right?

9secondkox2 said:

chutzpah said:

9secondkox2 said:

StrangeDays said:

9secondkox2 said:

Should just be in a genre tab on Apple Music. 

a lot of music catalogs on Apple Music. Just because this is a giant catalog doesn’t mean it needs its own app. 

Biography info, etc would fit nearly as a link or accordion element. 

More steps to do the same thing. Not good. 

It’s not the number of tracks, it’s that the UX is different owing to some unique things about classical music. 

It’s music. No need for separate UX. It’s just a way to justify a dedicated app. 

But let’s say that you have a point - for sake of argument. Apple could easily implement a class where the classical tab of Apple Music gets its own look and behavior. 

And yet none of that is necessary. 

A music app is a music app. 

If there is a better way to do it, then they should apply it to the app as a whole to benefit the entire thing. 

Searching for, curating, creating playlists, and playing classical music is fundamentally no different than doing so for any other genre. 

Yeah?  How often do you care about the composer of a pop music song?  How often do you care about the conductor or the orchestra?  How often do you care about the venue or the date of the performance?  How often do you care about what key it is in?  How often is a pop album divided by suites?

The considerations of classical music productions for classical music fans are very different than the considerations of pop music for pop music fans and for very good reasons.  You clearly don't know anything about this, so wind your neck in.

Like I said before, that info is nearly enabled by links and/or accordin elements right on the music page. It’s not a big deal nor is it some amazingly impossible thing that requires its own app. 

Next you’ll be saying a web browser isn’t good enough to read about a composer and that you need a classical music themed web browser…

you clearly don’t understand how tech works to enable the enjoyment of various music genres and want the world to cater to whatever preference you have, you you can tuck your own neck back into that shell and come out when it’s safe for non-thinkers.  

davidw said:

spheric said:

verne arase said:

gatorguy said:

-Are you claiming the EU cannot do what they are saying they wish to do because "not a monopoly".
-If so then you're also saying Apple can safely ignore anything the EU has to say about allowing other browser engines besides their own on your iPhone?
-Or that Apple could have safely said "NO!" to the charger cross-compatibility rules?
-And that any challenges to Apple AppStore will be of zero consequence and any attempt for regulators to interfere is not legal anyway, and certainly can't stand up to an Apple legal challenge if they try? 

The simplest thing to do would be to ship EU phones without Messages installed, and make it available for download in the app store.

The EU/EC are waaayyyy too full of themselves, and the best thing to do is to ship crippled phones to EU customers and let EU customers know it's EU rules and regulations causing it.

The EU has already crippled their native industries, and outside of a couple of infrastructure companies there are no big tech companies left within their jurisdiction.

The fact that the EU thinks it's appropriate to go after revenues made outside of the EU just shows how fatheaded they've become.

The point of fines is that they’re supposed to hurt. 

Even with fat headed global megacorps who figure they don’t need to follow laws because they can afford the cash to violate them. 

The US courts generally seem to agree, btw. Look up this famous case for an inkling of how silly you sound: 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

No, your link shows the the US court disagree. [detailed explanation snipped]

davidw said:

spheric said:

Illus1ve said:

avon b7 said:

Illus1ve said:

avon b7 said:

ackpfft said:

Europe regulates when they have competitively failed.

One of the few things I appreciated about the prior US administration- but at least they stood up for the US companies and interests.

That is incorrect. The EU has legislated to stimulate competition, protect consumer rights and reduce deterioration of the environment. 

Making carriers share their infrastructure is an example from years back.

The very idea is probably unthinkable in the US. Is their even any competition among US carriers? I hear so many people say they have access to just one provider. 

Dude, you sound like a politician at times. Why stick up for them liars?

It does not matter what I sound like. 

Do I sound better or worse than Tim Cook when he says Apple is all for competitive markets, not harming consumer choice and that Apple has values (without stating what those values really are)? 

'spin' is associated with politicians and marketers and I don't spin things. 

We had access to internal communications at Apple on Messages during the Epic - Apple trial. 

'lock in', 'obstacles to switching', user cost and confusion were all blatantly banded around at Apple.

Apple was well aware of the reasons it did not want users to have what the EU is proposing now because it simply wasn't in its interests.

It's difficult to argue against what Apple itself has admitted through its own inner circles and at the highest levels. 

Sounds like business to me. Ain’t nothin’ personal. 

Perhaps you’re more impartial than I am, though. I tend to question anything politicians do just because they’re…well, politicians. 

Works the other way, too. Politicians standing aside, not doing anything while big corporations take advantage of their market position and indirectly or directly hurting consumers as a result is as much a decision as it is to step in and regulate harmful corporate behaviour. 

(See also: insulin in the United States for an example of this. Do we really want to know why legislators stood and watched insulin makers literally killing the constituents they, the politicians, are under oath to protect from harm?)

https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/who-benefits-when-the-price-of-insulin-soars

>Our review of the evidence suggests that contrary to some claims, the three manufacturers that dominate the insulin market – Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi – have indeed seen higher net revenues from insulin product lines during the past decade as list prices have increased.  ......

..... In the case of insulin, analysis of the companies’ cash flows suggests that shareholders of Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi have seen huge gains as the list price of insulin has grown. The companies have collectively distributed a total of $122 billion to shareholders in the form of share buybacks and cash dividends over the period 2009-2018.<

Novo Nordisk and Sanfi are headquartered in the EU. (Denmark and France)  I bet the EU will not step in and regulate their harmful corporate behavior. 

Illus1ve said:

avon b7 said:

Illus1ve said:

avon b7 said:

ackpfft said:

Europe regulates when they have competitively failed.

One of the few things I appreciated about the prior US administration- but at least they stood up for the US companies and interests.

That is incorrect. The EU has legislated to stimulate competition, protect consumer rights and reduce deterioration of the environment. 

Making carriers share their infrastructure is an example from years back.

The very idea is probably unthinkable in the US. Is their even any competition among US carriers? I hear so many people say they have access to just one provider. 

Dude, you sound like a politician at times. Why stick up for them liars?

It does not matter what I sound like. 

Do I sound better or worse than Tim Cook when he says Apple is all for competitive markets, not harming consumer choice and that Apple has values (without stating what those values really are)? 

'spin' is associated with politicians and marketers and I don't spin things. 

We had access to internal communications at Apple on Messages during the Epic - Apple trial. 

'lock in', 'obstacles to switching', user cost and confusion were all blatantly banded around at Apple.

Apple was well aware of the reasons it did not want users to have what the EU is proposing now because it simply wasn't in its interests.

It's difficult to argue against what Apple itself has admitted through its own inner circles and at the highest levels. 

Sounds like business to me. Ain’t nothin’ personal. 

Perhaps you’re more impartial than I am, though. I tend to question anything politicians do just because they’re…well, politicians.