Last Active
  • EU antitrust chief to Tim Cook: Apple must allow third-party app stores

    AllM said:
    bulk001 said:
    glennh said:
    As an Apple shareholder, I would demand that any third party App Store, pay upfront their fair share to Apple for all R&D, marketing, IP, transportation, security and other associated yearly expenses and costs that Apple bears in making and maintaining its various devices and associated software products. 
    The walled garden is going away. The iPhone and iPad will move more and more to the Mac model. You are going to have to start learning to deal with it and decide how you want to move forward with your investment. Apple is going to have to start learning to deal with it too. Then have become too dependent on the iPhone and a watch, self driving car, weather app, and VR are not going to move the company forward like the iPhone did. Cook has done a great job generating iterative changes to make money but under his leadership Apple has missed on search, cloud, AI etc. In comparison MS moved into other areas after they lost the phone wars and somehow managed to closed on Friday as the world’s most valuable company, doing it without a phone type device or a map app. 
    Today, it’s Apple. Tomorrow, it’s America. The fewer Nordic socialist types on American soil, the better. 

    P.S. MS don’t produce jack in consumer electronics. If you ain’t no boring corporate type, you’ll hardly ever buy anything from them. 
    I don't know. I see quite a few Surface tablets at university. Not nearly as many as Macs and iPads, but still. 
  • Department of Justice antitrust filing against Apple said to be imminent, for the fourth c...

    longfang said:
    danvm said:
    designr said:
    danox said:
    designr said:

    danox said:
    designr said:
    tht said:
    designr said:
    According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
    1. How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
    2. How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
    3. How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
    4. Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
    5. How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
    6. How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
    7. How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
    8. In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
    (Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
    1. Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
    2. Totally Apple's prerogative.
    3. Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
    4. Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
    5. Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
    6. Might be sketchy of Apple too.
    7. Not sure about this one.
    8. Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
    All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.

    P.S. Apple just pulled another bone-head move of rejecting the 37 Signals Hey Calendar app: https://x.com/dhh/status/1743341929675493806 (here's a summary: https://world.hey.com/dhh/apple-rejects-the-hey-calendar-from-their-app-store-4316dc03)
    P.P.S. Whether anyone here wants to admit it or not, Apple has become like the Microsoft we hated in the past (and IBM before them). Perhaps this is an inevitable outcome of success and size and dominance. But I think we all expected—perhaps quite naively—better from Apple.
    Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
    Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased. :|

    Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.

    (NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)

    Either way, Apple best be careful here.

    Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
    And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
    Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.

    Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
    And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android. 
    Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo.  They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers. 

    Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
    You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous. 

    Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
    I knew that going in. Maybe you did. 

    But the vast majority of users don't, because the question is not something that would ever occur to them in the first place unless they actually run into an issue caused by it. And even then, they might not even recognise it as a result of this situation. 

    (Non-iOS Example: Apple is trying to establish iPad as a music production platform. Third-party plugins almost all have their own store/management platforms on Windows/Mac. How many iPad purchasers are clear on the fact that these industry-standard plugins are probably never going to be available on iPadOS unless they can be distributed through an iPad port their own store platform? How many will even know or care to ask the right questions?)
    avon b7
  • EU antitrust chief to meet with Tim Cook to discuss fines and regulation

    jdw said:
    Respite said:
    Chill out.  Have a cookie.
    It's 4°C/39°F right now.  Hard not to chill completely out in this weather, my friend.

    Regarding web cookies, please know that I use Super Agent for Safari.  It helps keep the madness under control on certain Macs that are able to run it, but I have a lot of computers and mobile devices, and it's not installed on all of them.  And it's not a 100% solution either.  The best solution is to eradicate those cookie notice viruses altogether.  That's really what they are, infecting each and every one of us.
    Yep, I agree. The way to do this is to eliminate the reason they exist — and that's not the EU. 
  • EU antitrust chief to meet with Tim Cook to discuss fines and regulation

    AllM said:
    avon b7 said:

    GDPR is an absolutely necessary piece of legislation. A model to follow and considered one of the best stabs at protecting EU citizens in the digital age.

    To many here it's the silent shield. Without it, Meta would have been deep into our underwear and way up our nooks and crannies!

    It's what saved EU WhatsApp users from many of those nasty privacy changes Meta tried to slip in a while back.

    No legislation is perfect and it will get revised but I'd rather have it over any alternative. 

    What’sWhat? Isn’t it better not to use crap products in the first place rather than rely on legislation to protect you? 
    That ship sailed long before Meta ever bought WhatsApp. 

    The only reason Meta bought them was because WhatsApp was already the by far dominant messaging service. 
  • EU antitrust chief to meet with Tim Cook to discuss fines and regulation

    rob53 said:
    I always find it interesting that the EU only brings in American companies to try and regulate. 
    That is a complete and utter lie, and I will call you out on it every time you blather it. 

    80% of EU antitrust rulings concern European companies.