danvm

nicholfd said:

danvm said:

nicholfd said:

danvm said:

AppleZulu said:

danvm said:

GeorgeBMac said:

THANK YOU APPLE - For Finally Laying that Out!

The Libertarian / Free to do whatever I want crowd always tends to ignore the consequences of their actions.

In this case, Apple's review and oversight of apps adds stability and security to my iPhone that I simply cannot get any other way.   So again, Thank You Apple.

Some might argue:  Well give the user the Choice!   But that's another bullshit argument.

Once Apple allows sideloading, more and more vendors will simply avoid the hassle and expense of going through the app store -- and iOS will become as porous, unreliable and insecure as Android or Windows.

While some might scream:  "Don't take away my free choice!"

I say:   "Don't take away my reliability and security!"

If that Apple App store si so good for developers, as Apple have been saying, there is no reason for them to leave the App Store, don't you think?  

BTW, you forgot to add macOS in the list of "unreliable and insecure",
https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/19/craig-federighi-blasts-mac-security-to-prop-up-ios-app-store

Developers want Apple's customers, but many don't want Apple's rules. Because Apple doesn't pursue the low-end hardware market, their customers are more lucrative than average. So developers will currently go through the hoops to get into Apple's App store. That does not mean that if they were given the option to sidestep that process and those requirements that they wouldn't choose to do that. The fact that Epic, Facebook and others are spending big money on disingenuous PR campaigns and lawsuits is clear evidence that they want to be on Apple's platform, but they would greatly prefer to bypass the App Store and be free to scrape user data and collect user fees without abiding by Apple's rules or paying Apple's cut for access to a curated, more lucrative customer base.

If given the option, many developers would bypass the app store in a heartbeat if they could. 

So, for instance, millions of iPhone users currently have the Facebook app loaded on their iPhone, and they can (and do) choose to say no to Facebook's request to track them through that app and across the internet in order to package and sell the resulting data. The moment Apple is forced to allow side-loading of apps outside the App Store, Facebook will be out, and millions of iPhone users will have to either quit Facebook or succumb to Facebook's undisclosed data mining practices. 

So yes, there are plenty of reasons for developers to leave the App Store, and few or none of them are actually good for consumers.

Again, if the App Store is so good for developers and customers as Apple said, most developers, will stay in the App Store.  If Facebook decides to go out of the app store that's a win for customers, don't you think? 

Nope - it's a los for the customers who get Facebook someplace else without the security & privacy the Apple App Store provides.

Agree.  That's an example on why most of the time I wouldn't go outside of the app store if, for some reason, Apple open iOS for side load apps.  

At the same time, it's not always about privacy and security.  One example are streaming game services, like Xbox GamePass w/ Cloud Gaming.  Sometime Apple create nonsense rules that block good services.  I don't think I would have any privacy or security issues side loading the Xbox Cloud Gaming app.  

You can't know that.  What if it's a "knock-off" you get by accident (and all the problems that would come with)?  What if Microsoft decides to rape your private info, without telling you?

pscooter63 said:

A pity that DewMe’s post isn’t getting more traction here.

I have very specific and narrow use cases for my 12.9 IPP that a MBP or some Microsoft-inspired Franken-device will absolutely not satisfy.  Yes, I also own a 16” MBP too.

Complainers looking for one device for all use cases would be better served fleeing to Windows.  No one wants to admit they just can’t afford to have the best in class of both form factors.  That’s not Apple’s problem, it’s theirs.  And they’re trying to shift the problem to someone else than themselves.

foregoneconclusion said:

It's mostly older releases from series like Doom, Fallout, Fable, Halo, Gears of War, Elder Scrolls, Yakuza etc. Don't expect much that's new for $14.99 a month. New = pay $60-$70 for a console game. 

Beats said:

baconstang said:

applesauce007 said:

I think Epic will eventually lose.  
They cannot call Apple a monopoly nor anti-competitive in this case.
All they can do is build a better or cheaper product to compete against Apple.  Good Luck with that.

Microsoft should be ashamed of itself for testifying against Apple in this case.

Microsoft ashamed?

You're talking about the people that delivered Vista having shame?

The company who makes knockoff everything Apple. 

crowley said:

danvm said:

crowley said:

danvm said:

tmay said:

danvm said:

tmay said:

danvm said:

canukstorm said:

danvm said:

canukstorm said:

GeorgeBMac said:

sdw2001 said:

Wgkrueger said:

GeorgeBMac said:

seanj said:

GeorgeBMac said:

For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap

Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 

But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.

If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 

...

The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

 

Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.

"For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.

Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  

Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.

Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?

I am of the belief that consumers want the most reliable devices, vs ease of service, so consumers have a purchase choice, same as it ever was. For the record, the X1 Nano traded battery life for lightweight and serviceability, and given that Apple has better battery life, plus better performance based on its M1 silicon, I'm not in agreement with your argument.

One would think that the market will actually decide this, not any of our arguments, but here we are, arguing to little effect, one way or another.

Do you have proof that the X1 Nano is a less reliable device?  Most ThinkPads, including the X1 Nano, pass many durability tests.  And based on what I have seen from my customer ThinkPad, they have many advantages over my MBP, from a design and construction POV.  

Lenovo ThinkPad | Military-tested Rugged Laptops | Lenovo US

Second, I agree that the M1 is a better compared to the Intel processor the X1 Nano have.  But that wasn't my point.  What I'm saying is that Lenovo showed that it's possible to create a thin and light device, while keeping the device easy to service.  

Lenovo created a thin and light device by compromising battery life. The marketing value of ease of serviceability to the consumer is minimal if their device has a high level of reliability to begin with. It may be an advantage for Lenovo, but Apple has retail stores that do a modest level of service and are within a short drive  by the bulk of the U.S. population.

Which service paradigm is more valuable to the consumer?

That's the question.

The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA.  So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip.  BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?  

Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right?  So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?

Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe.  If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location.  Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.

 https://www.thebalancesmb.com/apple-retail-stores-global-locations-2892925

I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them.  For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea.  My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers.  For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service.  Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference.  Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device.  Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.  

The majority of Apple's customers will be fairly local to an Apple Store though.  I'm not saying they don't care at all about customers in other places, but let's just say there's an element of proportionality at play.

And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard.  Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.