Last Active
  • House Judiciary advances all bills in sweeping antitrust legislative package

    I doubt the Ending Platform Monopolies Act will survive Constitutional judicial review if it ever became law. We have already seen the Courts push back on narrowly defining a particular product a monopoly in of itself without reference to the market and the judge in the Epic vs. Apple trial had the same sentiment. 

    Secondly, barring a tech company from selling wares on their own platform is incredibly silly and likely wouldn’t survive either. And I question whether the gov’t could prove a compelling public interest to force private companies to change their viable and otherwise legal business model. 
  • Intel takes aim at Apple, instead shoots itself in the dongle

    There was a rumor a while back that Apple may bring back MagSafe, HDMI and SD card slot to their pro laptops. I do hope that is the case because that would eliminate the need for the majority of dongles and probably save a few flying saucer Macs from someone tripping on the power cable. 

    As for this campaign, well, if you have to mention your competitor, you’re obviously not in the lead. It’s not just that Intel is losing incremental sales of Mac laptops - it’s also the perception that they are being outperformed. And as M1 compatible versions of software is released, they will have trouble keeping up. Heck, Adobe even said that their M1 version of Photoshop runs up to 50% faster. To get that kind of boost out of an Intel processor is impossible at the same wattage right now. 

    Back when the “I’m a Mac” series ran, everyone had the perception that PC’s were in the leadership position. Even my gamer son that custom builds his PC’s just selected AMD over Intel to rock the latest games. 

    That should tell you something. 
  • Arizona bill could force smartphone App Stores to allow third-party payment systems

    Most apps that have in-app purchases have free initial downloads. That means that Apple would get zero revenue for hosting the app, promotion services and paying vendors for bandwidth and delivery mechanisms around the world. 

    How is that even fair? 

    There are several ways Apple can respond:

    1) drop the app completely
    2) block downloads of the specific application from the App Store if you’re in Arizona - or require different versions 
    3) charge app developers a huge premium for shelf-space on the App Store if they bypass Apple for in-app purchases

    A monopoly isn’t illegal but it can act in ways that are anti-competitive, which is illegal. I don’t see where that bar is met here. 30% (or 15% in some cases) of app revenue is not exorbitant or excessive. Nor can the government force Apple to support its competitors.

    Imagine you had a software store and the developer of a hot app asked you, at your cost, to display boxes of their app. You had to constantly stock the shelves and store the boxes in the warehouse. But the boxes were given away for free. And then people who took the box home could go online and buy full versions and options of the software and you get nothing. 

    How long would you put up with that? 

    I don’t know who sponsored the bill but whoever did doesn’t understand business or value for services. 
  • Apple unveils new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Magic Keyboard

    A GPU in the 13” MBP would bring a lot of compromises including size and weight. Absolute power is only one part of the equation for a Pro notebook. Apple is also thinking of thermal management. In a Pro machine, you want it to run as quietly as possible, especially if you’re editing videos or working with audio. All the power in the world is useless if your computer sounds like a jet taking off.

    Battery life is another factor. In a smaller form factor, battery life becomes more susceptible to processor demands so you would have to increase the size of the case if you wanted to maintain Apple’s standards for battery life. This affects portability, which is also required to assist with airflow and convective cooling. These changes would demand a higher wattage charging brick.

    All these things have a cascading effect that destroys the mission of the 13” MBP. 

    The 13” is for the pro user who values portability over absolute processing power. The 16” is for those who value processing power over portability. 

  • Microsoft tests multi-window iPadOS support for Word and PowerPoint

    I’m glad they are finally testing this. I’ve been waiting for this feature for months. I still wish they would increase the functionality of the apps. Sometimes I switch to the web based apps to do certain jobs that the installed apps cannot, such as editing smart graphics in PowerPoint. Every current iPad has so much performance headroom that Office could greatly expand functionality while keeping it entirely usable.