therunningvm
About
- Username
- therunningvm
- Joined
- Visits
- 63
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,441
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 96
Reactions
-
How WeChat's ascent suggests the iPhone may never again dominate in China
-
Video demonstrates Hackintosh potential, but still isn't the Mac Pro
-
US Supreme Court greenlights lawsuit over App Store monopoly
maciekskontakt said:The problem is not with just Apple Store, but censorship. It is not Appe's business what applications should be allowed to run on device (except those that violate some local laws). We purchase that device to own it - not to lease it under strict contract. They can restrict apps on Apple Store, but then do not restrict people from haveing alternative stores. Disclaimers can be in place. I think this backfire of foolish concept of holding manufacturer liable for actions and abuse of others. So California uses that wicked logic and needs to continue along this narrative while it should verify it's foundations in the first place. Any tool in wrong hands could be misused, abused and used for illegal intent as well. No manufacturer should be liable in those cases.
-
Apple to sell third-party streaming service subscriptions through 'TV' app, report says
rogifan_new said:Can someone explain to me why Apple should get a cut of someone else’s subscription revenue? I’d ask the same question of Google or Microsoft or anyone else. Apple doesn’t host the content, they don’t do marketing or promotion. And if these companies could offer their own payment system in-app they would. If the argument is they wouldn’t exist were it not for Apple’s platform then why isn’t Apple taking a cut of every Uber and Lyft transaction? -
'iBoot' leak may stem from low-level Apple engineer with ties to jailbreaking community
bitmod said:lkrupp said:Well, my first question would be how could a “low-level” employee have clearance to access source code, the keys to the kingdom?