StrangeDays

bobolicious said:

...I wish Apple would slow everything down especially macOS which seemed to be released on merit (every 2~3 years through 2011) vs a calendar basis which may serve annual shareholder interests...

This lack of continuity has created at this customer end a ton of overhead juggling app compatibility and for example the orphaning of 32 bit apps also came with a flurry of upgrade costs for various apps, many switching from the persistent licensing 'gold rush' to the unsustainable subscription model. Is this the opposite of Windows with long support cycles and recognition of such burdens on business? I understand 32 bit apps are still supported in Windows...?

I just asked a developer today if Windows is now easier than the mac and in suit a better 'customer experience'...?

I use Windows 10 during the day in my customer’s enterprise, where I write desktop software. IMO Windows still sucks compared to using macOS, despite being a developer on the platform for decades. Things are just kludgier. Enterprise Windows also loves to load up tons of McAfee scanners and IBM app pushers, which eat my CPU and force it to run & noisy hot all the time. No progress, IMO. 

lkrupp said:

jungmark said:

Pretty sure he’s better known for Alien, Blade Runner, and other movies than he is for the commercial. 

He’s right, pop up ads and embedded ads after every other paragraph is not effective. They are annoying and makes me want to not read the article or even click on the ads. 

Webpages shouldn’t be like Times Square. 

So what do you think should be done? Let the government regulate the quantity, content, and placement of ads? Ads are what they are today because they work on the general population. If ads were not making money for the companies they wouldn’t be there. They work, they generate income. Apparently there aren’t enough people upset with how ads are intrusive and annoying to change corporate minds.

Without ads AppleInsider would become a subscription blog. How much would you be willing to pay each month to have access?

Web advertising may still work, but ads have been getting less effective for decades. I was a lead dev at MarketWatch in 2000 and personally implemented our DoubleClick ads -- the big sexy at the time was simply having the top banner match the side banner(!), which we did with very basic techniques. We didn't have any to any of our readers' browsing history or utilize any sort of trackers, because the ads were effective enough at that point. Back then we were paid by the impression, not the click. Because they're getting less effective is why advertisers pushed for more personal data in order to counter-act ad apathy.

John Gruber of Daringfireball makes a good case for why he uses hand-placed ads rather than an automated ad network -- it works better, and he makes more money. As the podcast world is eying automated ad placements, instead of custom ad reads during the show, he thinks they will make the same mistake as the web -- more annoying, more blocking, less effective.

avon b7 said:

StrangeDays said:

avon b7 said:

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut. 

Every online store gets a cut from sales.

It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.

Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with. 

Of course merchants control their own stores. You’re confusing control with regulation, but they’re not mutually exclusive. You can control your store, and also be regulated with things you cannot control. 

Regulation is control. You control your store in line with regulations. 

Being regulated has no bearing on what you claimed - that “nobody controls their own stores”. Yes, they do. It so happens they themselves are also regulated (everybody has a boss, so to speak), but that doesn’t somehow mean they do not control the aspects of their store within their ability to control. What on earth?

avon b7 said:

rob53 said:

avon b7 said:

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut. 

Every online store gets a cut from sales.

It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.

Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with. 

On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out. 

At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet. 

Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store. 

Your control is limited to what regulations allow for. You don't have a free ride to do whatever you want. 

Oh you just moved the goalposts. That goes without saying, which is why nobody claimed merchants have a free ride to “do whatever they want”. You’re making a false dichotomy - no control, or whatever they want. IRL: merchants are free to control their stores, and they are also regulated. It’s not the either-or proposition you seem to think it is. 

Contrary to your claim that “Nobody controls their own store”, they do. And they’re also regulated.

Hank2.0 said:

fallenjt said:

Ver Unlikely. It’s a gimmick and pron for damage but add zero or little benefit...

The benefit follows the principle of greater functionality with a smaller size for transporting. Isn't that the basic idea of a cell phone in the first place?

Works great in a computer render, but IRL it's a point of failure. iPhones are prized for their longevity. I suppose it's possible if they've "ironed out" crease issues...but the only thing I remember about the knockoff brands and their folding phones is the immense cost, and the reviewers writing about how crappy the hinged screens were and how they broke even in the review units.

waveparticle said:

sflocal said:

It's such an odd ruling.  I hope Apple still has options to fight this ruling.  It makes zero sense.  It's Apple's hardware, software, and ecosystem.  I don't see how the Dutch can say that Apple is abusing its dominance?  If you the developer want access to Apple's ecosystem (i.e. Customers) that Apple puts in tons of resources into obtaining, and keeping current users loyal, then you the whiny developer has to play by the house rules.

I'm all about Apple playing within the confines of a country's rules.  This one through, I do hope that Apple just shuts/slams the door on them.

It is not odd. Socialists like free lunch. 

Incorrect. Socialism is a type of policy, of which you very much enjoy the fruits of its labor here in the democratic republic of the US -- from labor policies, to worker benefits, to public services, fire, police, parks, streets, water purification, etc etc. You've only been brainwashed into believing socialistic policies are some sort of boogeyman, when the reality is it's the ultra wealthy who do not like these policies because they are forced to contribute via tax dollars into benefits for the working class and the common good st the expense of added profit. Nice job! Be mad at things that you utilize and benefit you! lol