Naiyas

I like all of my Eve devices. I also really like the specs of their smoke alarm (though it is hardly ever in stock - when it is, it sells out immediately). The smoke and heat sensor mix is an excellent feature for complete coverage, however I just wish they had a mains powered version as well as it’s a legal requirement to have at least one mains powered smoke alarm in a property here in the UK.

Will definitely be looking into the MotionBlinds and the outside camera is definitely on the list of options now, though I do think the 1080p limitation in HomeKit will eventually be raised in the next couple of years so there is a longevity angle to consider. I’m fortunate in that I can get POE cables to any of the camera points so my preference would be for POE based HomeKit cameras personally, but I realise I’m probably a bit niché.

@OutdoorAppDeveloper ;
I recall reading that there was a drop in orders with suppliers for every iPhone in history around 3 months after initial release… it’s called the sales cycle and it happens every year.

I actually suspect, and am partially concerned, that certain APIs could become subject to usage commissions in future. There is already plenty of telemetry data that is sent to Apple from our devices and some of it is clearly around what APIs are used and how often so they know which ones to drop over time. It wouldn’t take much to modify this telemetry and add app ID information with it and merge this data into a billing system.

This would be largely transparent to the end user, just as the telemetry data is already today.

bulk001 said:

Naiyas said:

AppleInsider said:

The proposed class is vast and includes anyone who purchased an iOS app or app license from Apple, or who made an in-app purchase, from Dec. 29, 2007, through the present.

One pretty fundamental flaw in their argument is they don’t even know when the iOS App Store started. If they can’t get that date right then how many other holes are there in their arguments.

More concerning is your reading comprehension. The date is for the start of who can be included in the class action suit, not when the App Store started. If you made an in app purchase from Dec 29, 2007 you will be part of the class included in the suit if it is accepted and certified as a class action suit.

Comprehension is fine thanks as a literal read of the articles wording I quoted could just as easily imply what I stated as well was what you stated. It is not what one would consider “legal wording”… at least not in English Law anyway.

AppleInsider said:

The proposed class is vast and includes anyone who purchased an iOS app or app license from Apple, or who made an in-app purchase, from Dec. 29, 2007, through the present.

One pretty fundamental flaw in their argument is they don’t even know when the iOS App Store started. If they can’t get that date right then how many other holes are there in their arguments.

22july2013 said:

I didn't see mentioned in the AI articles whether Apple can now revoke Epic's developer license, as it did last year, but with Epic at that time winning an injunction against Apple for that action being overreach at the time. So now that the case is over can Apple go ahead and revoke Epic's developer license?

According to the judgement passed down Apple is cleared to revoke all developer licences for Epic including all of its subsidiaries and affiliates should it choose to do so as a consequence of one of Epic’s companies breaching the terms of its developer licence.

The existing injunction has now expired. Whether Apple decides to do so is another matter given the prevalence of the Unreal Engine in games/apps unrelated to Epic directly.

IMO, I don’t think Apple will retaliate in such a way as I suspect they are going to focus on meeting the conditions of the judgement. They have yet to say they will appeal and I doubt they will as they will need to counter Epics appeal and let’s face it, they effectively won all elements of the case except for the area we all knew they had shaky ground.