majorsl
About
- Banned
- Username
- majorsl
- Joined
- Visits
- 31
- Last Active
- Roles
- unconfirmed, member
- Points
- 188
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 119
Reactions
-
Apple amping up purges of apps that are similar to iOS 12 Screen Time
That isn't accurate. 2.5.1 of the Guidelines state "Apps may only use public APIs and must run on the currently shipping OS." and "Apps should use APIs and frameworks for their intended purposes and indicate that integration in their app description." Nothing in the article says they were using private APIs.chasm said:I’m very disappointed that so few commenters actually read the article before commenting. As stated in the article, this has exactly ZERO to do with the apps “competing” with Screen Time, and EVERYTHING to do with using unauthorized APIs to copy the feature, and using the feature as an excuse to collect data about children illegally.
it SHOULD be obvious to anyone with two functions brain cells to rub together that Apple has ZERO issue with apps that do similar things to existing Apple apps ( see also: every word processor, voice recorder, and Calendar app), but they have to follow THE RULES.
This is absolutely not Apple being anti-competitive; this is the spyware “flashlight“ apps debacle all over again, only this time Apple is acting quickly to prevent violations of law, as well as violations of its rules for developers, specifically with regard to private APIs.
Thank you to those few commenters who “get it,“ and a big raspberry to the rest of you. Literacy or reading comprehension classes might help.
They were also referred to the 5.2.5 of Guidelines: "don't create an App that appears confusing similar to an existing Apple Product, interface, app, or advertising theme."
So, in summary: 1) They were using public APIs which Apple, at best, leaves open-ended to interpretation so they can slam the door on devs pretty much on a whim. That has never happened to an iOS dev before, right? 2) They evoked the "don't duplicate something we do" guideline for Apps that existed before their feature and those apps did it better.
They were all fine with these apps beforehand and they were approved without the security concerns that some of you have now touted as justification for this. Oh. Please.
If some here don't see this for what it is, I humbly suggest you need to take your Apple rose-colored glasses off.
-
Virtualization software maker Parallels bought out by Canada's Corel
I use Parallels at work and VMware at home. They are mostly the same now for the end user.
Parallels is much better in my work environment with their Business edition. It allows us in IT to deploy it easily, locked down (to prevent users from creating other unauthorized VMs), and for us to deploy VMs to our users pretty easily. Their deployment guide has every option and switch that allows you to build very custom installations and even "brand" the Help topics to your own internal documentation hosted on your web server(s). It's slick.
It also has a really nice web portal for business that allows you to see the machines that have it installed, their versions, when your user last used it, and other details about the host machines. You can also revoke licenses from machines via this portal which is useful if you allow deployment to personal Macs and a person leaves your organization. It is really polished for a central IT group to manage it.
-
First look at the new space gray 2018 Mac mini
And how is he wrong? That observation is spot on, regardless of Mac model.Rayz2016 said:
And so it begins … 🤣tylersdad said:
Even the lower spec'd machines are ridiculously overpriced. I guess some people don't mind paying for "awesome engineering as a feature". Count me out. The value proposition just isn't there. And don't give me that crap about Apple using more awesomer components than every other computer manufacturer. They source the same parts as every other manufacturer. They don't get better Intel I3 chips. They don't get better RAM. They don't get better hard drives.StrangeDays said:
Who’s forcing you to order the maxed-out top-tier machine? Are you OK? Do you need help?toxicman said:Seriously! A fully configured Mac Mini without keyboard, mouse and monitor is over $4299!
for what? I7 6 core, with 64gb ram and a 1.5tb SSD. That’s a $1800 PC. Come on apple. Get real.
Oh, you’re just whining about price. Would it make you feel better if Apple didn’t offer that top-tier? If everyone of all income-levels had to buy the same exact lower-tier machine? Would that make it better?
-
Netflix's iOS App Store fee avoidance will only give 'modest' revenue boost
Yes, and if they were forced to, Netflix and Amazon could just optimize streaming on a web browser for iOS. Of course, there are those who will say Apple should get a cut for anything that is streamed to their device be it via an app or a web browser because, you know, Apple.mac_128 said:OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me. Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
-
Mac mini: What we want to see in an update to Apple's low-cost desktop
I'm in IT at a small College. One of the things we use the Mac minis for are to offer a people a choice between Windows and Mac for the lower-end tier of users. We can standardize on displays with both platforms and, because of the lower cost of the mini, it allows the users choice which we believe in. The price is on par with similar Windows systems and the budget conscious administration gives it a "pass". The target user is typically using Word, Excel, PowerPoint and some low end desktop publishing.
We literally have 100s of minis deployed this way, our IT workload is almost non-existent with them, we manage them with free, open source tools, and (again) our users get choice.
If Apple abandons this line, there is no way we can justify much more expensive iMacs in this use case. It'd be a pity because I know Apple has gained a lot of home "switchers" with us doing this.
