13485
About
- Username
- 13485
- Joined
- Visits
- 84
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 799
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 347
Reactions
-
Is Apple's App Store a monopoly or a solution?
"Lies as truth": You seem to be heavily invested in mythology and polemics.rax_mark said:I understand that as an Apple fan you view the tech world through that lens. However, in doing so you misalign facts and brand lies as truth.You say everyone copies from Apple, but wasn't it Apple who copied the GUI from Xerox and what about the plethora of functions that Apple copied from Android, widgets, AOD etc. Are you oblivious to them or ignorant? or will you make up excuses to try to justify them while you blast others.You say that other systems are full of malware, well that is exaggerated and even what percentage exists is the tradeoff for having an open system which provides freedom.Apple products sell so well because more than the technology, Apple has marketed itself as a premium product for rich people. That is why we have gold Apple watches and $19 handkerchiefs. There have been instances where people have sold their kidneys for an iPhone, have no food yet bought an iPhone on finance. Do you think that they did it because they thought it was a better phone? Don't kid yourself.Maybe not insult other brands while making a fanboy esque article and even if you do at least state facts.
Apple & Xerox: There was no copying from Xerox. Jef Raskin documented his graphical user interface in the 1960s, well before Xerox PARC even existed. Doug Engelbart invented the mouse before Xerox PARC existed, and Apple paid Stanford University $100,000 to license the mouse. No one else has ever paid the license fee for the use of the mouse--including Microsoft and Xerox. Both Raskin and Engelbart became Apple employees. In 1983 Apple paid Xerox $100,000 for a lifetime license to all Xerox PARC technology. In addition, in a separate agreement, Xerox paid Apple $150,000 for a block of non-voting Apple stock.
Malware: Per Silent Breach, Android users are 50% more likely to have malware than iPhone users, and 97% of malware is directed at Android. That's not an exaggeration. That's some "tradeoff".
Apple just for Rich People: Ahh, the second oldest trope next to the Xerox myth. Sure, because everyone looks at everyone else's phone to see what brand it is, or watches the laptops being used in college lecture halls to see which has an Apple logo. There was one--just one--instance where a demented person sold a kidney to get an iPhone, out of 2.3 Billion iPhones sold. Yeah, real trend there.
-
US defense and intelligence services are buying troves of data about Americans on the open...
I'm not in favor of data harvesting by government agencies or commercial entities, but if the information they are referencing is already out there (commercially available), whether damaging or innocuous, those horses have been loose for many decades and aren't going back into the barn.
How the information may have been initially collected, or why one may have provided it to be used commercially (informed consent?) is more deserving of investigation.
-
Apple Vision Pro is already a win for Apple & consumers
I'm not sure where you came up with the claim that the total addressable market is "less than a million". Based on what? Apple may see the potential entirely differently than you.twolf2919 said:....Developers, like Apple, are in it for the money - they will only develop for a platform if they can see a potential profit. Such potential does not really exist when the total addressable market is less than a million for the foreseeable future. Maybe a few large development shops will bite because they can afford to take the long view, but not the little developers that have made iPhone such a success.
-
Apple Car is delayed -- again
So the Apple patents/patent applications for such components as windshields, bumpers, door mechanisms, window mechanisms, seats and seat mechanisms, and others are all just to sell an advanced form of CarPlay or a Rent-A-Car business? And we'll just ignore the fact that rental car operations in general generate about 6% profit.eightzero said:I have always considered the rumors of Apple Inc. making a full production bumper to bumper automobile specious. What I do think this codenamed project might really be about is what Emoter (above) alludes to: an integrated car electronics system that automobile manufacturers can purchase for inclusion in their production vehicles.
Recall that GM famously claimed they would stop making their cars CarPlay compatible, and the derision that greeted that announcement. People *want* to bring their phones to the car; and they *want* quality that a longtime tech manufacturer can bring in their cars. The idea that GM (or other car company) can do better is absurd. I've seen the Tesla version of this, and it is mediocre at best. Is CarPlay perfect? No. But it is what I asked for when I shopped cars. And when I rent them.
A company like Apple brings much to the table. Car companies can get out of the infotainment system and the necessary tech support that can be required for decades.
Done correctly, imagine an Apple Car on board electronic system being available in a rental car fleet. Nothing is more annoying than arriving at a destination airport and having to stand in a line to pick up a rental car. Sure, there are alternatives, and none of them insanely great. Imagine an Apple Car "rental services" division. -
Apple asks UK to dismiss $1 billion App Store class action suit
If the author is referencing the 15 or 30% fees, then Apple was correct and not "disingenuous". After all they are talking about a specific fee, not total revenues that may include other costs and fees.
