LeoMC

golfer12 said:
Would love to see a MBA 15" as my eyes get tired after working on the machine for hours on end, but I don't want to spend $$$ for a MBP 16" and yes, I also have a 27" desktop that spoils me...  Perhaps a price point of $1,300 for base MBA 15"...

”You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometime you find
You get what you need”

razorpit said:

neilm said:

golfer12 said:

Love the improvements, but where is the larger screen for adults?

On the shelf at a retailer near you, ready to be used on your desk. Many sizes and prices available.

These are ultra-portable laptops. A bigger screen would make the MBA not an ultra-portable. I've used a couple of the new 16" MBPs and they're lovely — but big.

We're talking another 3 inches, not 3 feet. It would be an ultra portable 16". What other 16" would come close in portability?

You don't think it's wrong that if a person would prefer the next screen size up they have to spend an additional $1,400?

So get a 16” MBP and stop bitching around; this laptop is definitely not for you.

But another is the upgrade to 256Gb storage in the base model.

It’s not like up until now you didn’t had the option to get a 256+ GB; you just had to cough out your own money to do it instead of expecting to get a “subsidy” from those that only needed 128 GB.

gatorguy said:

LeoMC said:

We are talking about apps.

Why?

The French regulators didn't take exception to the App Store, at least yet. This is about Apple hardware pricing.

Discussing the App Store instead is going to confuse some readers into thinking the French are fining Apple because of it instead of iPhone price fixing at independent authorized retailers.

I was talking apps with avon b7 and hardware with anybody else (my mind is able to handle 2 different subjects, you know).

avon b7 said:

Are we talking PWA or native Apps on an App Store? A PWA is not a perfect alternative for every native iOS App and far more importantly, any EU investigation will definitely cover the period prior to PWAs becoming viable alternatives in some cases. It also doesn't change the underlying fact that the only iOS app store allowed on Apple devices is Apple's App Store.

In your analogy, the iPhone is far, far more than the 'building'. It is the 'universe'. However, that is not the root issue. The root issue is why you should have to change your 'access pass' in the first place.

People (iOS users included) speak of walled gardens and lock-in. They are also related to the issues the EU could end up taking a hard look at.

We are talking about apps.
Apple has built the App Store as an alternative to web based apps; the developers wanted access to that store and were willing to pay for that, so Apple charged them a percentage; they are of course free to leave the store and provide - free of charge or whatever - web based apps (or PWAs) instead of paying Apple's fee to provide Xcode based apps.
EU is free to investigate, but Safari has always been able to handle web based apps so an investigation would have no object.

Just like you have nothing but Tesla authorised maps on your Tesla car, you also have nothing but Apple authorised apps on an Apple phone.

There's nothing locking users in Apple ecosystem, just their own desire.  

crowley said:

A consumer in the Carrefour store doesn't have any significant obstacle to leaving and going into another store, an iPhone user has a $1000 obstacle.  Stupid analogy, an iPhone is not a building.

The same goes for an iPhone user: instead opening the App Store app and installing an app from there, he opens Safari and runs a PWA.