FoodLover

aderutter said:

I now think it would be good for Apple to get ahead of this and state explicitly and loudly that developers are free to create web-apps and put them in their own web-app store - that these apps do not need to use Apple payment methods, have no Apple commission or require review by Apple or even an Apple developer account to create them. Apple is not preventing anyone creating web-app software to run on an iOS device - as this would be impossible.  

Apple has been hindering web apps for years. The support for PWAs has been just added, most probably because of all anti-competitive law suits around the world.

But Apple is still playing wrong, very wrong. The following is happening under iOS and it has been always this way:

• Our company has been offering a web app with offline functionality (no PWA as it new to iOS, just offline functionality)
• We had been wondering about the unexplainable bad performance when running the offline part of our web app under iOS while under any other platform it was performing good. Important to know: the offline part is heavily using JavaScript
• 2 years ago, because a customer asked for it, we have implemented a wrapper app around our web app
• All of sudden, the offline part was running faster: extremely easy to observe, maybe by 90% faster, just as expected and observed under Windows and Android
• I just checked it again under iOS 14.2.2 and the same:
• The web app running in Safari noticeably slower than the same app running in the wrapper app
• Just to be clear: Safari is slowing down offlineable web apps intentionally

I have simply no resources and time for suing Apple, but this is simply another prove for the anti-competitive behaviour of Apple.

If anyone from Epic or Spotify or any other company is reading this: just try that out yourself and you’ll get new proof for Apple’s anti-competitive behaviour. It is all about forcing everyone into AppStore.

flydog said:

mobird said:

I think 9to5mac said it best-
"Opensignal report claims iPhone 12 is slower than almost every Android phone in 5G/4G speed tests"

This is a little disheartening if you bought the iPhone 12 in any configuration. I wonder how far along in the iPhone 12 development cycle that Apple's and Qualcomm's engineers knew they weren't going to achieve anything close to the potential of the modem from Qualcomm? Can some of this be resolved with firmware or software updates or is this all hardware design (RF) shortcomings? Apple's engineers are some of the best and brightest and RF is nothing new to them. Are the modems themselves that are sourced from Qualcomm basically the same (5G) in iPhone 12 models as those in other phone manufacturers who had better results?

Assuming the data in this "report" is accurate (it's not), no human can tell the difference between 44 and 57 Mbps.  It's literally miliseconds of page loading time for a website, and zero difference when streaming video once the video starts.

The problem with this bullshit report is that it is based on tests done by users on their free app. There was no standardized testing conducted (for example, by using all the devices cited in the same area at the same time).  The sample data is made up only of people who selected themselves and performed the tests at different times on different days and at different locations.

I would not question the reports, but I agree that the outcome is simply irrelevant in day-to-day usage for us end users, in particular when considering that these are only average numbers: as Fastasleep mentioned you could also have almost 250 Mb/s on iPhones.

rob53 said:

Why? Why all of a sudden is Google portrayed as a good guy? Does Google own rights to all photos stored on Google servers? Thought I read that some place. I believe Facebook does. Is Apple being pressured to do this?

Apple slowly seems to feel the heat from users and start to understand that the strategy of making users’ live hard to switch to other platforms or even to use other platforms in parallel would be ended by a judge/by lawmakers rather sooner than later.

nealc5 said:

Apple has their own store because it costs them $ to vet apps and run the store. They do not charge for free apps, but they do take a cut of in-app purchases to pay for the store. What right does Arizona have to tell a company that they have to allow the free app, and then not take a cut of the in-app purchase? 

This argument is invalid. Apple does not vet an App each time someone make a purchase, Apple vets an App initially and at subsequent updates.

Have you ever heard that airlines pay percentages of each ticket to Boeing or Airbus? Have you ever heard of taxi companies sharing their profits with the car manufacturer? They pay for the car and for maintenance, but do not pay a percentage of each ride's fees to the car manufacturer.

Apple does not share the loss of the App developers, so Apple should also not share their profits. Apple should just invoice the developer for the App store.

Apple is not doing a favour to developers by providing the App Store: it help Apple to sell more devices. Isn't that superior App Store not the argument of many Apple fans for buying Apple devices? The superior aspect is not the user interface of the App Store, it is the collection of its Apps.

qwerty52 said:

In line with the copycat strategy of Samsung, I am wondering how it comes, that they did not already copied Apple (for the N-th time again),
to announce their Samsung Car?
Or I have missed something?