chutzpah

entropys said:

avon b7 said:

rob53 said:

Why does everything have to interoperate? I buy Apple products. I don’t buy Google things. I made a choice to buy Apple-only products. What business does the EU have telling me I have to use, or allow to use, other products? What product has the EU improved? None that I know of. They’re just doing a huge money grab. 

Would you prefer that your carrier only connected to users that used the same carrier? 

That should be a decision by the carrier and it would be up to the customer to decide if they liked the idea or not. 

Not some fat, tax eating bureaucrat in Brussels. Dictating I might add, about the products developed by some one outside their jurisdiction.

the Little Red Hen was not meant to be an instruction manual for the other farm animals.

They aren't dictating anything about the products being developed outside their jurisdiction.  Apple can develop and manufacture anything they want outside the EU without any EU laws applying.  But when they import it for sale in the EU, that's when EU law applies.  Suck it up.

FileMakerFeller said:

I mean, seriously: if the patents are essential to the standard then they should be ratified by the standards body and that should be prima facie evidence. They should also then be covered by the licensing fee that any manufacturer pays to the standards body, end of story.

Ideally, sure.  But if the standards body doesn't receive or doesn't ratify a patent then that doesn't mean that the patent isn't valid or essential for the standard.  The world is a complicated place.

radarthekat said:

I fail to see how a verdict that the parents ARE essential fits with an award equivalent to $7 billion.  These seem contradictory.  

Why?  Them being essential is what means that Apple has used them and needs to pay licensing fees.

Doubling the frame rate is very impressive, even if it is just a single title.  I wonder if there is any internal discussion about whether Apple should promote this consumer side and work on a user friendly interface so this could be their version of Proton.

I get that Apple want to push native games and use of Metal, but they've been banging that drum for a while now with little movement.  Maybe the success than Valve has been seeing is getting them to re-evaluate.

darelrex said:

22july2013 said:

I've been saying for nearly a decade that Apple could meet all of EU's rules by allowing iPhone and iPad users to install Android when they set up their device. There's no reason for iOS to support third party app stores if Apple supports Android for iPhones. There's your choice. How many iPhone users would install Android, maybe 1%?

Don't people already have that choice? They can go buy an Android phone, today. Why should Apple have to support its most direct competitor, and how does that benefit anyone except people who don't like Apple and want to see it ruined via government fiat?

That's not what 22july2013 means.  He thinks that Apple can slyly skirt regulations by pointing to the fact that an alternative operating system can be installed on their hardware.  As if regulators will magically be satisfied by something that no one will actually do and that doesn't achieve the goals they're aiming for.

It's a really thick headed point that he's been making for a long time, and everyone's complete rejection of it just makes him think that he's even more right, because he's a contrarian idiot.