Kuminga
About
- Username
- Kuminga
- Joined
- Visits
- 8
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,074
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 68
Reactions
-
Analysts mostly nonplussed by DoJ suit, and believe Apple will win
Jail Breaking was for less than .01 percent of Apple customers and the only innovation that came from it is Apple learned and stepped up its security to stop Apps Cydia eventually .Fred257 said:Look, Apple is in the wrong here. They will be found guilty if this goes to trial. Instead, Apple will slowly open up their ecosystem, just watch… IWatches will soon be available on Android. Third party app stores will be available (in very limited ways) in a couple years before trial. Consumers will have more options to customize iOS to their liking. It will be a win for both Apple and consumers. Why? Because I have kept up on a daily basis with Apple News and innovation since 1997 on a daily basis. The only time we had massive amounts of software innovation is n the iPhone was when you could jailbreak your phone. After Apple has closed off this with encryption software innovation has almost come to a screeching halt.
Apple will be able to show most of their customers are happy with Apples closed Eco system and people like you are the extreme minority.This case has no chance of going to trial with these outdated charges. Apple is the one company with the resources to take down this incompetent DOJ quite honestly
-
Analysts mostly nonplussed by DoJ suit, and believe Apple will win
I work for an investment firm as a back end researcher and by yesterday afternoon , my bosses were basically laughing at this outdated and idiotic indictment and the fact that the actual attorney general was made to stand there and read these outdated charges .
-
Apple will crush the DoJ in court if Garland sticks with outdated arguments
That is not true . There are Samsung and Huawei phones more expensive than IPhone. And the cheaper phones you are talking about use cheap components .tht said:
The inherent problem is that Apple makes too much profit. Owners of iPhones spend 2x to 4x more with their phones than competitors. Any remedy that does not change this will not be satisfactory to any of Apple’s competitors or developers.Hreb said:Maybe the problem is not that Apple is going to finally bring RCS to the iPhone in 2024. Maybe the problem is that only Apple can bring RCS to the iPhone platform, instead of letting whatever app users choose provide RCS functionality on the iPhone platform, whether or not Apple thinks RCS is ready.The reasons for why Apple should be regulated is basically made up using novel judgements, which often doesn’t have to make sense. Remember, the DOJ has had 6 years to do this. It’s only in the past 3 to 6 months the DOJ has had any reasonable shot at declaring that Apple is a monopoly, and they still have to game it by saying “performance smartphones”. That’s barely wider than saying Apple has a monopoly on iPhones.The inherent issue with SMS, MMS and RCS isn’t that Apple doesn’t implement them. It’s that no third party can access them. If Apple implements RCS, it doesn’t solve anything as they will not allow another messaging service to use it. Nothing will change if RCS only works with Apple Messages app.
3rd party messaging apps want to be SMS, MMS clients on the iPhone. They also want to be a client for phone calls too. There are obvious reasons why no consumer should ever want this ever. I repeat, you never ever want a 3rd party app to be a client for your phone, SMS, MMS nor RCS messages.If it truly was about RCS, an anti-trust suit against Apple is dumb shit way to remedy it. The gov’t can just have the FCC mandate that the GSMA RCS universal protocol be supported by all phones connected to US cellular networks. Within about a couple of years, every phone will support it. They don’t do that surely because it involves some company with good lobbyists losing a revenue stream somewhere.The USA gov’t can’t address robocalls which is a clear and present nuisance, if not outright danger, to every American with a phone number.
So by your logic, BMW cars cannot be more expensive than cheap some GM cars? Conversely, there are GM cars more expensive than BMWs?
-
Apple will crush the DoJ in court if Garland sticks with outdated arguments
DOJ is not the judicial branch, it’s Biden’sradarthekat said:
Why not this one? Maybe because the executive branch should not attempt to interfere with the judicial branch. Biden would be rightly criticized if he did attempt to interfere. Let the lawsuit play out on its merits, or lack thereof.h2p said:Mike Wuerthele said:
This started two years into the Trump administration.Madbum said:Joe Biden needs to go. I am sorry but I am not usually political but this guy is ridiculousSure did! Biden erased many of Trump's initiatives.- Why not this one?!- What's the angle?- Does the administration hate Apple that much that they are looking for Any reason to knock an American company?I appreciate the perspective of nudging Apple to change, but the ridiculous part is using a lawsuit to extract - what? extraction concessions? extract cash? - from Apple.
-
Apple will crush the DoJ in court if Garland sticks with outdated arguments
The EU if you noticed, generally only goes after American Companies and never their own companies.bulk001 said:
Couple of thoughts, it isn’t Apple’s lawyers that AppleInsider is quoting. I doubt that Apple’s lawyer's see this as this simple or are so cavalier. Further, Apple couldn’t win a case where Cook made statements on a QER which is typically covered by a catch all disclaimer that is almost lawsuit proof and paid out close to a half billion dollars that AppleInsider then blew off as insignificant. They couldn’t hold off the EU regulations and also just got hit with a 1.84B Euro fine. Their brilliant legal minds also sued a tiny company with a pear logo and ended up having to help redesign their logo given the public blowback. They lost the Apple Watch case and settled with Qualcomm. This is their top notch legal team that they are bringing to this fight?fastasleep said:
If only Apple had a few actual lawyers and stuff.bulk001 said:Only time will tell if you are right. Why don’t you reschedule this post for an update in 2 years. Personally my money is on the DOJ who, you know has actual lawyers and stuff, as opposed to two writers of an Apple blog.
