stompy
About
- Username
- stompy
- Joined
- Visits
- 203
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 482
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 408
Reactions
-
Apple & Google have unfair 'vice-like grip' on smartphone markets, says UK regulator
Schiller, Levinson, others within Apple had been pressing Jobs to allow third party native apps, even before the January 2007 iPhone announcement. And Jobs -- according to the Isaacson biography -- was initially against it, and also wanted to focus on the iPhone launch first.rmoo said:
Remember that Apple at one point also was a huge advocate of cross-platform web apps (when there was still a huge threat of Microsoft shifting their PC dominance to mobile leading to developers following along ... this would have been a way to get developers to make apps that would run on both Windows CE/Mobile and iOS). It wasn't until iOS and its app store became so dominant so fast - which absolutely no one at the time expected - that Apple shifted positions.stompy said:
The whole report is blissfully ignorant of how the software development community actually works.
So I think you're referring to Steve Jobs' "very sweet solution" presented to developers in June 2007?
The iPhone SDK was announced in October 2007, released March 2008. A lot went into that SDK release, the steps leading up to the March release -- 9 months after iPhone launched -- are more than we saw in public.
The more fronts developers have to address, the easier it is to justify cross-platform.hammeroftruth said:
Except that some apps reverted back to web apps and now there is canned code to take your desktop website and convert it to a smartphone compatible web app.rmoo said:...that Apple shifted positions.It’s all now dependent on the company who wants an online presence. Some don’t want to hire app developers and also don’t want to deal with Apple and Google every time they need to update their app.
-
Apple & Google have unfair 'vice-like grip' on smartphone markets, says UK regulator
Agree with everything you said. And to expand a bit: ultimately the more platforms the are, the more likely app developers are to abandon native apps for a single, cross-platform app. How does that create more "... competition and meaningful choice for customers."MplsP said:....
Ultimately, with things like smartphones, within reason I think a duopoly is better - there's still competition, but the limited number of platforms mean developers are not spread too thin trying to create and support apps for 10 different systems. If you look at the number of apps available on the App Store, it's hard to argue that there's no competition.
The whole report is blissfully ignorant of how the software development community actually works.
-
Almost nobody in the US used the Apple & Google COVID-19 apps
The Apple / Google exposure notification includes nothing like you describe. You may be confusing the APIs built by Apple / Google with specific app implementations; some of these did have privacy issues.9secondkox2 said:Good
the whole thing is wrong.“Oh. There’s a new disease. So we must track you. And we need to know your movements as well as those of your contacts.” RIIIIGHT… that’s going to end well…
Forget HIPAA. Forget privacy. Not to mention potential abuse of something like this.This kind of thing did not happen with HIV/AIDS, note the flu, nor pneumonia, nor anything. All of a sudden, a née deadly disease is out and we are supposed to happily forget our humanity so that people who tell us a different story every day can monitor us like lab rats.No thanks.
-
M1X Mac mini with more ports could launch within months
...looks like I answered this late, JBSlough and others already noted that the iMac's depth isn't a great match for conventional power cords. As for USB-C, the M1 supports 2 USB/Thunderbolt ports. It sure looks like spending one of those on a permanently connected power cord was unacceptable. -
M1X Mac mini with more ports could launch within months
When Apple engineers decided to make a thin iMac, they created a litany of problems for themselves that they decided to solve with new ideas.MplsP said:
So what’s the point of using magnets, then, especially for a desktop. How often do you plug/unplug a desktop’s power cord? Was the cord for the imac really that difficult or an issue in any way? Nope. Magnets are just a more expensive (and resource intensive) way of doing the same thing.stompy said:
Apple describes the M1 iMac magnetic power connector as "A power connector that easily attaches via magnets", where (retired) MacBook MagSafe was an easily disconnected magnetic power connection. I get that it's easy to conflate the two, most people did when Apple introduced the 2021 iMac; adding to that, Apple has never said "Hey, this isn't MagSafe".darkpaw said:I don't get why we'd ever need MagSafe on a desktop computer? For a laptop, great; someone comes along and treads on the cable, it pulls it out without breaking the port on the laptop or pulling the laptop to the floor, and the laptop continues running on battery power.
The day the iMac went on sale, reviewer Jason Snell compared the new iMac power cord to the old: "In practical terms, the force required to yank the magnetic power cable off the iMac is the same force required to yank the current iMac’s plastic power plug out of its socket."
Unless we're going to start referring to non-magnetic designs as "FrictionSafe", we should agree to only call products MagSafe that Apple calls MagSafe.
One "point" of the iMac's magnetic power connector is it's depth: it is significantly shallower than a standard 3 prong port/plug, solving one of these self-created problems.
(Why don't you show us how a standard power port/plug would look on a 2021 iMac?
)
FWIW, I never defended Apple's engineering exercises, I only pointed out that the iMac doesn't have "MagSafe" -- this connector is designed to stay connected until you want it disconnected.
