lordjohnwhorfin

European regulators have a history of shooting their citizens in the foot, I think it’s really interesting to compare their approach to web site tracking (forcing each web site to implement an infuriating, often time consuming dialog for each new site you visit where most of the times the only way to turn off tracking requires reviewing a bezillion options, forcing most people to give up and choose the easy one click solution where you agree to being tracked) to the one implemented by Apple, where one simple click resulted in wiping out 2/3 of Meta’s ad revenue.
Check it out next time you visit Europe (or if you have access to a EU-based VPN). Mind boggling. But hey, at least now they forced all-USBC on phones (filling up landfills with billions of Lightning cables, well played)

igorsky said:

flydog said:

igorsky said:

My understanding is the basis for the parent is that it’s an oxymeter on a watch. How in the world was something so general given as a patent to begin with?  Ridiculous. 

Your understanding is not correct. Maybe you should actually read the patents before spouting nonsense.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10945648B2/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/en

This might be helpful too https://www.inquartik.com/blog/apple-watch-masimo-pulse-oximeter-litigation/

Thanks for clearing up. Appreciate the extra douchiness 👍

Clearing up what? It’s a ridiculous patent for an oxymeter on a watch, with tons of brand-X infringing products selling on Amazon for $30. Should never have been granted to begin with. Masimo only went after Apple because they saw dollar signs. F them.

Maybe we’ll be able to sideload it back in how funny would that be?

eyekey said:

What I learned in my long history of buying Apple products:
Under no circumstances I will ever buy a first-generation Apple device again.
Fool me 5 times - I am a slow learner but now I learned my lesson. 

The first ever M1 laptops are perfect counter examples of your statement. More than two years after launch, they still more than hold their own, and early adopters didn’t pay an inflated price.
While the VP’s price makes it a product that is obviously not for the mass market, it is justified by the complex hardware (so many cameras, lasers, cutting edge displays…) not to mention the astronomical development costs.

It’s pretty clear what they want to do: force opening up to third party stores is the opening salvo. Obviously next step is coming up with their own store where they can collect tax directly, and finally outlaw use of any other app store, including Apple’s, once theirs is up and running.
It has nothing to do with “opening up markets” or “fostering competition to benefit the customer” let’s call it what it is, a government crying because they see a massive revenue stream escape their grip, and trying everything they can to get a cut of the action.