mpantone

danox said:

Apple is the only one that’s not squatting all over the other platforms ecosystems. (ie..Safari on Windows which was rightfully, canned by Apple)

This is false.

Apple does have a presence on other platforms which Apple has carefully groomed over years. iTunes has been a longtime presence on Windows and is still available to manage media content to transfer to iDevices (iPhones, iPads, old iPods, etc.).

Apple Music has a presence too, including Android devices in the form of an app on the Google Play Store. This includes a separate Apple Classical Music app too.

And let's not forget about Apple TV which is all over the place. My LG OLED television (running webOS) has an Apple TV app. Yes, it's also available on the Google Play Store for Android smartphones as well as streaming devices like Roku.

Shazam is another Apple service that has a longtime Android app.

So understand that Apple plays the same game too trying to entice non-iPhone/non-Mac users to enjoy Apple services (which now generate a substantial percentage of Apple's revenue).

It's not just about iPhone and Mac hardware sales anymore. That ended about ten years ago. Apple fanboys cannot take a "holier than thou" attitude about this topic.

In any case Apple needs to offer some sort of search engine capability to their users since they don't run their own search engine. Apple's thought process in 2025 is probably "Well, we could just let people choose one from a list during the setup process but most people will pick Google anyhow so why don't we just get paid for it?" One of the first things that I do in setting up a new Apple device (and web browsers) is to change the default search engine to DuckDuckGo. But Apple still gets bucks from Google. That's fine by me. I'm an indirect shareholder of both companies anyhow (like any American with a retirement account).

AppleInsider said:

In order of popularity, those reasons were:

1. Not wanting to share financial details with multiple sites
2. Preferring not to manage multiple accounts
3. Simply don't see a benefit
4. App Store is faster because it already has their details
5. They trust the security and privacy of the App Store
6. They can use Apple Gift Cards, or get cash back on Apple Card

Reasons #1-4 are basically why many people buy their PC videogames on Steam rather than GOG, Epic, EA, Ubisoft, or individual developer sites.

It's also probably why people buy stuff at Amazon.com rather than surf over to some third-party storefront, create an account and reenter all that stuff again.

Reason #5 is probably in play for most of those people. And Reason #6 has some applicability as well. There are Steam gift cards and the Amazon credit card. Plus Amazon Prime members get some additional benefits that an individual merchant really can't offer.

Avon is correct. There's nothing inherently wrong with Apple being dominant or the preferred choice. The problem is/was their anti-steering policies which meant an uneven playing field. As noted, this is not just one judge or one government agency telling Apple what they are doing is unfair. It is multiple organizations around the world.

This will drive more regulation and more legislation that favors fair competition. Apple's lawyers will fight but ultimately it's a benefit to let consumers decide whether or not they want to stay in the safety of the walled garden or walk through the newly opened gates.

My guess is that many would rather just give their credit card information to a handful of companies (like Apple, Amazon, Google, or Steam) rather than fill out forms on dozens and dozens of websites/apps for separate charges which increases the risk of security issues, privacy breaches, fraud, etc.

But for sure, third party merchants should have the right to provide information to consumers to let them know that they have other options.

I know that I have purchased Mac software in the past directly from the developer's own store at a discounted price compared to the Mac App Store offering. There is no reason why iPhone and iPad users shouldn't have the same choice.

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

I have looooong criticised Apple's business model on this point.

It makes all the sense in the world to stagger releases for the reasons stated in the article. Plus, it would keep the marketing people happy with something new to push every few months and draw attention away from competing releases.

It would also be a positive in terms of iOS rollout issues. 

It would also allow Apple to produce fewer iPhones at a given time which is currently necessary in India compared to China. IOW, this could Apple to shift more overall production to India going forward.

This is the likely main justification if Apple chooses to change their release cycle: because non-China manufacturing partners don't have the capacity to generate four primary iPhone models for the same launch date. They might in the future but these new exorbitant tariffs have made transitioning to non-Chinese factories a priority.

My guess is that Apple has been studying many places for years to see whether or not some of Apple's manufacturing can be moved to those territories, not just India, Vietnam, or Brazil. In any case, it's clear that putting all their eggs in one basket (whether it be China, India, wherever) risks future problems just like the one Apple faces with the current administration.

No matter what, iOS will have one launch date with point releases for new hardware. Since the Pro models have the largest amount of differentiation (both hardware and software features), it still makes sense to release these models in the fall with the new version of iOS and drive consumer interest to the premium offerings. The regular non-Pro and 'e' class models would follow later because their bigger draw would be value not shiny new features. The big volume/mass market models also benefit from improved yields which comes after a couple of months of refining manufacturing processes.

With a very mature smartphone market in industrialized nations, there's less pressure for Apple to coordinate releases of 3-5 models because people aren't replacing their phones as frequently as they did ten years ago. Most of the smartphone growth potential is in emerging markets which aren't as sensitive to calendar dates.

As others have pointed out, it's about individual usage cases. Heck, for many people, their individual usage cases aren't the same every single day of the year.

My iPhone 12 mini's battery is normally very fine for the majority of days. However when I travel, at the end of the day I often find the battery level to be quite low because I haven't been sitting at a desk or sitting in my car and I don't care to chase electrical sockets when I'm on vacation.

That's what these battery banks are for. It's worth mentioning that smartphone battery banks can be rented out at many convenience stores in Japan (7-11, Lawson, FamilyMart, etc.). This sort of convenience is difficult to find in most American cities so owning your own battery bank might make sense for some.

But if you permanently leave your iPhone "Air" in one of these battery cases, it sort of makes you wonder if you bought the right model. But if you only use it occasionally, sure, why not?