davidw
About
- Username
- davidw
- Joined
- Visits
- 187
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,770
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,202
Reactions
-
Norway gets world's first Apple Pay alternative for iPhone
spheric said:
I'm aware of this. My point was that the usual suspects here on these fora like to pretend that the thinking behind this is a "EU SOSHULIST MONEY GRAB" or an attempt at curbing competition from foreign tech companies (only when the U.S. is involved, of course).davidw said:spheric said:
I had no idea the United States is now part of the EU…charlesn said:"We have fought for years to be able to compete on equal footing with Apple," said Rune Garborg, CEO of Vipps MobilePay
Only in the EU is it considered "equal footing" when the government hands you another company's hardware and IP to use free of charge. Maybe Vipps should have spent those years developing its own phone and VippsPay system? Little wonder that European economies are and have been in the toilet. I honestly wish Apple would just pull the plug on selling to Europe and "Let them eat Android."
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-apple-monopolizing-smartphone-markets
Point 4:
„- Limiting Third Party Digital Wallets. Apple has prevented third-party apps from offering tap-to-pay functionality, inhibiting the creation of cross-platform third-party digital wallets.“
FYI- The Department of Justice is not the US Courts. The DoJ is part of the Executive Branch whose head is appointed by the POTUS. Until the Judiciary Branch of the US government rules in favor of the DoJ claims, Apple can not be held guilty for violating any of those claims.Except that antitrust is very much an AMERICAN thing, and virtually every investigation by the EU has also been mirrored by the U.S. authorities — though, in some cases, dropped (as have been some European efforts).
I was showing up the hypocrisy.But in the DoJ case against Apple, the DoJ is not going after Apple for ....... "Limiting Third Party Digital Wallets. Apple has prevented third-party apps from offering tap-to-pay functionality, inhibiting the creation of cross-platform third-party digital wallets.“. The DoJ is claiming that Apple is violating US anti-trust laws by using anti-competitive practices to maintain a "monopoly" in the smartphone market. The only reason why Apple digital wallet is mention is because of the EU ruling. The US government is not going after Apple for this. They are trying to use it as proof that Apple is abusing their "monopoly" in the "performance smartphone" market.The problem is that the DoJ have not provided any evidence that Apple is a monopoly or have monopoly power, under US anti-trust laws. Except by using a relevant market that is narrowed down to suit their need. A relevant market the will most likely not stand up under SCOTUS scrutiny.The DoJ right now aren't concern about forcing Apple to open up Apple Pay, for competitors to use for free. The fact that the EU found Apple Pay in violation of the DMA was enough for the DoJ to use it as an example of Apple anti-competitive behavior. It may be because here in the US, only about 30%-34% of the consumers use a mobile phone (both iPhone and Android phone) for non-contact in-store payment and only about half of those (16%) involves a bank CC. The about the other half uses a debit card. Which may be why here in the US, there are hardly any consumers complaining about how Apple Pay works and I don't recall any banks complaining about it. The main complaints about Apple Pay seems to be from AU banks and the EU.If the US is going to mirror anything from the EU, is that we will try to pass some BS "gatekeeper" law so the big 5 techs can be tried for "anti-competitive practices, without having to prove a monopoly as defined by the Sherman Act. The Progressive politicians (or "Socialist" party as referred to by some) have such a bill. Only if this bill ever pass, so call "gatekeepers" will be referred to as "covered platforms". But the majority of elected Democrats, Republicans and Independents are against it. Here in the US, we are much more concern about harm to the consumers, than harm to the competitors.Don't be fooled by the DoJ rhetoric. They aren't nearly as determined or efficient in going after the big 5 techs, as the EU is. The DoJ case against Apple began during Trump first Presidency and in 6 years, this is the best the DoJ can do to come up with a case against Apple? And it will be at least another 6 years before any ruling because of the appeal process. Unless the courts dismiss the case.
-
Norway gets world's first Apple Pay alternative for iPhone
spheric said:
I had no idea the United States is now part of the EU…charlesn said:"We have fought for years to be able to compete on equal footing with Apple," said Rune Garborg, CEO of Vipps MobilePay
Only in the EU is it considered "equal footing" when the government hands you another company's hardware and IP to use free of charge. Maybe Vipps should have spent those years developing its own phone and VippsPay system? Little wonder that European economies are and have been in the toilet. I honestly wish Apple would just pull the plug on selling to Europe and "Let them eat Android."
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-apple-monopolizing-smartphone-markets
Point 4:
„- Limiting Third Party Digital Wallets. Apple has prevented third-party apps from offering tap-to-pay functionality, inhibiting the creation of cross-platform third-party digital wallets.“
FYI- The Department of Justice is not the US Courts. The DoJ is part of the Executive Branch whose head is appointed by the POTUS. Until the Judiciary Branch of the US government rules in favor of the DoJ claims, Apple can not be held guilty for violating any of those claims.Federal Trade Commission is also part of the Executive Branch whose head is appointed by the POTUS. They alleged that Facebook is a monopoly (in Social Media market) but the US courts decided otherwise. The FTC is appealing.With Amazon, the FTC case against them won't be heard in the US Courts until 2026. So until the US Courts rule on the matter, the FTC case against Amazon in not a matter of law and no action can be taken against Amazon until then. Not to mention before any appeal is heard.With Google, the US Courts has ruled in favor of the FTC and against Google (Alphabet). But there's still the appeal to the SCOTUS. So until then, Google will most likely not be broken up, as recommended by the DoJ.So the DoJ claiming that Apple is .......... "Limiting Third Party Digital Wallets. Apple has prevented third-party apps from offering tap-to-pay functionality, inhibiting the creation of cross-platform third-party digital wallets.“, means nothing until the US courts rule on the matter. This is not at all like the EU, where the DMA is a matter of law and already been tested in their courts.At least you're in the EU. There are many people here in the US, that thinks the DoJ is part of the US Court system. But even the DoJ have to prove their case in a US Federal Court and if needed, all the up to the SCOTUS, before the DoJ claim(s) can be acted upon. Think of the DoJ as the prosecuting attorney representing the US government in a court case against Apple. Apple have the right to disprove any of the DoJ allegations in a court. And the US Court can side with Apple.
-
Update your iPhone now to stop your iCloud data from getting stolen
xplorations said:Shock Headline:
"Update your iPhone now to stop your iCloud data from getting stolen"
Actuality: Already FIXED in iOS 18. We expect better.
But the exploit is not FIXED in iOS 16 or iOS 17. Thus those that are still on iOS 16 or iOS 17 ........ Update your iPhone now ... to iOS 18. And those that are already running iOS18 but don't have "Automatic Update" enabled, they need to manually update their iPhone now. GET IT?And the reason why iOS 15 is FIXED is for the benefit of older iPhones, the 2016 iPhone SE and iPhone 7, that can not update to iOS 18. Those iPhones last iOS version they can run is iOS 15. GET IT?What this leaves out is the patch for iOS 16. There are two models of iPhones whose last version of iOS they can run is iOS 16, the 2017 iPhone 8 and iPhone X. Either the iOS 16 is not affected by the exploit or Apple is still working on the patched for it.As far as security updates are concern. Apple have a history of providing security updates to all iPhones that are still in use. Even if these iPhones last iOS versions stopped receiving any other form of updates, years ago.The problem arises for those that have an app(s) that will not run on iOS 18 (or iOS 15). (Or they prefer to keep using the older version of the app(s).) Thus they have to face the choice of staying with the older iOS to keep on using those app(s) or updating to the newer iOS for security reasons and losing the use of those app(s). -
FBI suggests use of encrypted messaging apps while US faces huge cyberattack from China
gatorguy said:OK, this is a first...
The noon news had a story about this. They explained what was happening and the reason for the FBI's concern. Then they went on to say for the utmost security and encryption use Google Messages on Android or iMessage on an iPhone.
Oh, and they added one other warning: The worst danger comes when iPhone owners and Android users text each other, and there would be no protection from Chinese (or other government) eavesdropping, even tho alone the two apps are E2EE. Some folks probably do not understand that.
This needs to be fixed sooner rather than later by Apple encrypting RCS with the MLS protocol which is already in place on Android.
Back to the "first": I don't ever recall Fox promoting the security of Google Messages before today. Kudos.Once again, you are over simplifying what Apple needs to do to have RCS with cross platform E2EE.For one, RCS do not belong to Apple. It doesn't even belong to Google. RCS belongs to the telecoms (GSMA) and any changes to it has to go through the GSMA. Just because Google is now using MLS protocol for encryption, it doesn't mean that all Apple have to do is add E2EE to RCS in iOS.It is not Apple responsibility to develop their own encryption for the telecoms standard version of RCS, that they adopted for iOS. The telecoms has to come up with the cross platform E2EE for RCS.Google did not adopt the MLS encryption protocol so that Apple can easily adapt their iOS version of RCS with E2EE into Google version, without any significant loss of security. Google adopted the MLS protocol so that when the telecoms finally implement E2E in the standard version of RCS, the telecoms that wants to use Google Jibe servers to host their RCS messaging, can easily do so. But those that don't want to host their RCS on Google Jibe servers could do so, without losing E2EE on RCS messages between other carriers.Not all carriers are hosting their RCS messaging on Google Jibe servers. When Apple finally implement E2EE with RCS, they want to ensure that when using iMessage to send a RCS E2EE message, that message is E2EE no matter the carrier, not just E2EE when using carriers that are hosting their RCS messaging on Google Jibe servers. This will be solve when the telecoms agreed on a standard version of RCS with E2EE. Not when Apple add their own E2EE to RCS, on iOS.
-
NFL's Gronk calls Apple his best-ever investment
danox said:stevegee said:so it doesn’t sound like “… he made an investment in Apple without any advice.” sounds like the guy who built his house advised him to. Gronkowski made moneySo? He got nagged into it so what however if Gronkowski had bought with his disposable income 1 million dollars worth of shares in 2005 right after Apples 2 to 1 split and just held onto it through a 7 to 1 split and a 4 to 1 split. He would’ve made more money than he made in his entire NFL football career, initial investment one million dollars 22,742 Apple shares in (2005). 22,742 Apple shares times a 7 to1split and a 4 to1split would be 636,776 thousand Apple shares worth $149,495,901.52 million dollars at today’s market price.
If Gronkowski or anyone else with knowledge (or a nagging builder) had bought just $2 million dollars worth of Apple shares in 2005 and just held onto it. They would be worth nearly 300 million dollars plus minus at today’s market price. (Note most people, even if they have money don’t bother).
It’s not too late despite what anyone says, drown out the noise and invest in Blue Chippers. Appleinsider over the years gives you a heads up over Seeking Alpha.
Also note, Apple also pays a dividend, which would make the total a little bit more.
One can't get on Gronkowski case for not investing $1M in AAPL in 2005. In 2005, he was only 16 years old and most likely, didn't have $1M of disposable income then.However, one can get on his case for only investing $69K in AAPL in 2014. Even if he might not had had $1M in disposable income then, at the time, his cars probably cost him more the $69K .... each. Plus, one would think he could afford to hire a better financial adviser to invest his money, rather than to depend the person building his home.To put things in better perspective, if one were to invest just $1K in AAPL in 2005 (that would get about 50 shares before the split), one would have 2,800 shares today with a value of slightly over $650K. And just $1K in1996 when Jobs returned, would also get you 50 shares but having that extra 2 to1 split in 2000 would result in 5,600 shares today or $1.3M.True story. Around 2002, I opened 2 Roth IRA. One for me and one for my wife. Back then $2K per year was the limit one could put in their Roth IRA and only one Roth per person. Some time before 2005, I put $1K in my wife's IRA and bought 30 shares of AAPL. Today those shares are still in her account but is now 1,680 shares and value at $390K. But those 1680 shares of AAPL (when sold and withdrawn) and all the AAPL dividend already received, are tax free since it's in a Roth IRA. I only wished I did the same with my Roth. But I already had plenty of AAPL shares in my regular stock portfolio. So I thought, how could GE get any lower than $30 a share (This after the dot com crash) and GE was paying a dividend back then. Needless to say, the amount of tax free AAPL dividend my wife's Roth receives every year, is 2X more than what my GE stock is worth, in my Roth.
But judging from the AAPL investors here at AI, none of us seem that impressed that a person whose income was probably over $2M a year in 2014, manage to make more than $600K, by investing $69K in AAPL (in 2014). I for one, would be way more impressed if he had invested $1K in 2005 (when he was 16 years old) and would now have about the same amount (more than $600k) in AAPL.
