davidw

nubus said:

macxpress said:

I can't wait for this to be a failure so Mr Sweeney can bitch and complain again about how Apple's App Store practices are unfair after he can't even get people to buy his apps and addon's via a 3rd party store. 

Triple-A gaming on iOS is a failure with Fornite being the exception. The fact that Apple didn't make a quiet "marketing kickback" deal but allowed fragmentation of App Store is on Apple. Will it work? It takes devoted users to make this happen and Fortnite users are devoted.

gatorguy said:

y2an said:

This is chalk and cheese. Facebook and Google both have social media platforms hosting user content for consumption by others. Apple does not. Where is the recognition of that rather significant difference in the “findings“?

Google does have YouTube, where user content can be shared, but direct interactions with specific people are not a strong point.  I would not call it a "social media platform" in the vein of a Facebook or Snapchat. Not that they haven't tried.

Of note, PatentlyApple has an expanded viewpoint. 
https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/06/apple-was-once-a-leader-in-scanning-message-apps-for-child-pornographic-images-now-joins-a-group-to-protect-encryption-ov.html

xRAHx said:

9secondkox2 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

xRAHx said:

indiebug said:

EU commission head is targeting Apple either because she has clandestinely sided with its competitors or as a means to milk American companies which are far ahead of European counterparts. EU is literally finding ways to squeeze money out of American tech giants. EU s policies are based on protectionism and jealousy towards Big American brands. This is awful and anyone with common sense can understand. Interoperability- nonsense. Next, make iMovie compatible with android. Why does not Microsoft make windows compatible with Mac? Why no android on iPhone.  All nonsensical hogwash 

The EU commission requires owners of market-dominating operating systems not to set their own browsers as the default, but to show users a selection of competing browsers during setup, from which they should choose one as the default.

The EU commission wants the owners of the market-dominating operating systems not to prevent app developers from advertising the sale of licenses in their own apps. 

European iOS and iPadOS users shall become free to choose who they want to buy apps and content from. Apple shall not stay the monopoly reseller of apps for iOS and iPadOS in the EU. The EU does not want Apple to be able to continue to prevent certain apps from being available on iOS and iPadOS. European Users of iOS and iPadOS shall become able to freely develop, distribute, install, sell and buy apps for iOS and iPadOS.

That is more freedom for European users, that is more freedom for developers all over the world who want to sell apps for iOS and iPadOS in the EU, that is less freedom for Apple in the EU.

The EU commission demands that the owners of the market-dominating operating systems do not use the APIs of the operating systems exclusively for themselves, but that the owners of these operating systems allow all app developers to use the APIs of the operating systems so that there are more better applications that run on all operating systems.

The EU commission does not require Apple to develop apps for other operating systems.

First point: I don't think anyone has much of an issue with this. The EU does also require Apple to allow browsers to use their own engine.

Second: Not sure why the EU thinks this is important. Advertising licenses inside an app is not typical for any platform. Smartphone users also have access to all kinds of information outside of apps and the App Store on the same device...internet, social media, email, text messages, direct messages etc. Basically, you have to pretend that smartphone users aren't aware that they can get information about developers and their products/services anywhere other than inside apps or the App Store in order to think this is important.

Third: Apple monopolizes app distribution because iOS/iPadOS and iPhone/iPad hardware are their own IP. That formula has been around for decades and was never previously considered to be anti-competitive since there is a high degree of difficulty in achieving success with it commercially. Think of all the various video game consoles that have either flopped or been unable to maintain viability in the long run. Think of Microsoft's attempt at a smartphone. It's not a magic formula for market dominance. Apple does have limits for what it allows to be sold in the App Store but that is true of any store...digital or brick/mortar. For the most part though, it's really the app developers that choose whether or not to provide their apps on iOS. Example: Microsoft made a big stink about its game streaming app not being allowed on the App Store but they had never previously ported 1st party games to the App Store either. They preferred to limit their own gaming apps to Windows/Xbox.

Fourth: Requiring access to APIs across the board is kind of an odd stance since not every API can be linked to market competition. I can see how it makes sense for something like NFC/Wallet or the browser engine aspect, i.e., targeted situations. This seems like a big overreach on the part of the EU similar to the third point above.  

Great points. 

No one goes to target or wal mart to find information about what else is available from a handbag maker - or if there are any vendor-specific sales better than what’s at that brick and mortar store. 

They use the internet, advertising in tv, radio, direct mail, etc. 

when you go to a Mercedes dealership, they don’t have to post up signs telling you that a certain bmw can be had cheaper for similar horsepower, etc. 

in the smartphone, you have the whole internet at your disposal. People know what search engines and websites are. Sheesh. It’s not kindergarten where you don’t know something unless it’s in front of you at all times. 

It’s really quite embarrassing that the eu is forcing a tech company to divert customers to vendors own separate stores -inside their own store. 

It’s a solution looking for a problem and has indeed become the problem. 

Brick and mortar stores have digital storefronts/apps. To be fair, that’s a digital market and would need to force them to have a sign next to the Kilauea bananas item in the apps that directed them to Klause’s stall down the street where he sells cheaper because of less overhead. It’s the height of stupidity. 

In the EU, apart from the youngest children, almost 100 percent of citizens use a smartphone. No more than 30 percent of EU citizens use games consoles.

Smartphones are (vitally) important. Game consoles are not important.

Smartphones are now regulated in the EU. Games consoles may be regulated later.

There are two operating systems for smartphones: Android and iOS. Alphabet/Google and Apple have a duopoly here.

Google and Apple have agreed that the Google search engine will be the default setting on all smartphones. They made it obvious that they want to manipulate the owners of smartphones in order so squeeze money out of them.

A smartphone is a computer that is connected to the Internet and GPS and can be used to make phone calls, take photos, navigate, chat, read and listen.

Anyone who has bought a computer for 1000+ dollars/euros in the EU shall now be able to decide freely in the EU from whom they buy software for this computer.

The EU has changed the law exactly for this. It doesn't matter what was allowed before. Now it's different. There is a new law.

The EU wants freedom for EU citizens who own computers called smartphones. The owners of the computers shall decide where they buy software. Not Google. Not Apple.

Apple doesn't want that. A minority of Apple users in the EU don't want that either, because they are afraid. The majority of citizens in the EU, however, want to be free to decide from whom they can buy software for their computers that they have already paid for.

The EU wants this rule to apply to both Android and Apple. That's just how it works. This is not unusual in the EU.

VictorMortimer said:

macxpress said:

Command strips would work great for securing in the battery. It's also easily removable and replacable without damaging the battery while removing it. Flat out glue is a very bad decision. 

Clips would work great.  There is ZERO excuse for using the garbage they use, which is essentially a very thin "command strip" type strip (that breaks virtually every time you try to pull it out.

davidw said:

There is a reason why the battery in iPhones and iPads are "glued" down, that most here don't seem to realize. That is that the adhesive, which covers the whole backside of the battery, acts like thermal paste to help transfer the heat from the battery to the metal back cover. The back cover acts as a heat sink. Just like how thermal paste is applied between a CPU and the heat sink, to ensure as much contact as possible.

There is also a very small gap, (at least on the ones I've replaced), between the top of the battery and the screen on top of it. This acts as a insulator to keep as much heat away from the back of the screen and more importantly, to provide enough space for normal expansion of the  battery when it heats up. Therefore, one do not want that expansion gap between the battery and the back cover or any gap there at all, caused by just putting a small amount of adhesive on the corners of the battery (to hold it down) so that it can be easily removed later.

And if possible, when replacing the battery, one shouldn't just use any double sided tape but heat sink double side tape (they sell such a thing) when bonding the battery to the back cover. And the tape should cover the whole battery to ensure a complete bond. The very last thing one want to do is to use any adhesive that ends up acting like an insulator. (Which is why velcro is a no-no.)

 

https://www.amazon.com/25Mx20mmx0-15mm-Adhesive-Performance-Thermally-Heatsink/dp/B0751GYD6N /ref=sr_1_2?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.vuZ8wI-bHDxR-RnUCevX5nGN1r9HBmsOSpS0LmTCCj28eheGdWn-TftGSY5q35FRGB5oFvliVoFrEmHIro_UXYt7bLobmGg_L7scdtbsdE9N1pGuS96deJ5EzMuV7XUuo1syF_WxRA2jf1biKPkjTjiO-4oKr0fVYjxsvufpKPVGUbfz9QFQp6FwGRvgf9geH1c7Pjx9G5rfDYf-qHY2QNYuhKcv3DZgq0U21IWZxL0.eepM9THFhEfI7AZ6NcEfXDhnFm6XHmwpM6kbCB31seM&dib_tag=se&keywords=double+sided+thermal+tape&qid=1719535955&sr=8-2

One shouldn't be accusing Apple of unnecessarily making it difficult to replace the battery. But Apple do have a habit of over engineering a fix to a problem, where the fix might cause more of the problem later on, than the problem being fixed. 

I just use a hairdryer to heat the back cover for about 30 seconds, to soften the adhesive and battery can be easily pried off. But it still requires the battery to bend quite a bit (when being pried out.) and therefore, I would never use that battery again in another device. Don't know what internal damage could have been caused by the bending.  Which is why I don't buy used iPhone or iPad batteries, even if the seller say that it's in excellent health. No telling how much bending occurred when it was removed.

Virtually everything about this is wrong.

First, you DO NOT want the battery to be thermally coupled to a heat sink that is also the heat sink for the CPU.  The battery would get HOTTER because of it.

Fortunately, the back cover is not a heat sink in current iPhones, it's made of glass, which isn't that great at thermal conduction, particularly compared to the aluminum they used to use. 

And one should absolutely be accusing Apple of unnecessarily making it difficult to replace the battery, because that is exactly what they are doing.

Heat is the WRONG option for removing the adhesive.  Squirt a bit of 91% isopropyl alcohol in there, you'll be able to remove the battery undamaged.

But adhesive of ANY kind is doing it wrong.  Small metal clips with screws would be the perfect attachment for batteries like Apple uses, but that's ALSO the wrong approach, because batteries should be easily swappable without tools, like they were on older phones.  Changing the battery on my old Motorola flip phones took seconds, I kept spare batteries charging so I never had to worry about charging the phone itself, I just changed to a fully charged battery.  THAT is what Apple should be doing.