normm

wozwoz said:

rogifan_new said:

Hmm...DED’s article is the first I heard about this.

Really?  Where have you been hiding. Scientists have warned that potential health risks of chronic EMF exposure include cancer, genetic damages, neurological disorders, learning and memory deficits, and reproductive issues, among others. 

Scientists who know what they're talking about have not.  Einstein got the Nobel prize for showing that the energy of photons depends on the frequency.  Photons of the frequencies we're talking about have way too little energy to break chemical bonds, and so there is no plausible mechanism for them to cause genetic damage or cancer.  Nevertheless, there have been enormous studies looking for health effects of low frequency EMF over the years, some involving the whole population of countries.  None have shown any evidence whatsoever of health risks.

AppleInsider said:

It was like a public declaration of how he was going to manage Apple. Collaboration, cross fertilization are the coin of the realm and this is how he wants to run the company. And then you look at the spaceship campus, I mentioned this in the book, that the campus was sort of designed -- probably not by Jobs -- to try to do that, to to get more people to collaborate, to talk, not to be locked in their offices, but to get out and to spread ideas around the company. Those ideas are sort of writ large in architecture.

This seems like an ignorant statement and makes me doubt the author knows what he's talking about in general.  Steve Jobs famously designed the Pixar offices for collaboration https://www.inc.com/jeff-miller/3-ways-to-design-an-office-for-collaboration-not-c.html .  I think this was also discussed in the book "Creativity Inc.".  I've also seen various statements about how Steve wanted to do the same thing with the new Apple campus.

rotateleftbyte said:

flydog said:

Patent holders cannot refuse to license IP covered by a standard essential patent, and the license must be on fair and non-discriminatory terms. 

and who decides what is a SEP?

Will something becoming a SEP and therefore under FRAND end QC's policy of double dipping when it comes to licensing?

Standards committees define standards, and companies offer their patented technology to be included in the standard.  No industry would include patented technology in a standard without some commitment that the patent holder won't bleed them, once the standard becomes widespread.  This is the FRAND commitment that a company makes, to get their technology used.

Johan42 said:

And how do you know Apple isn’t recording and maybe selling all your data? Oh, wait... you don’t.

I trust Apple more than the others because it makes money by selling hardware and services, not by selling their customers.  And because they have a good track record on privacy.

Metriacanthosaurus said:

There has to be a system of checks and balances. The idea that Apple can do whatever it wants with its own platform isn’t good enough. That is just a copout and a way to circumvent fairness, openness, and possibly even the law. 

If you want to have a platform and pretend to make it available to everyone, it has to actually be available to everyone, without various anti competitive practices that prevent any one particular company or group or political ideology from exposure. Let the market handle it, not the whims of a few people in Cupertino. 

Clearly there's an issue if Apple lets an app be developed and used for several years, and then disallows it when they make their own version.  If Apple wants to be both a major platform owner and a participant, they should follow some basic rules about "platform neutrality".  It's true Apple isn't technically a monopoly, but they do have a 45% market share of smartphones in the US, and an effective monopoly on the high end of the market.  

I personally find some Apple policies obnoxious: ones that discourage big media companies from selling directly on iOS.  If a media company is big enough and popular enough that having their stuff helps sell iPhones, Apple shouldn't be taking a large cut. Not being able to buy digital media in the Kindle app or the Netflix app sucks.