theothergeoff

lkrupp said:

Doesn’t matter. Android still wins because, well, just because. We know there are a billion Android phones out there with fatal security flaws that will never be patched but it just doesn’t matter. Android wins every time. Nobody cares. Go figure.

People buy what they buy.  There are probably a billion people on the planet that have no need for or can't afford digital security, just like there a billions of people who can't afford decent health care.  If a phone makes calls and has facebook... and the buyer puts their entire life on facebook anyway, who are we to say 'you shouldn't buy that phone... it isn't secure.'

I'm just glad there is a choice. 

battiato1981 said:

crowley said:

Or distribution and fulfilment for that matter.

Apple only handles the payment processing, all of the content comes from Spotify.

If that is indeed all that Apple provides, it does seem rather simple, except you have to put a value on the venue itself, which of course is valuable. On one hand, the upcoming system is a step in the right direction of fairness for the consumer (the 15% mark-up for subscribers who come via the app-store), perhaps there can be more descending tiers if that customer is in fact continuously loyal (next year 10%, next year 5%, then done - zeroed out). That would be another improvement. If there was a way for there to be a rebate for the first year on half of that 30%, once you hit the mark, that would be even better. 

This is such a hot button issue and I admit that I hadn't thought much about it before this recent kerfuffle. I don't think that a company with a questionable business model should be rewarded much, especially if it's true that they totally lowball their content providers (i.e. - the musicians), but I think Apple has to stay ahead of the game and not be seen as gouging. 

I still think that if I was in Spotifys shoes I would do what someone said Amazon has done and offer the Kindle app, which when opened informs the new customer that they need an account to use it. The customer goes to their website, signs away their privacy and then returns to the app and logs in. Spotify gets it all, Apple gets nothing. Everyone is happy. 

the spotify content comes from spotify.  Apple also provides
- the DRM to trust the app is truly an unadulterated app from spotify
- The CDN to download the app.
- User notifications that the App has been updated
- A comments and review section for marketing the application

In short, it provides a permanent software marketplace..   30% is a reasonable amount to showcase your wares, and 15% is reasonable to maintain the customer relationship year over year. 

As noted elsewhere, Spotify could easily put up a 'free' app and forgo inapp purchases, and sell subscriptions at a web page (e.g. netflix).  But they don't.  Something tells me that the Apple has created a marketplace that consumers want to shop, and for that, there should be a price of admission for the vendors who want to set up a booth, and use the in store Point of Sale system.

maestro64 said:

Lib-Simulator said:

The evidence states otherwise.

During the attack, Omar told the authorities that he was an ISIS surrogate.  After the attack, ISIS told the authorities that Omar was an ISIS surrogate. In a dozen Muslim countries (representing about 100 million people) the sentence for homosexuality is death. Omar's family came from one of those countries. These Muslim countries have no Christian counterparts where homosexuality warrants a death sentence. Omar's family attended mosques where Imams openly preach that it's ok to kill homosexuals.  No Christian churches teach such things. No Christian bishops teach such things. Omar's entire family knew of his plans to become a martyr. That's why Omar gave his house to his sister before the attack, and why he was communicating with his wife during the attack. They were ok with his plans, and now they're covering for him. That's why they didn't go to the authorities, and why his wife will soon be arrested.

Actually the guy was a nut case and you're trying to use logic to explain what a crazy person did. You like most, you can not blame the crazy guy so you have to have other things to blame. BYW the Christian churches do talk about homosexuality and how it wrong, I grew up Christian and head it all the time at church, they did not say kill people. But a crazy person can not reason between right and wrong and which things is worse. Then again hate speech is protected along with your guns.

And there is a racial dynamic:  when Dylan Roof kills 9 christian Blacks, we don't blame his membership with the the KKK (which at it's core is a full of christian religious symbolism).... No,  He's a troubled, and confused young man.  Columbine, Oklahoma City, rinse and repeat.

But a 1st generation immigrant name Omar, who goes to a church that requires prayer rugs...it's an entire religion  (let alone a splinter religious terrorist group) that is the root cause, not that fact that he 'self-radicalized' (no recruitment, no training, no documented communications).

(We, as I am one) Whites tend to ignore that.

There are no republicans or democrats in Big Business, really big business.  In fact there are no countries in big business.   If the CEO of a company that chooses not to fund a coming out party for a crazy candidate, but then he personally funds the presumptive true ideological leader of the 'mainstream' of that party, and the one that controls 1/2 of Congress, AND, is probably the most fiscally sharp stick in the bunch, that's a good hedge, and keeps 280 odd votes on the Hill 'open' to Apples' issues.

As for tying this to Orlando.   You can't stop crazy.  And like Gretzky skated to the puck was going to be, Apple/Cook has to look 2-3 shifts ahead on the ice, and can't punish your 'ice mates' (while you may be competing, you're all part of the game), if a crazy fan tosses an octopus on the ice, causing an injury to someone.  As for Trump, the crazy goon, on the other team, well, you can avoid him, and pick your competition with someone else.

Cook can't expect to manage Obama down to the Orlando FBI field office, nor can he swing a Gay Anti-Gun bill through congress, because a) he's focused on other things, things that are important to his 'owners' and b) it's not one crazy in Florida....  It's 300+Million people who let crazy happen, on both sides of the political divide, because they want gays/blacks/latinos/syrians/muslims/transgenders/oldpeople/youngpeople/poorpeople  off their lawn.   Because they feel someone is gonna take their stuff, when in fact, it's the people who sell you stuff, people who convince you that you are special and different and deserving, people who tell you how to get to heaven, and the people who want your vote that take the most from you.

tallest skil said:

jungmark said:

I don’t think Apple should pick sides...

Exactly. Why would they back it in the first place?!

I have no problem with Apple Picking Sides, except as a stockholder, if I think they going to impact my return on investment.  

Leadership is all about making decisions. I expect Apple to make them.   Not all of them will be nuanced, and some may be contridictory with past decisions.   But I expect Apple's leadership team to Lead, and to make hard decisions... some of which a majority of people won't like, but may be the right decision when balancing all the current and future employees, consumers, stockholders opinions and needs.