flydog

Xed said:

gregoriusm said:

Or pay Masimo licensing fees. 

1) Masimo's patents have been shown to be invalid and except for one juror holding out this would've been settled long ago.

2) How exactly does Apple paying a company for invalid patents for O2 monitoring somehow invent noninvasive glucose monitoring or engineer sleep apnea monitoring via a wristwork device? 

3) With that kind of logic you could be a lawyer for Masimo.

mike_galloway said:

If demand in your home country is weaker than expected, then this would be a good reason not to roll out to other countries.

Massiveattack87 said:

GM is not the only one. Mercedes Benz officially confirmed that CarPlay will not be supported for next models.

The reason of Mercedes is that Apple wants to strive for "All or Nothign" strategy. 
Mercedes Benz would have no issue to have CarPlay as long as basic features can be played by Apple, but Mercedes Benz is not willing to give up the entire control to Apple.

I fear that more and more OEMs would follow GM´s and MB´s decision not to support Apple CarPlay if Apple continues sticking to their "All or Nothing" strategy.

But Having driven EQS, I have to say that MB is way way behind in the UI/UX area. 
MB tries hard to present their cars as a modern technology, but it feels old somehow. 

Nothing can top the simplified UI/UX made by Apple. 

Kierkegaarden said:

Separately, Epic Games is continuing to press the European Union over Apple. In that case, its criticisms concern what it alleges is Apple's "malicious compliance" in only technically following the laws of the Digital Markets Act.

If you’re “technically” following the law, are you not acting legally?