Apple is in the wrong here. They are clearing just trying to force others to give them money when they shouldn’t have to. John Gruber and Ben Thompson had a very good discussion of it on...
Apple is in the wrong here. They are clearing just trying to force others to give them money when they shouldn’t have to.
John Gruber and Ben Thompson had a very good discussion of it on yesterday’s episode of their new show Dithering. Unfortunately it’s behind a paywall but basically, they both think this might be the final straw to get people to start turning against Apple. Thompson mentions receiving a deluge of emails from other developers who have had similar experiences with Apple. He’s also talked about it on Twitter.
I listened to that episode last night. It's worth the one and a half cups of coffee a month. Ben was quite incensed about the whole issue, and correctly described it, in my view, as rent-seeking;...
John Gruber and Ben Thompson had a very good discussion of it on yesterday’s episode of their new show Dithering.
I listened to that episode last night. It's worth the one and a half cups of coffee a month. Ben was quite incensed about the whole issue, and correctly described it, in my view, as rent-seeking; and frankly, for a company that claims to be so focused on services, they do a damn good job of mismanaging IAP subscriptions and abusing their market position as platform owner.
Focused on their services. I’ve been listening since the beginning and I quite like it. I agree with him (and you) that it is wrong. I think the only way they change their ways is if governments...
Focused on their services.
I’ve been listening since the beginning and I quite like it. I agree with him (and you) that it is wrong. I think the only way they change their ways is if governments step in and either threaten to or actually do slap them with a massive fine. The problem is that it’s so easy for them to pay even a $10 billion fine and just write it off as a cost of doing business.
Personally, I made the move to an iPhone this year from Android because: Google's obsession to violating your privacy at every corner. It was actually giving me a headache at thinking of the many...
Personally, I made the move to an iPhone this year from Android because:
Google's obsession to violating your privacy at every corner. It was actually giving me a headache at thinking of the many ways to try and successfully de-Google my phone without going so far as to flash ROMs and all that business.
Google are plain terrible at supporting products if "tHe DaTa" doesn't allow it, no matter how good the idea is.
There was a point in Android's lifecycle where there was such massive innovation that I found it bewildering why anyone would go with iPhones. Now they've slowed down, and the features that they add aren't all that enticing.
I had the OnePlus 7T Pro from the OnePlus 3T. I went from £450 to £750 and I really did not feel like the phone justified the increased cost. With 5G on the way, the price is only going to get worse.
Cheap phones that are decently spec'd under Android are usually by companies with the absolute worst privacy policies I've ever seen. Compare that to iPhone where it nags me constantly to review when it thinks there is any data that is potentially valuable to me that might be sent off. I can even read the raw JSON analytics data my iPhone generates.
As of now, I think the iPhone is fine, but you raise good points. Ultimately it sort of boils down to there being no ethical consumption under capitalism and all that.
The problem is that we are talking about phones and the competition. Sadly it is down to Apple's iOS and Google's Android. If this was the PC platform, it would be a different conversation*. I had...
The problem is that we are talking about phones and the competition. Sadly it is down to Apple's iOS and Google's Android. If this was the PC platform, it would be a different conversation*.
I had a look at Librem 5. As someone with a decent salary, if the product is ethical and compatible with my lifestyle, then I'm more than happy to invest in a phone (I'd say if it was genuinely ethical I'd be willing to spend up to £800-£1000 depending on features). Looking at Librem 5 (and assume it's actually selling and hardware is fine), it is a phone that is a Linux phone, so I'm already missing out on a killer app like WhatsApp.
You can explain to me that WhatsApp is owned by Facebook and it is a terrible app. I know this. I'm convinced myself. The hardest part is convincing others. Believe me - I've moved to iPhone and it's hilarious that I struggle to convince family members to send me messages through iMessage considering I'm one of the last people to own an iPhone (my brother is truly the last), and I wanted that so I can carry on with work on my Mac, but reply when I'm free.
And that's just WhatsApp. What about social media messaging apps? What about maps applications (I need to use my phone to take me places when driving). What about 2FA apps? There is a whole ecosystem that will need to be filled in with this new ecosystem under Librem 5.
Apple and Google know it's near impossible for a new contender to come in and steal it's thunder. Microsoft tried and failed. These days they are doing much better in terms of business decisions, and even now that they are getting back to making rational business decisions, they won't make their own mobile OS - their upcoming phones (Surface Duo and Surface Note) are running Android.
Let that sink in - a multi-billion dollar company who will happily challenge Google on their search engine (Google has 92.1% market share) and browser market (Chrome has 69.8% market share), and Apple/Google on their tablet OS share (Apple: 19.3%, Google: 57.8%), will not challenge the mobile market.
So going back to iPhone vs Android, I agree with your points, but I eventually weighed it up and I felt like Google actively and willingly did more harm to users than Apple - including being anticompetitive with their search practices, with AMP, with ads, and is spent the most on lobbying (which isn't necessarily bad in itself, but I'm pretty sure Google are spending the most to keep a hold on its power). On top of Google's shenanigans, when you pick an Android phone and if you care about ethics, you have to think carefully about the manufacturer as well. Half of the time it doesn't even matter since it's usually made in a place where the people are poor and are forced to manufacture these devices under excruciating circumstances.
That's not to say what Apple are doing isn't terrible. I've watched Louis Rossman's videos and I'm aware at how unbelievably anti-competitive Apple can be. I'm aware of the slowdown of iPhones (which I'll stick my neck out and say that the idea wasn't bad, it was the fact that true to Apple, they never gave the customer the option to choose between slow device and a weaker battery). And I'm utterly appalled by the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China and the weak response by Apple. But as of now, I'd rather have an iPhone and get away with the many continuous horrible practices of Google. I know that in the future, that will very likely change as nothing remains the same.
*With one exception - I am a Mac, Windows, and (barely) Linux user. I have the Mac despite the fact I loathe Apple's designs, their anti-consumer policies, and their expensive hardware for comparatively little value. I have it because I develop iOS apps for very real customers - with one of my clients, 75% of their customers are iPhone users. I can't just ignore that market, I have to cater to it. And because I have to cater to it, I have to own a Mac because Apple makes it impossible to do iOS development outside of Mac.
Before that I was using an Ubuntu Mate Linux machine at work and I was incredibly happy with it as it cost me little hassle for lots of freedom in development (something both Mac and Windows are comparatively weak at).
Even if I stop using an iPhone, how do I stop 75% of my client's customers using iPhone and use a better alternative?
You're taking the names of items at face value to determine their value, worth, and quality in society. As if product names determine their intrinsic quality or, as you put it, "betterness". I...
Example: I can buy biodegradable containers or single-use plastics. Which is better? The former.
You're taking the names of items at face value to determine their value, worth, and quality in society. As if product names determine their intrinsic quality or, as you put it, "betterness".
I don't see how you can possibly lead with logical dismissals such as "red herring" and "false dilemma" and then follow up with arguments like this. What item is "better" depends firstly on what your measure for "better" is. Is it price? Because then single use plastics are better. Is it carbon intensity? Because that entirely depends on far more complicated measures of the product's manufacturing carbon footprint than merely what the product is called.
It just so happens that there are many biodegradable containers that are worse for the environment than single use plastics. There are also some that are better too.
It is? What's wrong with two content creators asking for a coffee's worth of money from you every month? Also, linking to an article with a hyperlink of "updates that intentionally slow down...
Exemplary
First of all, it's hilarious that a show complaining about Apple wanting money is behind a paywall.
It is? What's wrong with two content creators asking for a coffee's worth of money from you every month?
With the updates that intentionally slow down devices
Also, linking to an article with a hyperlink of "updates that intentionally slow down devices" is a bad faith and intentionally misleading take on the situation—to the point of being deceptive and malicious to people reading your comment. The updates were designed to extend iPhone longevity by slowing down the device to ensure your battery lasted longer. There was absolutely zero legal discovery that found the intent was to profiteer. We could go into the whole argument about iOS versus Android software update support for older devices, just to indicate how awfully misleading your comment is, but that's a beaten horse already.
You should edit that portion of your comment because frankly, it's not even an opinion, it's simply a lie with no factual basis in reality, and I'd expect better from comments on Tildes than that.
What else is there? Google's track record is just as bad, if not worse. There really aren't any other viable options when it comes to smartphones... Not really sure what your point is here. What's...
If anyone thinks they can't buy anything other than Apple, since their products are so thin (wow, look at that thinness), then just keep buying Apple products I guess.
What else is there? Google's track record is just as bad, if not worse. There really aren't any other viable options when it comes to smartphones...
First of all, it's hilarious that a show complaining about Apple wanting money is behind a paywall.
Not really sure what your point is here. What's wrong with a podcast charging money instead of having ads?
Apple is in the wrong here. They are clearing just trying to force others to give them money when they shouldn’t have to.
John Gruber and Ben Thompson had a very good discussion of it on yesterday’s episode of their new show Dithering. Unfortunately it’s behind a paywall but basically, they both think this might be the final straw to get people to start turning against Apple. Thompson mentions receiving a deluge of emails from other developers who have had similar experiences with Apple. He’s also talked about it on Twitter.
I listened to that episode last night. It's worth the one and a half cups of coffee a month. Ben was quite incensed about the whole issue, and correctly described it, in my view, as rent-seeking; and frankly, for a company that claims to be so focused on services, they do a damn good job of mismanaging IAP subscriptions and abusing their market position as platform owner.
Focused on their services.
I’ve been listening since the beginning and I quite like it. I agree with him (and you) that it is wrong. I think the only way they change their ways is if governments step in and either threaten to or actually do slap them with a massive fine. The problem is that it’s so easy for them to pay even a $10 billion fine and just write it off as a cost of doing business.
Personally, I made the move to an iPhone this year from Android because:
As of now, I think the iPhone is fine, but you raise good points. Ultimately it sort of boils down to there being no ethical consumption under capitalism and all that.
The problem is that we are talking about phones and the competition. Sadly it is down to Apple's iOS and Google's Android. If this was the PC platform, it would be a different conversation*.
I had a look at Librem 5. As someone with a decent salary, if the product is ethical and compatible with my lifestyle, then I'm more than happy to invest in a phone (I'd say if it was genuinely ethical I'd be willing to spend up to £800-£1000 depending on features). Looking at Librem 5 (and assume it's actually selling and hardware is fine), it is a phone that is a Linux phone, so I'm already missing out on a killer app like WhatsApp.
You can explain to me that WhatsApp is owned by Facebook and it is a terrible app. I know this. I'm convinced myself. The hardest part is convincing others. Believe me - I've moved to iPhone and it's hilarious that I struggle to convince family members to send me messages through iMessage considering I'm one of the last people to own an iPhone (my brother is truly the last), and I wanted that so I can carry on with work on my Mac, but reply when I'm free.
And that's just WhatsApp. What about social media messaging apps? What about maps applications (I need to use my phone to take me places when driving). What about 2FA apps? There is a whole ecosystem that will need to be filled in with this new ecosystem under Librem 5.
Apple and Google know it's near impossible for a new contender to come in and steal it's thunder. Microsoft tried and failed. These days they are doing much better in terms of business decisions, and even now that they are getting back to making rational business decisions, they won't make their own mobile OS - their upcoming phones (Surface Duo and Surface Note) are running Android.
Let that sink in - a multi-billion dollar company who will happily challenge Google on their search engine (Google has 92.1% market share) and browser market (Chrome has 69.8% market share), and Apple/Google on their tablet OS share (Apple: 19.3%, Google: 57.8%), will not challenge the mobile market.
So going back to iPhone vs Android, I agree with your points, but I eventually weighed it up and I felt like Google actively and willingly did more harm to users than Apple - including being anticompetitive with their search practices, with AMP, with ads, and is spent the most on lobbying (which isn't necessarily bad in itself, but I'm pretty sure Google are spending the most to keep a hold on its power). On top of Google's shenanigans, when you pick an Android phone and if you care about ethics, you have to think carefully about the manufacturer as well. Half of the time it doesn't even matter since it's usually made in a place where the people are poor and are forced to manufacture these devices under excruciating circumstances.
That's not to say what Apple are doing isn't terrible. I've watched Louis Rossman's videos and I'm aware at how unbelievably anti-competitive Apple can be. I'm aware of the slowdown of iPhones (which I'll stick my neck out and say that the idea wasn't bad, it was the fact that true to Apple, they never gave the customer the option to choose between slow device and a weaker battery). And I'm utterly appalled by the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China and the weak response by Apple. But as of now, I'd rather have an iPhone and get away with the many continuous horrible practices of Google. I know that in the future, that will very likely change as nothing remains the same.
*With one exception - I am a Mac, Windows, and (barely) Linux user. I have the Mac despite the fact I loathe Apple's designs, their anti-consumer policies, and their expensive hardware for comparatively little value. I have it because I develop iOS apps for very real customers - with one of my clients, 75% of their customers are iPhone users. I can't just ignore that market, I have to cater to it. And because I have to cater to it, I have to own a Mac because Apple makes it impossible to do iOS development outside of Mac.
Before that I was using an Ubuntu Mate Linux machine at work and I was incredibly happy with it as it cost me little hassle for lots of freedom in development (something both Mac and Windows are comparatively weak at).
Even if I stop using an iPhone, how do I stop 75% of my client's customers using iPhone and use a better alternative?
You're taking the names of items at face value to determine their value, worth, and quality in society. As if product names determine their intrinsic quality or, as you put it, "betterness".
I don't see how you can possibly lead with logical dismissals such as "red herring" and "false dilemma" and then follow up with arguments like this. What item is "better" depends firstly on what your measure for "better" is. Is it price? Because then single use plastics are better. Is it carbon intensity? Because that entirely depends on far more complicated measures of the product's manufacturing carbon footprint than merely what the product is called.
It just so happens that there are many biodegradable containers that are worse for the environment than single use plastics. There are also some that are better too.
It is? What's wrong with two content creators asking for a coffee's worth of money from you every month?
Also, linking to an article with a hyperlink of "updates that intentionally slow down devices" is a bad faith and intentionally misleading take on the situation—to the point of being deceptive and malicious to people reading your comment. The updates were designed to extend iPhone longevity by slowing down the device to ensure your battery lasted longer. There was absolutely zero legal discovery that found the intent was to profiteer. We could go into the whole argument about iOS versus Android software update support for older devices, just to indicate how awfully misleading your comment is, but that's a beaten horse already.
You should edit that portion of your comment because frankly, it's not even an opinion, it's simply a lie with no factual basis in reality, and I'd expect better from comments on Tildes than that.
What else is there? Google's track record is just as bad, if not worse. There really aren't any other viable options when it comes to smartphones...
Not really sure what your point is here. What's wrong with a podcast charging money instead of having ads?