especially not in the same week when Kamala Harris goes on national TV to say she’s a capitalist.
You can rest assured that that is a meticulously prepared statement to curry favor and win elections in specific areas, and nothing to do with her personal ideology or how she will run things as President.
Controlling what happens on your systems is not anti-competitive.
That entirely depends on what part of “your systems” you’re controlling. When you control how users of “your systems” can interact with other businesses, it absolutely is. When you say “if you want to create software that runs on our hardware, you have to adhere to all of our guidelines, no matter how absurd, and pay us 30% of any revenue received through this software” that’s anticompetitive…
The locked down system of Apple and consoles is hair biggest value add.
LOOOOOOOLOLOL okay so you’re not just a fanboy, you’re a shill!
Good talk. Bye bye now.
People should be able to make their own products.
Of course they should. You’re intentionally missing the point. They should not be allowed to make their products anti-competitive and anti-consumer by preventing the user from installing the software they want to use, in order to funnel more money into their pockets and essentially extorting it from businesses that want to write software for its’ customers with exorbitant fees.
There are many companies that do what Apple does and run closed operating systems on their own hardware.
And they shouldn’t be allowed to do that either. And especially not if they become one of the top 5 wealthiest companies on the face of the Earth in the process.
Apple built their market share on the strength of their walled garden providing an excellent development environment.
And absolutely nothing about allowing users to install whatever software they want without paying extortionate and exorbitant fees to Apple impedes that strength.
It’s not what a monopoly is
Fucking el oh ol. There’s simply no world where Google is a monopoly and Apple isn’t, and the insinuation of such can only be described as fanboyism.
It’s not in any way a limitation of the OS.
Requiring a specific refresh rate for the OS to be installed isn’t “in any way” a limitation of the OS? Not sure how you arrived at that.
And again, your core concept isn’t just flawed. It completely lacks understanding of what antitrust is.
No, I think you just don’t understand that I am not having a legal discussion. I am having a rational discussion. If the law is irrational, then it is fucked and needs to be updated. Imposing rules that apply to businesses that are more competitive by sharing their IP (with caveats), then going back and saying that other businesses that operate in essentially the exact same space, but refuse to share any IP (anti-competitive), are exempt from such regulations, is fucked.
Neither of them are okay, and both should be regulated more heavily, but the fact that the more competitive one faces more penalties is fucked and just further enforces Apple’s “walled garden” ideology, as well as encouraging other businesses to operate similarly.
There’s a refresh rate requirement to distribute your device with the play store.
Is there? I’ve seen lots of Android e-readers that are way less. Maybe just because they’re Chinese and don’t give a shit. Presumably that requirement is to ensure a positive experience for Android users. Android is obviously not intended to be used for e-readers.
Regardless, a limitation of your OS is absolutely not in any way more anti-competitive than not distributing an OS at all. I feel like this is pretty straightforward…
I honestly don’t understand anything you said. There’s a refresh rate requirement for Android? And the refresh rate requirement made it convoluted for people to enable the Play Store?
What are the hardware requirements?
Using your market position to dictate a cabal of other manufacturers’ rules on their hardware is anticompetitive.
You’re dictating the ToU of your software. They have zero control over others’ hardware.
So, Google allows other OEMs to use their OS and tries to control how it’s used = anti-competitive.
Apple doesn’t let anyone else use their OS = totally fine?
Apple is not using their market position to force anything on anybody or any OEM. Google is.
You can’t claim that Google is more anti-competitive because they try to control how others use their OS when Apple doesn’t even let anyone else do that, and they still maintain a near-majority market-share in the US.
And this is why we dont do countdowns…
For the most part, they are, mainly due to the fact that MS and Google don’t seem to be capable of making a proper tablet OS, and iPad OS seems intent on ensuring product diversity so their laptops can’t be replaced.
But yeah, the ability to draw on the screen can be excellent for note-taking.
It’s kinda like a gaming PC, in that both have an intended use case.
Russians using Telegram and Discord reaks of a ridiculously high level of incompetence…
Their military communications are not private at all? They have no encrypted messaging platforms? Like WTF
It’s an unfortunate sign to feature in the main article picture because it distracts from the story.
Unfortunate but not a mistake. Like anything else in media, their only goal is to sew controversy and drive clicks and “engagement”. I can’t imagine any other reason why this would be the main photo of the article. I hope and do not believe that this is the kinda sexist bullshit that represents the majority.
Ehhhh no?