The Paris Prosecutor's Office has opened an investigation into Apple's alleged efforts to render its own devices obsolete in order to force users
to upgrade. The complaint follows successful judgments against the
California tech giant in France and Italy.
"Following a complaint, an investigation was opened in December 2022 into deceptive marketing practices and programmed obsolescence," the office
said in a statement on Monday, adding that the complaint was filed by an activist group called 'Halte a L'Obsolescence Programmee' (HOP).
The group's complaint centers around the practice of 'serialization',
whereby spare parts like microchips or speakers are matched with serial numbers to a specific generation of iPhone. This prevents third-party repairers from using generic parts, and as models are phased out by Apple,
so too are the associated spares, forcing customers to shell out for a
newer model.
Apple, HOP claims, can detect when a phone has been repaired with unauthorized parts and can remotely "degrade" its performance.
https://dailystormer.in/france-wants-to-sue-apple-for-planned-obsolescence/ France Wants to Sue Apple for Planned Obsolescence
Apple is possibly the worst offender, but every company is doing this.
There
is no real reason an iPhone from 2015 shouldn't be fine today, and yet no one, not even the most thrifty, are walking around with 2015 iPhones.
https://www.rt.com/news/576343-apple-planned-obsolescence-france/
The Paris Prosecutor's Office has opened an investigation into Apple's
alleged efforts to render its own devices obsolete in order to force users >> to upgrade. The complaint follows successful judgments against the
California tech giant in France and Italy.
"Following a complaint, an investigation was opened in December 2022 into
deceptive marketing practices and programmed obsolescence," the office
said in a statement on Monday, adding that the complaint was filed by an
activist group called 'Halte a L'Obsolescence Programmee' (HOP).
The group's complaint centers around the practice of 'serialization',
whereby spare parts like microchips or speakers are matched with serial
numbers to a specific generation of iPhone.
This prevents third-party
repairers from using generic parts, and as models are phased out by Apple, >> so too are the associated spares, forcing customers to shell out for a
newer model.
Apple, HOP claims, can detect when a phone has been repaired with
unauthorized parts and can remotely "degrade" its performance.
Apple could have been the single best American company.
Steve Jobs was hardcore. He's demonized now, like, "he was evil for having a strong work ethic and expecting his extraordinarily well-paid employees to perform well."
The reality is, he was a lot more of a serious person than any of these
other assholes in Silicon Valley.
He did some things people might consider shady, with tricks to get people into the Apple "ecosystem." But he wouldn't have run these stupid scams that Rim Cook is running. He would have actually innovated, and expanded the company, rather than leaving it as a cellphone company that maybe also sells a couple of laptops.
Rim Cock designs these phones to break when they drop, then refuses to allow you to repair them. It's a criminal conspiracy. There is no reason you would design a phone to break easily, and there is no reason you would refuse to allow it to be repaired - unless you were a homosexual criminal.
Apple is not even doing AI. Siri is still at the level she was at in 2016. The bitch is always confused. ChatGPT isn't confused, is he?
It's absurd.
The French are a group of people who would probably prefer to go back to the 1980s. If their government was even remotely serious, they would just ban
all consumer electronics.
On Wed, 17 May 2023 03:17:00 +0000, Here is the News wrote:
The French are a group of people who would probably prefer to go back to the >> 1980s. If their government was even remotely serious, they would just ban
all consumer electronics.
The Brazil government is also on the side of the consumer, which is to say it's also suing Apple for sticking other sticks up its customers' asses.
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. ><robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by Apple.
Isn't there some sort of a chip which identifies "approved" cables?
Steve Jobs was a vain, power hungry fanatic who thought
he was some kind of Zen master bringing higher vibes to the
world. Meanwhile he exploited his customers. It was under Jobs
that the programming was controlled and licensed, while anyone
could write Windows software with standard tools.
Jobs removed
the floppy far too early, forcing customers to buy $100 USB
floppy drives.
He did the same with CDs.
If I remember correctly,
it was under Jobs that Apple fashioned a custom screw head so
that people wouldn't be able to open Apple products without
first manufacturing a screwdriver.
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not >>Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by Apple.
Isn't there some sort of a chip which identifies "approved" cables?
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by Apple.
Isn't there some sort of a chip which identifies "approved" cables?
Yes.
"Here is the News" <news@here.anon> wrote
| Steve Jobs was hardcore. He's demonized now, like, "he was evil for
| having a strong work ethic and expecting his extraordinarily well-paid
| employees to perform well."
|
| The reality is, he was a lot more of a serious person than any of these
| other assholes in Silicon Valley.
|
Steve Jobs was a vain, power hungry fanatic [...]
nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. >><robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by Apple.
In article <autejjx4bg.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard,
not Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the
functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by
Apple. Isn't there some sort of a chip which identifies "approved"
cables?
Yes.
no.
see my other post for details, including that authentication is part
of the official usb spec, and that in the past eight years, apple has
not blocked non-compliant cables.
but why let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
it was done because many cables, chargers and accessories
caused damage to the device.
Actually there are still quite a few iPhone 6s and 6s Plus phones in
use. Users are reluctant to give them up because it's the last iPhone
model that has a 3.5mm headphone jack.
nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
I've read numerous articles where Apple is considering limiting the functionality of USB-C cables which haven't been "approved" by Apple.
Isn't there some sort of a chip which identifies "approved" cables?
"Here is the News" <news@here.anon> wrote
| Steve Jobs was hardcore. He's demonized now, like, "he was evil for
having a | strong work ethic and expecting his extraordinarily
well-paid employees to | perform well." | | The reality is, he was a
lot more of a serious person than any of these | other assholes in
Silicon Valley. |
Steve Jobs was a vain, power hungry fanatic who
thought he was some kind of Zen master bringing higher vibes to the
world. Meanwhile he exploited his customers. It was under Jobs that
the programming was controlled and licensed, while anyone could write
Windows software with standard tools. Jobs removed the floppy far too
early, forcing customers to buy $100 USB floppy drives. He did the
same with CDs. If I remember correctly, it was under Jobs that Apple fashioned a custom screw head so that people wouldn't be able to open
Apple products without first manufacturing a screwdriver. And Jobs
famously remarked that he didn't want windows that open in his
spaceship office building because, "When you let people open things
they just break them."
On 2023-05-17 12:53, nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
<https://www.applesfera.com/iphone/violaria-directamente-ley-llegan-advertencias-comision-europea-planes-iphone-15-usb-c>
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/04/eu-warns-apple-about-limiting-usb-c-iphone-cables/>
<https://www.zeit.de/digital/mobil/2023-05/eu-kommission-apple-ladekabel-einschraenkungen-warnung?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.macrumors.com%2F>
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
Yes, they do. It is called MFi certification. See links provided for
more details.
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
<https://www.applesfera.com/iphone/violaria-directamente-ley-llegan-adverten
cias-comision-europea-planes-iphone-15-usb-c>
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/04/eu-warns-apple-about-limiting-usb-c-ip
hone-cables/>
<https://www.zeit.de/digital/mobil/2023-05/eu-kommission-apple-ladekabel-ein
schraenkungen-warnung?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.macrumors.com%2F>
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
Yes, they do. It is called MFi certification. See links provided for
more details.
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15 models
is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
the usb spec is public. anyone outside of apple can read it. even you.
apple has supported usb-c for eight years, without having created any non-standard version.
Not to mention the fact that if any company created a ³non-standard USB-C port², said company would not be able to call said port a ³USB-C² port.
the usb spec is public. anyone outside of apple can read it. even you.
apple has supported usb-c for eight years, without having created any non-standard version.
On 2023-05-17 04:52, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:53, nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
<https://www.applesfera.com/iphone/violaria-directamente-ley-llegan-advertencias-comision-europea-planes-iphone-15-usb-c>
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/04/eu-warns-apple-about-limiting-usb-c-iphone-cables/>
<https://www.zeit.de/digital/mobil/2023-05/eu-kommission-apple-ladekabel-einschraenkungen-warnung?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.macrumors.com%2F>
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
Yes, they do. It is called MFi certification. See links provided for
more details.
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15 models
is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
On 2023-05-17 04:52, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:53, nospam wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning >>>>> that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own >>>>> version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
<https://www.applesfera.com/iphone/violaria-directamente-ley-llegan-advertencias-comision-europea-planes-iphone-15-usb-c>
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/04/eu-warns-apple-about-limiting-usb-c-iphone-cables/>
<https://www.zeit.de/digital/mobil/2023-05/eu-kommission-apple-ladekabel-einschraenkungen-warnung?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.macrumors.com%2F>
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
Yes, they do. It is called MFi certification. See links provided for
more details.
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15 models
is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of the purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so.
On Wed, 17 May 2023 07:47:09 -0700, sms wrote:
Actually there are still quite a few iPhone 6s and 6s Plus phones in
use. Users are reluctant to give them up because it's the last iPhone
model that has a 3.5mm headphone jack.
True. Apple stuck that stick up its customers asses
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's
own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
In article <u433b1$3ufvg$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
it's already told.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
the usb spec is public. anyone outside of apple can read it. even you.
apple has supported usb-c for eight years, without having created any non-standard version.
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
the usb spec is public. anyone outside of apple can read it. even
you.
apple has supported usb-c for eight years, without having created any
non-standard version.
Not to mention the fact that if any company created a “non-standard
USB-C portâ€, said company would not be able to call said port a
“USB-C†port.
It would be very difficult to sell such a device.
Nice to see that Arlen is back - complete with sock puppets - spewing
the same bullshit as always.
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of the >> purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in >> their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so.
yet history shows they do no do that.
On 17-05-2023 21:51 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside
of the purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do
everything in their power to design hardware using loopholes in the
standards to do so.
yet history shows they do no do that.
Apple serialized batteries "to do (exactly) that."
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of the purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so.
Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside
of the purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do
everything in their power to design hardware using loopholes in the
standards to do so.
Hey Arlen. How are those “cross platform, ultrasonic file transfers†working out?
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
It's based on the fact that an Apple-branded USB-C cable some analyst
became aware of has a chip in it (without identifying what chip it is or
even whether it's Apple-proprietary), and it ignores the fact that it is
not uncommon for USB-C cables to have chips in them. It also
conveniently ignores the fact that Apple hasn't limited any of the
USB-C cables for existing Apple devices that use USB-C. ; )
On 17-05-2023 21:51 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of the >>> purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in >>> their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so. >>yet history shows they do no do that.
Apple serialized batteries "to do (exactly) that."
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of the >> purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in >> their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so.
yet history shows they do no do that.
Apple serialized batteries "to do (exactly) that."
If Apple can restrict key choices of its customers to stray outside of theyet history shows they do no do that.
purchasing direction that Apple wants them to, Apple will do everything in
their power to design hardware using loopholes in the standards to do so. >>
Apple serialized batteries "to do (exactly) that."
Did they?
In article <c3mfjjxt1g.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
On 2023-05-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
It's based on the fact that an Apple-branded USB-C cable some analyst
became aware of has a chip in it (without identifying what chip it is or
even whether it's Apple-proprietary), and it ignores the fact that it is
not uncommon for USB-C cables to have chips in them. It also
conveniently ignores the fact that Apple hasn't limited any of the
USB-C cables for existing Apple devices that use USB-C. ; )
Steve Jobs was a vain, power hungry fanatic who thought
he was some kind of Zen master bringing higher vibes to the
world. Meanwhile he exploited his customers. It was under Jobs
that the programming was controlled and licensed, while anyone
could write Windows software with standard tools.
On 2023-05-17 22:07, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-05-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
It's based on the fact that an Apple-branded USB-C cable some analyst
became aware of has a chip in it (without identifying what chip it is or
even whether it's Apple-proprietary), and it ignores the fact that it is
not uncommon for USB-C cables to have chips in them. It also
conveniently ignores the fact that Apple hasn't limited any of the
USB-C cables for existing Apple devices that use USB-C. ; )
And then there is the fact that the official requested a meeting several times to clarify the situation, and Apple refused/declined.
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
It doesn't matter, if they ban Apple products.
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
And then there is the fact that the official requested a meeting several times to clarify the situation, and Apple refused/declined.
On Wed, 17 May 2023 09:48:01 -0400, nospam wrote:
it was done because many cables, chargers and accessories
caused damage to the device.
Every time Apple shoves another stick up its customer's ass, Apple smiles sweetly telling its customers "Relax, stop moaning, we shoved that MFI
stick up your ass for your own good" (which the "mean EU" has figured out).
In article <c3mfjjxt1g.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
On 2023-05-17 13:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 22:07, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-05-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
It's based on the fact that an Apple-branded USB-C cable some
analyst became aware of has a chip in it (without identifying what
chip it is or even whether it's Apple-proprietary), and it ignores
the fact that it is not uncommon for USB-C cables to have chips in
them. It also conveniently ignores the fact that Apple hasn't
limited any of the USB-C cables for existing Apple devices that use
USB-C. ; )
And then there is the fact that the official requested a meeting
several times to clarify the situation, and Apple refused/declined.
Got proof of that, do you?
On 2023-05-17 22:07, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-05-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-05-17 19:24, Alan wrote:
You are apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of things like:
"is expected" (link 1)
"It was rumored" (link 2)
"It is worth emphasizing that Apple potentially limiting the
functionality of uncertified USB-C cables connected to iPhone 15
models is only a rumor for now" (link 2)
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
It's based on the fact that an Apple-branded USB-C cable some analyst
became aware of has a chip in it (without identifying what chip it is or
even whether it's Apple-proprietary), and it ignores the fact that it is
not uncommon for USB-C cables to have chips in them. It also
conveniently ignores the fact that Apple hasn't limited any of the
USB-C cables for existing Apple devices that use USB-C. ; )
And then there is the fact that the official requested a meeting several times to clarify the situation, and Apple refused/declined.
Am 17.05.23 um 17:19 schrieb Tim+:
On Wed, 17 May 2023 09:48:01 -0400, nospam wrote:
it was done because many cables, chargers and accessories caused
damage to the device.
Every time Apple shoves another stick up its customer's ass, Apple
smiles sweetly telling its customers "Relax, stop moaning, we shoved
that MFI stick up your ass for your own good" (which the "mean EU"
has figured out).
The EU will enforce the law. It is that simple. Apple better complies.
The EU will enforce
the law and it made clear what it considers a circumvention.
Am 17.05.23 um 21:46 schrieb nospam:
In article <c3mfjjxt1g.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
Your opinion in this respect is totally irrelevant.
Apple intentionally circumvents laws all the time.
Like when Apple throttled batteries where Apple lied for years about why
they did it and why they changed the release notes & why they lied about
that too until Apple finally had to settle cases at the cost of billions.
It's what Apple is.
the problem is people are *assuming* without evidence that apple will intentionally circumvent what the eu imposes on the world.
Am 17.05.23 um 21:46 schrieb Alan:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
Bullshit!
The EU made clear what it would consider a circumvention of the law. The
EU never works on rumours.
Apple serialized batteries "to do (exactly) that."
nope. there is no restriction on which batteries can be used.
genuine apple batteries have what you call a serial number due to
counterfeit batteries which at best overstate their capacity and worst
case, ignite and catch fire, potentially causing injury and in at least
two cases, death.
if someone doesn't care about fake batteries with the risk of problems,
then they can use a fake one. the choice is entirely theirs.
many other companies do the same thing, and not just with batteries.
early olmypus digital cameras offered additional functionality when
olympus branded memory cards were used. the sony mavica that used
mini-cds would display a warning with non-sony cds.
Like when Apple throttled batteries where Apple lied for years about why
they did it and why they changed the release notes & why they lied about
that too until Apple finally had to settle cases at the cost of billions.
What Apple did was not only did Apple serialize certain iPhone batteries,
but many iPhones also output a permanent warning even when you use genuine Apple batteries but you did the repair without special serialization tools.
On 18.5.2023 00:19, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
the problem is people are *assuming* without evidence that apple will
intentionally circumvent what the eu imposes on the world.
Apple intentionally circumvents laws all the time.
Like when Apple throttled batteries where Apple lied for years about why
they did it and why they changed the release notes & why they lied about
that too until Apple finally had to settle cases at the cost of billions.
hi arlen!
Don't know don't care who or what that means
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple did.
hi arlen!
it shows a warning until the battery can be guaranteed as genuine and
that the health data its reporting is accurate. once that's done, the
warning goes away. it is *not* permanent.
other than that *one* thing, the battery functions as normal. those who choose to use fake batteries can simply ignore the warning.
On 18.5.2023 00:19, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
the problem is people are *assuming* without evidence that apple will
intentionally circumvent what the eu imposes on the world.
Apple intentionally circumvents laws all the time.
Like when Apple throttled batteries where Apple lied for years about why
they did it and why they changed the release notes & why they lied about
that too until Apple finally had to settle cases at the cost of billions.
It's what Apple is.
In article <u43j1p$4gj$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>, Michael
<michael@spamcop.com> wrote:
What Apple did was not only did Apple serialize certain iPhone
batteries, but many iPhones also output a permanent warning even when
you use genuine Apple batteries but you did the repair without
special serialization tools.
hi arlen!
it shows a warning until the battery can be guaranteed as genuine and
that the health data its reporting is accurate. once that's done, the
warning goes away. it is *not* permanent.
other than that *one* thing, the battery functions as normal. those
who choose to use fake batteries can simply ignore the warning.
Battery > Battery Health. Otherwise, you never see it.
What Apple did was not only did Apple serialize certain iPhone
batteries, but many iPhones also output a permanent warning even when
you use genuine Apple batteries but you did the repair without
special serialization tools.
hi arlen!
it shows a warning until the battery can be guaranteed as genuine and
that the health data its reporting is accurate. once that's done, the warning goes away. it is *not* permanent.
other than that *one* thing, the battery functions as normal. those
who choose to use fake batteries can simply ignore the warning.
Not only that, but the warning isn't displayed unless you go to Settings
Battery > Battery Health. Otherwise, you never see it.
On Wed, 17 May 2023 18:15:05 -0400, nospam wrote:
hi arlen!
Don't know don't care who or what that means but anyone who refutes
your lies you are saying hi arlen to so maybe that's how you hide your
lies.
it shows a warning until the battery can be guaranteed as genuine and
that the health data its reporting is accurate. once that's done, the
warning goes away. it is *not* permanent.
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple
did. You lied.
yep.
On Wed, 17 May 2023 19:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
yep.
All you have are lies
I'm not responding to...
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple did.
You lied.
On 2023-05-17 10:36, Chris wrote:
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's own
version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
Yet not knowing it, you uncritically accept that they are.
On 2023-05-17, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning
that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's
own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
And you nor anyone else outside of Apple knows they are limiting USB-C.
See how that works, Sparky?
On 2023-05-17, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
Am 17.05.23 um 17:19 schrieb Tim+:
On Wed, 17 May 2023 09:48:01 -0400, nospam wrote:
it was done because many cables, chargers and accessories caused
damage to the device.
Every time Apple shoves another stick up its customer's ass, Apple
smiles sweetly telling its customers "Relax, stop moaning, we shoved
that MFI stick up your ass for your own good" (which the "mean EU"
has figured out).
The EU will enforce the law. It is that simple. Apple better complies.
There isn't any evidence that Apple ever planned not to comply in the
first place. : )
In article <v1qfjjxnnp.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
yes, the eu is laughable.
It doesn't matter, if they ban Apple products.
they're not going to ban apple products.
On 2023-05-17 14:01, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
Am 17.05.23 um 21:46 schrieb Alan:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
Bullshit!
The EU made clear what it would consider a circumvention of the law. The
EU never works on rumours.
And you know that...
...how?
In article <u43fk6$4pal$7@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
The EU will enforce
the law and it made clear what it considers a circumvention.
nobody said otherwise.
the problem is people are *assuming* without evidence that apple will intentionally circumvent what the eu imposes on the world.
nearly a decade of apple's usb-c products and 25 years of apple's usb-a products show that apple is fully compliant with the usb spec, without
any custom version.
Ilya Kraskov <Ilyanospam123Kraskov123@gomail.com.ua> wrote:
Apple intentionally circumvents laws all the time.
Like when Apple throttled batteries where Apple lied for years about why
they did it and why they changed the release notes & why they lied about
that too until Apple finally had to settle cases at the cost of billions.
It's what Apple is.
Arlen sock puppets, spewing Arlen Facts. It’s what “Ilya Kraskov†is.
Am 17.05.23 um 23:19 schrieb nospam:
In article <u43fk6$4pal$7@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
The EU will enforce
the law and it made clear what it considers a circumvention.
nobody said otherwise.
the problem is people are *assuming* without evidence that apple will
intentionally circumvent what the eu imposes on the world.
Correct.
nearly a decade of apple's usb-c products and 25 years of apple's usb-a
products show that apple is fully compliant with the usb spec, without
any custom version.
I never claimed otherwise. Once more journalists are fabricating stories
to increase the circulation or the number of clicks.
Am 17.05.23 um 23:29 schrieb Alan:
On 2023-05-17 14:01, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
Am 17.05.23 um 21:46 schrieb Alan:
On 2023-05-17 12:21, Carlos E.R. wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
But the letter admits that it is based on unsubstantiated rumours.
Bullshit!
The EU made clear what it would consider a circumvention of the law. The >>> EU never works on rumours.
And you know that...
...how?
Who has more pull?
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <v1qfjjxnnp.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
yes, the eu is laughable.
I wouldn't expect an american to understand. Regulation is a good thing.
It doesn't matter, if they ban Apple products.
they're not going to ban apple products.
They would if they didn't comply. Apple knows this which is why they're complying. MS found out the hard way how sharp the EU regulator's teeth
are.
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C, meaning >>>> that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not Apple's
own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
And you nor anyone else outside of Apple knows they are limiting USB-C.
See how that works, Sparky?
The rumours are seemingly as credible as other rumours which have come
true. It's absolutely reasonable to discuss the issue.
Waving it away as categorically not happening based on nothing is simply arrogant.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
Because they have been forced to put USB-C on iphones against their wishes.
It is reasonable for the rumours to be published,
however.
they're published because they get the clicks and make money for the publishers. people love a good conspiracy theory, so why not publish
them.
as it turns out, many of them have little basis in reality and are
nothing more than ignorant apple bashing.
Said by an apple apologist, so very reliable as well :-D
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-17, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <5tnejjxtof.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
And the EU is going to force Apple to be serious with USB-C,
meaning that it has to be fully compatible with the standard, not
Apple's own version of it.
that's nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Time will tell.
apple is not creating their own version of usb-c.
You nor anyone else outside of Apple knows that.
And you nor anyone else outside of Apple knows they are limiting
USB-C. See how that works, Sparky?
The rumours are seemingly as credible as other rumours
It's absolutely reasonable to discuss the issue.
Waving it away as categorically not happening based on nothing is
simply arrogant.
what money? being incompatible with standard usb-c would cause a *loss*
in sales.
In article <u44kj4$76io$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years), which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the
spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
btw, that's a very big clue as to what is likely to happen with the
next iphone.
It is reasonable for the rumours to be published,
however.
they're published because they get the clicks and make money for the publishers. people love a good conspiracy theory, so why not publish
them.
as it turns out, many of them have little basis in reality and are
nothing more than ignorant apple bashing.
In article <u44hco$6t10$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
yes, the eu is laughable.
I wouldn't expect an american to understand. Regulation is a good thing.
sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't, which has nothing to do with
one's nationality or the eu in particular.
the problem is when a regulations are based on politics instead of
actual facts, especially ones regulators do not understand.
as is often the case, such decisions are made to further one's own
career rather than what is best for society.
It doesn't matter, if they ban Apple products.
they're not going to ban apple products.
They would if they didn't comply. Apple knows this which is why they're
complying.
no, apple is complying because there is no reason not to.
what possible benefit would there be in an apple-only version of usb-c,
which could not be called usb and would be incompatible with zillions
of usb devices?
MS found out the hard way how sharp the EU regulator's teeth
are.
different issue entirely.
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
Aye.
And then, we don't know where is Arlen, so anybody is at risk of being accused of being Arlen!
X-D
On 2023-05-18 14:01, nospam wrote:
In article <u44kj4$76io$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years), which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
Because they have been forced to put USB-C on iphones against their wishes.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years), which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
btw, that's a very big clue as to what is likely to happen with the
next iphone.
He has been harping endlessly how stupid the EU mandate is and how
USB-C doesn't fit the 'usage model' for iPhones (but apparently does
for the iPad).
And now - out of the blue - he claims that Apple has decided to move
to USB-C for iPhones "well *before* [emphasis FS] the eu decided to
mandate it". So what the heck has he been babbling about all this time!?
btw, that's a very big clue as to what is likely to happen with the
next iphone.
QED.
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 14:01, nospam wrote:
In article <u44kj4$76io$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years), which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the
spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
Because they have been forced to put USB-C on iphones against their wishes.
Exactly. Did you notice that nospam is now weaseling and rewriting
(his and Apple's) history:
<rewind>
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years), which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the
spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
</rewind>
He has been harping endlessly how stupid the EU mandate is and how
USB-C doesn't fit the 'usage model' for iPhones (but apparently does
for the iPad).
And now - out of the blue - he claims that Apple has decided to move
to USB-C for iPhones "well *before* [emphasis FS] the eu decided to
mandate it". So what the heck has he been babbling about all this time!?
Nospam is not a liar.
He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable.
I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
On Thu, 18 May 2023 07:33:27 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:
Nospam is not a liar.
Actually, he is a liar.
He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
He made up whataboutism claims when in truth, only Apple does it.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable.
If he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, it's only because an audience that doesn't know what Apple did is just as clueless as he is.
I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
I gave him three or four chances to back up his lies and he failed all.
On 2023-05-18 08:49, Michael wrote:
...
Arlen, you lie more easily than you breathe.
In article <u45hus$aim1$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 08:49, Michael wrote:
...
Arlen, you lie more easily than you breathe.
one day, both will cease.
On 2023-05-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <u45hus$aim1$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 08:49, Michael wrote:
...
Arlen, you lie more easily than you breathe.
one day, both will cease.
And that will be a joyous day for all of Usenet.
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple did.
You lied.
So, how does iFixit "know what Apple did"?
More importantly, how does
iFixit know WHY Apple did whatever Apple allegedly did?
Where is your link for all of this?
Funny how you demand "backup links"
for the "lies" of others, yet you spew absurd claims without any "backup links".
Nospam is not a liar.]
He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
On Thu, 18 May 2023 03:56:55 +0000, Bob Campbell wrote:
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple did. >>> You lied.
So, how does iFixit "know what Apple did"?
What's obvious is you & he don't know anything about what Apple did.
More importantly, how does
iFixit know WHY Apple did whatever Apple allegedly did?
I'll post the links - but if you don't know, you know nothing about Apple. https://www.google.com/search?q=ifixit+apple+battery+serialization
Where is your link for all of this?
Why can't you look it up before demanding links that are all over the place? https://www.ifixit.com/News/66879/iphone-14-parts-pairing-results-apple-is-still-trying-to-monopolise-repair
https://www.ifixit.com/News/32521/meet-the-tech-who-found-apples-plan-to-discourage-independent-repair
https://www.ifixit.com/News/32343/apple-is-locking-batteries-to-iphones-now https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/781441/Battery+Replacement+can't+recognize+battery+serial.
https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/621513/Service+message+after+copying+battery+serial
https://www.ifixit.com/News/69320/how-parts-pairing-kills-independent-repair https://www.ifixit.com/News/45921/is-this-the-end-of-the-repairable-iphone https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/8/20776965/iphone-xs-max-xr-battery-service-third-party-repair
https://talkbackcomms.com/pages/serial
How many links do you need to learn what you should long ago have known?
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based on a flimsy rumor is arrogant.
In article <u44kj4$76io$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years),
which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the
spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
btw, that's a very big clue as to what is likely to happen with the
next iphone.
It is reasonable for the rumours to be published,
however.
they're published because they get the clicks and make money for the publishers.
people love a good conspiracy theory, so why not publish
them.
as it turns out, many of them have little basis in reality and are
nothing more than ignorant apple bashing.
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based on a
flimsy rumor is arrogant.
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/28/iphone-15-usb-c-accessories-limited-without-mfi/
In article <u44hco$6t10$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
yes, the eu is laughable.
I wouldn't expect an american to understand. Regulation is a good thing.
sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't, which has nothing to do with
one's nationality or the eu in particular.
the problem is when a regulations are based on politics instead of
actual facts, especially ones regulators do not understand.
as is often the case, such decisions are made to further one's own
career rather than what is best for society.
It doesn't matter, if they ban Apple products.
they're not going to ban apple products.
They would if they didn't comply. Apple knows this which is why they're
complying.
no, apple is complying because there is no reason not to.
what possible benefit would there be in an apple-only version of usb-c,
which could not be called usb and would be incompatible with zillions
of usb devices?
MS found out the hard way how sharp the EU regulator's teeth
are.
different issue entirely.
On Thu, 18 May 2023 03:56:55 +0000, Bob Campbell wrote:
I know what it does as iFixIt has reported extensively on what Apple did. >>> You lied.
So, how does iFixit "know what Apple did"?
What's obvious is you & he don't know anything about what Apple did.
More importantly, how does
iFixit know WHY Apple did whatever Apple allegedly did?
I'll post the links - but if you don't know, you know nothing about Apple. https://www.google.com/search?q=ifixit+apple+battery+serialization
Where is your link for all of this?
Why can't you look it up before demanding links that are all over the place? https://www.ifixit.com/News/66879/iphone-14-parts-pairing-results-apple-is-still-trying-to-monopolise-repair
https://www.ifixit.com/News/32521/meet-the-tech-who-found-apples-plan-to-discourage-independent-repair
https://www.ifixit.com/News/32343/apple-is-locking-batteries-to-iphones-now https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/781441/Battery+Replacement+can't+recognize+battery+serial.
https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/621513/Service+message+after+copying+battery+serial
https://www.ifixit.com/News/69320/how-parts-pairing-kills-independent-repair https://www.ifixit.com/News/45921/is-this-the-end-of-the-repairable-iphone https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/8/20776965/iphone-xs-max-xr-battery-service-third-party-repair
https://talkbackcomms.com/pages/serial
How many links do you need to learn what you should long ago have known?
Funny how you demand "backup links"
for the "lies" of others, yet you spew absurd claims without any "backup
links".
I knew very well what Apple did, so I knew right away that he was lying.
France Wants to Sue Apple for Planned Obsolescence
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based on a
flimsy rumor is arrogant.
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/28/iphone-15-usb-c-accessories-limited-without-mfi/
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years),
You regularly say. How do you know seeing as you always say no one knows anything about Apple other than Apple.
which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
It doesn't mean a single design is taken throughout the full cycle (however long that may be). They have to build in contingency for
design/manufacturing failures, market dynamics and regulation. They will be able to make some changes easily and without affecting the process.
It's fair to bet that they've had a USB version designed and tested for the last couple cycles.
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
Fair question. Different markets and demographics.
btw, that's a very big clue as to what is likely to happen with the
next iphone.
Clue, yes. Fact, no.
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based on a
flimsy rumor is arrogant.
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/28/iphone-15-usb-c-accessories-limited-without-mfi/
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <u44hco$6t10$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
The letter of warning from the EU official to Apple is a fact.
it means absolutely nothing, and the eu is technically ignorant.
LOL.
yes, the eu is laughable.
I wouldn't expect an american to understand. Regulation is a good thing.
sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't, which has nothing to do with
one's nationality or the eu in particular.
the problem is when a regulations are based on politics instead of
actual facts, especially ones regulators do not understand.
as is often the case, such decisions are made to further one's own
career rather than what is best for society.
Not sure who's career is being furthered here? Regulation is a process not
an ego trip.
That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls *convinced* that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones
That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls *convinced* that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones
You aren't aware that Apple already did it with the prior cabling?
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based on a
flimsy rumor is arrogant.
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/28/iphone-15-usb-c-accessories-limited-without-mfi/
Thanks for proving my point, dummy. From your vaunted article:
"Apple is widely expected to switch out the Lightning port for USB-C on iPhone 15 models, and earlier this month, a rumor out of China suggested
that the replacement USB-C port would continue to have a Lightning-like authentication chip, despite USB-C ports on Apple's iPads having no such chip."
...which links to this article:
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/10/apple-planning-to-limit-iphone-15-usb-c-port/>
"The iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro's USB-C port and accompanying charging cables will feature a Lightning-like authenticator chip, potentially
limiting their functionality with Apple-unapproved accessories, a rumor shared on Weibo suggests."
...which links to this Weibo post:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20230213113927/https://weibo.com/u/1833340431?is_all=1>
Translated:
"Apple made a type C, lightning interface IC, which will be used on this year's new iPhone and MFI-certified peripherals."
That's it! That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls *convinced* that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones, despite the *FACT* that Apple has never
done so in any of Apple's existing products with USB-C support. You're a bunch of arrogant, gullible clowns who gleefully fall for and repeat
flimsy rumors without any evidence of them being true, simply because
they fit your biased narrative. 🤡
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
Aye.
And then, we don't know where is Arlen, so anybody is at risk of being accused of being Arlen!
That's it! That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls convinced that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones, despite the FACT that Apple has never
done so in any of Apple's existing products with USB-C support.
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
Aye.
And then, we don't know where is Arlen, so anybody is at risk of being
accused of being Arlen!
X-D
Well, "Michael <michael@spamcop.com>" is in the 'suspect' part of my
list of AH-nyms, so there you go! :-)
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
Newyana2 in this thread is Arlen! Check the headers.
"Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
| > And then, we don't know where is Arlen, so anybody is at risk of being
| > accused of being Arlen!
| >
| > X-D
|
| Well, "Michael <michael@spamcop.com>" is in the 'suspect' part of my
| list of AH-nyms, so there you go! :-)
I just want to know when we Americans can join the EU.
It's beginning to feel like a 3rd world country here.
In all fairness, and bearing in mind why Apple have always chosen to have different charging ports/cables for their iPhones than a standard one compatible with other smart phone manufacturers, it is a legitimate possibility ... it might only be an unsubstantiated rumour at this point,
but it would make sense.
Pre-any new iPhone release there's always tons of rumours, some of which
are invariably fake and some of which are grounded in fact.
I wouldn't see
it as anything to get worked up over though at this moment in time. We'll find out in the autumn... probably.
On 19/05/2023 0:30, Jolly Roger wrote:
That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls *convinced* that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones
You aren't aware that Apple already did it with the prior cabling?
Jolly Roger wrote:
That's it! That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls convinced that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones, despite the FACT that Apple has never
done so in any of Apple's existing products with USB-C support.
In all fairness, and bearing in mind why Apple have always chosen to
have different charging ports/cables for their iPhones than a standard
one compatible with other smart phone manufacturers, it is a
legitimate possibility ... it might only be an unsubstantiated rumour
at this point, but it would make sense.
Personally, I don't think it will happen. But sometimes there's no
smoke without fire... and we all know how dodgy those cheap cables can
be, don't we?!! ;-)
Pre-any new iPhone release there's always tons of rumours, some of
which are invariably fake and some of which are grounded in fact. I
wouldn't see it as anything to get worked up over though at this
moment in time. We'll find out in the autumn... probably.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Claiming Apple has nefarious intentions without any evidence based
on a flimsy rumor is arrogant.
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/28/iphone-15-usb-c-accessories-limited-without-mfi/
Thanks for proving my point, dummy. From your vaunted article:
"Apple is widely expected to switch out the Lightning port for USB-C
on iPhone 15 models, and earlier this month, a rumor out of China
suggested that the replacement USB-C port would continue to have a
Lightning-like authentication chip, despite USB-C ports on Apple's
iPads having no such chip."
...which links to this article:
<https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/10/apple-planning-to-limit-iphone-15-usb-c-port/>
"The iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro's USB-C port and accompanying
charging cables will feature a Lightning-like authenticator chip,
potentially limiting their functionality with Apple-unapproved
accessories, a rumor shared on Weibo suggests."
...which links to this Weibo post:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20230213113927/https://weibo.com/u/1833340431?is_all=1>
Translated: "Apple made a type C, lightning interface IC, which will
be used on this year's new iPhone and MFI-certified peripherals."
That's it! That unsubstantiated claim is what has all of you gullible
dip shit trolls *convinced* that Apple is supposedly planing to limit
USB-C functionality in iPhones, despite the *FACT* that Apple has
never done so in any of Apple's existing products with USB-C support.
You're a bunch of arrogant, gullible clowns who gleefully fall for
and repeat flimsy rumors without any evidence of them being true,
simply because they fit your biased narrative. 🤡
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports his
absurd claims. He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded
guilty in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled
with France. I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty
plea†was for. But he posted several links, ALL of which stated that FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE WITH APPLE. Apple OF COURSE settled AND
admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads guiltyâ€.
That’s why its called a “settlementâ€. Pleading guilty and paying a fine is NOT a “settlementâ€.
In article <u46331$65sm$2@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
Newyana2 in this thread is Arlen! Check the headers.
no, it's mayayana.
Apple shaped the customer's possible reactions by removing the jack so
that the customer is forced to make only the few choices Apple allowed
them.
Nah, it was just to piss off perpetually butthurt trolls, and it looks
like it worked. You guys are so mad... : )
On 19 May 2023 02:31:58 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Apple shaped the customer's possible reactions by removing the jack
so that the customer is forced to make only the few choices Apple
allowed them.
Nah, it was just to piss off perpetually butthurt trolls, and it
looks like it worked. You guys are so mad... : )
If you think I'm mad because I explained to you the reason Apple
removed the jack blah blah blah
I don't care what Apple did
In article <u46331$65sm$2@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
Newyana2 in this thread is Arlen! Check the headers.
no, it's mayayana.
Am 18.05.23 um 23:11 schrieb nospam:
In article <u46331$65sm$2@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
Newyana2 in this thread is Arlen! Check the headers.
no, it's mayayana.
Nope. It is probably an identity theft.
In article <4lhhjjx724.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
the problem is when a regulations are based on politics instead of
actual facts, especially ones regulators do not understand.
as is often the case, such decisions are made to further one's own
career rather than what is best for society.
Oh, but this regulation is very good for our society. We love it.
actually it isn't.
it's not for the eu or any regulatory agency to dictate what type of connector a company chooses to use on their products because it stifles innovation. when (not if) a usb-c successor appears, companies will not
be able to use it until the eu decides to update the rules so that they
can, and that process is slow. also, usb-c is a complex standard with
cables that don't always work as expected.
why not dictate mains power plugs? there are a *lot* of those, and
travelers need to carry multiple adapters as well as make sure the
voltage and line frequency are compatible. <https://cdn.ttgtmedia.com/rms/onlineimages/data_center-electric_plug_ty pes-f.png>
what possible benefit would there be in an apple-only version of usb-c,
which could not be called usb and would be incompatible with zillions
of usb devices?
Money.
what money? being incompatible with standard usb-c would cause a *loss*
in sales.
In article <nohhjjx724.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
but the bigger question is if apple wanted to create their own version
of usb-c, why haven't they done so in the past eight years with
macbooks and ipads?
Because they have been forced to put USB-C on iphones against their wishes.
there is *zero* evidence of that.
apple was among the first to support usb-c, starting back in 2015 with
the retina macbook and since then has been migrating other products to
usb-c when it makes sense to do so.
It is reasonable for the rumours to be published,
however.
they're published because they get the clicks and make money for the
publishers. people love a good conspiracy theory, so why not publish
them.
as it turns out, many of them have little basis in reality and are
nothing more than ignorant apple bashing.
Said by an apple apologist, so very reliable as well :-D
ad hominem.
That it pisses Apple and Apple "fan-atics" is a bonus that makes us
happy :-P
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports his
absurd claims. He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded guilty in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled with France.
I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty plea†was for. But he
posted several links, ALL of which stated that FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE
WITH APPLE. Apple OF COURSE settled AND admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads guiltyâ€.
That’s why its called a “settlementâ€. Pleading guilty and paying a fine
is NOT a “settlementâ€.
When you ³settle², the charges are dropped and no one ³pleads guilty². That¹s why its called a ³settlement². Pleading guilty and paying a fine is NOT a ³settlement².
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win them.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads guiltyâ€.
That’s why its called a “settlementâ€. Pleading guilty and paying a fine
is NOT a “settlementâ€.
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit smaller, saving time and layer fees.
unfortunately, some lawyers take advantage of that by filing frivolous lawsuits and then offer to 'go away' for a small settlement amount.
what's worse is they claim they 'won' when in fact, they did nothing of
the sort. it's simply blackmail.
On 2023-05-19 07:49, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
Am 18.05.23 um 23:11 schrieb nospam:
In article <u46331$65sm$2@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
Newyana2 in this thread is Arlen! Check the headers.
no, it's mayayana.
Nope. It is probably an identity theft.
AFAIK, he confirmed somewhere that he is mayayana.
In article <4lhhjjx724.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
the problem is when a regulations are based on politics instead of
actual facts, especially ones regulators do not understand.
as is often the case, such decisions are made to further one's own
career rather than what is best for society.
Oh, but this regulation is very good for our society. We love it.
actually it isn't.
it's not for the eu or any regulatory agency to dictate what type of connector a company chooses to use on their products because it stifles innovation.
We think otherwise.
That it pisses Apple and Apple "fan-atics" is a bonus that makes us
happy :-P
That it pisses Apple and Apple "fan-atics" is a bonus that makes us
happy :-P
On 2023-05-18 22:22, Bob Campbell wrote:
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports
his absurd claims. He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded
guilty in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled
with France. I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty
plea†was for. But he posted several links, ALL of which stated that
FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE WITH APPLE. Apple OF COURSE settled AND
admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads
guiltyâ€. That’s why its called a “settlementâ€. Pleading guilty and
paying a fine is NOT a “settlementâ€.
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win
them.
On 19/05/2023 14:29, nospam wrote:
unfortunately, some lawyers take advantage of that by filing
frivolous lawsuits and then offer to 'go away' for a small settlement
amount. what's worse is they claim they 'won' when in fact, they did
nothing of the sort. it's simply blackmail.
Poor Apple. All that money paid to settle all those lawsuits Apple
loses.
On 2023-05-19, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 22:22, Bob Campbell wrote:
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports
his absurd claims. He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded
guilty in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled
with France. I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty
plea†was for. But he posted several links, ALL of which stated that
FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE WITH APPLE. Apple OF COURSE settled AND
admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads
guiltyâ€. That’s why its called a “settlementâ€. Pleading guilty and
paying a fine is NOT a “settlementâ€.
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit
smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win
them.
And with that you've just shown the world you know nothing about
lawsuits and the actual motivations of settlements. 🤣
Am 18.05.23 um 15:28 schrieb Frank Slootweg:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 13:33, Newyana2 wrote:
"Michael" <michael@spamcop.com> wrote
| Why did you lie?
|
Nospam is not a liar. He's a compulsive arguer and extreme
devotee of Apple. If you fall for his endless arguments you'll
have only yourself to blame.
But nospam does have an uncanny
knack for sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
He speaks with authority, avoids details, and switches topics
in a way that makes him seem believable. I've seen bickering
threads go on with over 100 posts in the photo group, all
because people can't resist arguing with nospam. :)
Aye.
And then, we don't know where is Arlen, so anybody is at risk of being
accused of being Arlen!
X-D
Well, "Michael <michael@spamcop.com>" is in the 'suspect' part of my
list of AH-nyms, so there you go! :-)
You have no clue.
When you ³settle², the charges are dropped and no one ³pleads
guilty². That¹s why its called a ³settlement². Pleading guilty and
paying a fine is NOT a ³settlement².
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit
smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win
them.
And with that you've just shown the world you know nothing about
lawsuits and the actual motivations of settlements. ?
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
On 2023-05-18 22:22, Bob Campbell wrote:
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports his
absurd claims.  He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded guilty >> in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled with France. >> I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty plea†was for.
But he
posted several links, ALL of which stated that FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE
WITH APPLE.  Apple OF COURSE settled AND admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads guiltyâ€.
That’s why its called a “settlementâ€.  Pleading guilty and paying a fine
is NOT a “settlementâ€.
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win them.
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
you are likely confusing accepting a plea deal (for a lesser sentence)
versus a settlement.
On 19/05/2023 14:29, nospam wrote:
unfortunately, some lawyers take advantage of that by filing frivolous
lawsuits and then offer to 'go away' for a small settlement amount.
what's worse is they claim they 'won' when in fact, they did nothing of
the sort. it's simply blackmail.
Poor Apple. All that money paid to settle all those lawsuits Apple loses.
On 19 May 2023 02:31:58 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Apple shaped the customer's possible reactions by removing the jack so
that the customer is forced to make only the few choices Apple allowed
them.
Nah, it was just to piss off perpetually butthurt trolls, and it looks
like it worked. You guys are so mad... : )
If you think I'm mad because I explained to you the reason Apple removed
the jack, then that's OK with me as it tells me how you think about Apple.
I don't care what Apple did just like I don't care how any general
shapes their battlefield to constrain the enemy into walking into their minefield.
Apple shapes the iPhone to limit your choices like any good general would.
By removing the jack, Apple shaped your available choices to only what
Apple wanted. That doesn't make me mad at all. I appreciate Apple's genius.
So do you apparently.
On 2023-05-19 18:24, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-05-19, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-05-18 22:22, Bob Campbell wrote:
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-05-18, Umberto <canaliumberto@impresatrecolli.com> wrote:
On May 18, 2023, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article<news:kcmmavFcekjU1@mid.individual.net>):
Proving - ONCE AGAIN - that Arlen never posts a link that supports
his absurd claims.  He has a 100% record on this.
Remember a few months ago when Arlen INSISTED that “Apple pleaded
guilty in France†to whatever the horrible offense was, and settled
with France. I can’t even remember now what the supposed “guilty >>>> plea†was for. But he posted several links, ALL of which stated that >>>> FRANCE OFFERED TO SETTLE WITH APPLE.  Apple OF COURSE settled AND
admitted to nothing.
When you “settleâ€, the charges are dropped and no one “pleads
guiltyâ€. That’s why its called a “settlementâ€.  Pleading guilty and
paying a fine is NOT a “settlementâ€.
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit
smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win
them.
And with that you've just shown the world you know nothing about
lawsuits and the actual motivations of settlements. 🤣
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
nospam wrote:
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
you are likely confusing accepting a plea deal (for a lesser
sentence) versus a settlement.
Paying a half a billion dollars is not a win.
how guilty Apple obviously wasi
they lied about everything
In article <u45o9c$ba11$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thing is we'll never know if Apple changed their mind following the
response to the rumours.
the iphone product cycle is *long* (3-4 years),
You regularly say. How do you know seeing as you always say no one knows
anything about Apple other than Apple.
there is a *lot* of evidence, including statements from apple.
here's some of it:
for more than a decade, iphones have had major changes every 4 years:
they can be grouped as follows:
- 4/4s/5/5s (the 5/5s is essentially a stretched 4 without the glass
back, a relatively minor difference)
- 6/6s/7/8
- x/xs/xr/11 (3 year)
- 12/13/14 and soon to be 15.
back in the iphone 4/4s days, phil schiller stated that they were aware
of demand for a larger iphone, but were limited in what they could do
beyond stretching the 4/4s to the 5/5s, which was already in progress.
the soonest they could address that demand was with the 6 and 6+.
apple sells ~250 million iphones per year (~700k per *day*, or ~10 per *second*), and at that volume, a long cycle is the only option.
which means the
decision for iphones to move to usb-c was made well before the eu
decided to mandate it and before any rumours of a custom version of the
spec surfaced, most likely in 2020.
It doesn't mean a single design is taken throughout the full cycle (however >> long that may be). They have to build in contingency for
design/manufacturing failures, market dynamics and regulation. They will be >> able to make some changes easily and without affecting the process.
iphone designs are locked in roughly a year before release
It's fair to bet that they've had a USB version designed and tested for the >> last couple cycles.
exactly, and long before the mandate was proposed, let alone finalized.
the transition to usb was *not* a last minute decision, nor could it
be.
keep in mind that apple must secure 250 million usb-c ports and an
additional 250 million usb-c plugs (for the bundled cable), along with associated other parts, and that's just for the phone package.
alongside a usb-c iphone will undoubtedly be usb-c airpods, so add in
another roughly 100 million usb ports & plugs.
In article <utnkjjxep1.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
When you ³settle², the charges are dropped and no one ³pleads
guilty². That¹s why its called a ³settlement². Pleading guilty and >>>>> paying a fine is NOT a ³settlement².
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit
smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win
them.
And with that you've just shown the world you know nothing about
lawsuits and the actual motivations of settlements. ?
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
you are likely confusing accepting a plea deal (for a lesser sentence)
versus a settlement.
On 2023-05-19 20:11, nospam wrote:
In article <utnkjjxep1.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
When you ³settle², the charges are dropped and no one ³pleads
guilty². That¹s why its called a ³settlement².  Pleading guilty and
paying a fine is NOT a ³settlement².
Not correct.
A settling means accepting the claim and paying a fine for it, albeit >>>>> smaller, saving time and layer fees.
If the claims were false, they would continue the proceedings and win >>>>> them.
And with that you've just shown the world you know nothing about
lawsuits and the actual motivations of settlements. ?
Oh, I saw a group of lawyers assert precisely what I said. IANAL.
you are likely confusing accepting a plea deal (for a lesser sentence)
versus a settlement.
Nope. The lawyers were talking of Fox vs Dominion.
https://dailystormer.in/france-wants-to-sue-apple-for-planned-obsolescence/
France Wants to Sue Apple for Planned Obsolescence
Andrew Anglin
May 16, 2023
If France has laws against planned obsolescence, they should just ban all consumer electronics and go back to the 1980s.
Apple is possibly the worst offender, but every company is doing this. There is no real reason an iPhone from 2015 shouldn't be fine today, and yet no one, not even the most thrifty, are walking around with 2015 iPhones.
RT:
https://www.rt.com/news/576343-apple-planned-obsolescence-france/
The Paris Prosecutor's Office has opened an investigation into Apple's
alleged efforts to render its own devices obsolete in order to force users >> to upgrade. The complaint follows successful judgments against the
California tech giant in France and Italy.
"Following a complaint, an investigation was opened in December 2022 into
deceptive marketing practices and programmed obsolescence," the office
said in a statement on Monday, adding that the complaint was filed by an
activist group called 'Halte a L'Obsolescence Programmee' (HOP).
The group's complaint centers around the practice of 'serialization',
whereby spare parts like microchips or speakers are matched with serial
numbers to a specific generation of iPhone. This prevents third-party
repairers from using generic parts, and as models are phased out by Apple, >> so too are the associated spares, forcing customers to shell out for a
newer model.
Apple, HOP claims, can detect when a phone has been repaired with
unauthorized parts and can remotely "degrade" its performance.
Apple could have been the single best American company.
Steve Jobs was hardcore. He's demonized now, like, "he was evil for having a strong work ethic and expecting his extraordinarily well-paid employees to perform well."
The reality is, he was a lot more of a serious person than any of these
other assholes in Silicon Valley.
He did some things people might consider shady, with tricks to get people into the Apple "ecosystem." But he wouldn't have run these stupid scams that Rim Cook is running. He would have actually innovated, and expanded the company, rather than leaving it as a cellphone company that maybe also sells a couple of laptops.
Rim Cock designs these phones to break when they drop, then refuses to allow you to repair them. It's a criminal conspiracy. There is no reason you would design a phone to break easily, and there is no reason you would refuse to allow it to be repaired - unless you were a homosexual criminal.
Apple is not even doing AI. Siri is still at the level she was at in 2016. The bitch is always confused. ChatGPT isn't confused, is he?
It's absurd.
The French are a group of people who would probably prefer to go back to the 1980s. If their government was even remotely serious, they would just ban
all consumer electronics.
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing is
trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer has rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing is
trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer has rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
In comp.misc Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing is
trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer has
rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
Possibly that they have enough fanboi's that no matter what they put
out, the fanboi's will line up around the block to buy it, and
therefore it will be a profitable item for them.
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing is
trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer has
rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
Possibly that they have enough fanboi's that no matter what they put
out, the fanboi's will line up around the block to buy it, and
therefore it will be a profitable item for them.
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way more
about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people buy Apple products
because they are of excellent build quality, have good privacy and
security protections, and provide a far better overall user experience.
And that really triggers haters.
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing
is trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer
has rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
Possibly that they have enough fanboi's that no matter what they put
out, the fanboi's will line up around the block to buy it, and
therefore it will be a profitable item for them.
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way more
about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling
anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people
buy Apple products because they are of excellent build quality, have
good privacy and security protections, and provide a far better
overall user experience. And that really triggers haters.
The fact that you are hallucinating "enough" to mean "all"
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
To me the most shocking thing that modern post-Jobs Apple is doing
is trying to get into the 3D headset game long after the consumer
has rejected it. What the hell are they thinking?
Possibly that they have enough fanboi's that no matter what they put
out, the fanboi's will line up around the block to buy it, and
therefore it will be a profitable item for them.
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way more
about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling
anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people
buy Apple products because they are of excellent build quality, have
good privacy and security protections, and provide a far better
overall user experience. And that really triggers haters.
The fact that you are hallucinating "enough" to mean "all"
"Enough" iPhones have sold (literal billions) that it's a successful
product, and plenty of haters like you claimed it would fail when it was first announced - just like you are doing now with the Vision. 🤡
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way
more about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling
anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people
buy Apple products because they are of excellent build quality,
have good privacy and security protections, and provide a far
better overall user experience. And that really triggers haters.
The fact that you are hallucinating "enough" to mean "all"
"Enough" iPhones have sold (literal billions) that it's a successful
product, and plenty of haters like you claimed it would fail when it
was first announced - just like you are doing now with the Vision. 🤡
because there are "enough" fanboi's who will buy it
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way
more about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling
anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people
buy Apple products because they are of excellent build quality,
have good privacy and security protections, and provide a far
better overall user experience. And that really triggers haters.
The fact that you are hallucinating "enough" to mean "all"
"Enough" iPhones have sold (literal billions) that it's a successful
product, and plenty of haters like you claimed it would fail when it
was first announced - just like you are doing now with the Vision. 🤡
because there are "enough" fanboi's who will buy it
There's no evidence that "fanboi's" (sp) are primarily responsible for
the success of any of Apple's other products, nor is there any evidence
that would be the case with any new products Apple will release in the future. And the fact that you are making that claim without evidence
says a lot.
[1] Evidence: The long lines of folks sitting outside Apple stores
for every new product release -- for which Google can find you ample
news coverage. All of those fanboi's that sit for days waiting for
release day are there to buy whatever it is that is the new thing for
that release day.
In article <u7qqnj$37cgh$1@dont-email.me>, Rich <rich@example.invalid>
wrote:
[1] Evidence: The long lines of folks sitting outside Apple stores for
every new product release -- for which Google can find you ample news
coverage. All of those fanboi's that sit for days waiting for release
day are there to buy whatever it is that is the new thing for that
release day.
that's called high demand.
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-07-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
In comp.misc Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone >>>>> users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way
more about you than anyone else. Your bias has you babbling
anti-intellectual foolishness. Back here in the real world, people >>>>> buy Apple products because they are of excellent build quality,
have good privacy and security protections, and provide a far
better overall user experience. And that really triggers haters.
The fact that you are hallucinating "enough" to mean "all"
"Enough" iPhones have sold (literal billions) that it's a successful
product, and plenty of haters like you claimed it would fail when it
was first announced - just like you are doing now with the Vision. ?
because there are "enough" fanboi's who will buy it
There's no evidence that "fanboi's" (sp) are primarily responsible for
the success of any of Apple's other products, nor is there any evidence that would be the case with any new products Apple will release in the future. And the fact that you are making that claim without evidence
says a lot.
Third try -- and still a severe lack of reading comprehension and a
severe case of art-student binary thinking hallucinations.
I never said fanboi's were "primarily" responsible for success of any
of Apple's products, you hallucinated that thought yourself with your
lack of reading comprehension. Someone asked why Apple would be
jumping into building the Vision. I remarked that one reason might be
that they expect with high probability due to past product releases
that at least their fanboi base [1] will buy one, so they are all but guaranteed those sales. And the number of fanboi's that line up for
every release means a lot of units sold on release day.
As for the future, none of us can know with any certainty what will
happen. But the long lines for every past Apple release day means that predicting long lines of fanboi's lined up waiting to purchase the
Vision on its release day is likely to be the most probable outcome.
[1] Evidence: The long lines of folks sitting outside Apple stores
for every new product release -- for which Google can find you ample
news coverage. All of those fanboi's that sit for days waiting for
release day are there to buy whatever it is that is the new thing for
that release day.
On Sun, 02 Jul 2023 06:03:32 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <u7qqnj$37cgh$1@dont-email.me>, Rich <rich@example.invalid>
wrote:
[1] Evidence: The long lines of folks sitting outside Apple stores for
every new product release -- for which Google can find you ample news
coverage. All of those fanboi's that sit for days waiting for release
day are there to buy whatever it is that is the new thing for that
release day.
that's called high demand.
Apple have long realised that what they are selling is not tech,
It's fashion statements. At designer prices.
On Sun, 02 Jul 2023 06:03:32 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <u7qqnj$37cgh$1@dont-email.me>, Rich <rich@example.invalid>
wrote:
[1] Evidence: The long lines of folks sitting outside Apple stores for
every new product release -- for which Google can find you ample news
coverage. All of those fanboi's that sit for days waiting for release
day are there to buy whatever it is that is the new thing for that
release day.
that's called high demand.
Apple have long realised that what they are selling is not tech,
It's fashion statements. At designer prices.
The "fanboi's" line up, for days before a release, around the block for whatever Apple's latest offering is.
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric.
Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric. Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
In article <87leetcxak.fsf@tigger.extechop.net>, Otto J. Makela
<om@iki.fi> wrote:
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric.
it is not.
Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
that's because they weren't very good. in other words, consumers
rejected it.
Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
that's because they weren't very good. in other words, consumers
rejected it.
The flip-phones were fine. We sent mine (with a charger, of course) to
an elderly aunt to keep in her pocket in case she ever had to dial 911.
So far, so good.
In article <87leetcxak.fsf@tigger.extechop.net>, Otto J. Makela
<om@iki.fi> wrote:
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric.
it is not.
Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
that's because they weren't very good. in other words, consumers
rejected it.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers
of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric. Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
With the first iPhone Apple quickly dropped to price from $599 to $399
after initial sales volume of the iPhone was less than desired because consumers rejected it based on the high price.
Those Nokia devices were not the first smart phones either,
Those Nokia devices were not the first smart phones either,
nobody said they were the first. the point is that symbian phones did
not sell well because they were not particularly compelling devices.
iphones were, and changed the entire industry as a result.
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way more
about you than anyone else.
Your bias has you babbling anti-intellectual
foolishness.
because they are of excellent build quality, have good privacy and
security protections, and provide a far better overall user experience.
And that really triggers haters.
Apple products are not designed to be suitable for everybody.
It seems that you just don't qualify, Rich; tough titties, ol' buddy.
that's called high demand.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
The fact that you're actually suggesting that the 1+ billion iPhone
users on the planet are all supposedly "fanboi's" (sp) says way more
about you than anyone else.
Actually, think about cigarette smokers when you realize Apple has selected the billion most gullible people on the planet to buy their product line.
On Sun, 02 Jul 2023 06:03:32 -0400, nospam wrote:
that's called high demand.
There is a high demand for cocaine also, but the people who buy iPhones are
a subset of stupid, like cocaine users, who don't understand what it does.
Just look at any Apple advertisement to see how Apple selects for stupid.
Mr �n!on <onion@anon.invalid> wrote
Apple products are not designed to be suitable for everybody. It seems
that you just don't qualify, Rich; tough titties, ol' buddy.
To own an Apple product is to be p'owned by Apple because nothing works unless you're logged into Apple servers 24/7/365 due to the walled garden.
The "fanboi's" line up, for days before a release, around the block for
whatever Apple's latest offering is.
That was the case five years ago or so, but that sort of thing is
history
On 4/7/2023, sms wrote:
The "fanboi's" line up, for days before a release, around the block for
whatever Apple's latest offering is.
That was the case five years ago or so, but that sort of thing is history
Not really history because Apple customers are driven only by style.
Maybe you haven't seen Apple's advertisements telling people that the
biggest development in iPhones is they made the color a special yellow?
As to "the consumer has rejected it", phones with integrated computers >>> of some sort existed before the iPhone and were largely rejected by
consumers are large.
Being from Finland, I'd like to point out that this view is a bit
US-centric.
it is not.
It is.
Nokia had their Symbian smartphones (first models came out
in 2001), they just didn't in the end succeed against Apple and Google.
that's because they weren't very good. in other words, consumers
rejected it.
They were actually quite reasonable for was possible around the turn of
the millennium.
And no, consumers did NOT reject them.
Some early Nokia
computer/phone combos were actually quite popular here in Europe, for example, all technology-affine management guys used to have a Nokia Communicator at some point.
In the end, it was three factors which killed Nokia:
1. They were too early.
The technology was still too expensive for the
average customer and the mobile networks not ready for large-scale data usage.
Syncing appointments and receiving/sending text-only eMail were
basically the only reasonable over-the-air functionality.
Not because
the devices didn't provide a browser and installable Apps (they did,
starting with Symbian), but because data transmission was just WAY too
slow and expensive.
2. Nokia had far less marketing power than Apple and Google (especially outside of europe) and used it poorly. When Apple started aggressively marketing the iPhone, Nokia just reclined on their leading position in
the European market.
3. The phone branch of Nokia was ultimately bought by Microsoft, which immediate stopped all improvement on Symbian in favor of the Mega-Flop
called Windows Mobile.
it is not. symbian phones were available worldwide, and they did not
sell in appreciable numbers..
They were actually quite reasonable for was possible around the turn of
the millennium.
perhaps so, but that doesn't mean they were any good. they weren't.
In the end, it was three factors which killed Nokia:
really just one: it wasn't anywhere near as good as iphone and android.
1. They were too early.
that's not a flaw.
The technology was still too expensive for the
average customer and the mobile networks not ready for large-scale data
usage.
wifi.
Not because
the devices didn't provide a browser and installable Apps (they did,
starting with Symbian), but because data transmission was just WAY too
slow and expensive.
the browser and third party apps were not particularly good and
comparatively expensive,
most apps in the iphone app store were free, and of the paid apps, they were a buck or two.
it was also *much*
easier to write ios apps, especially since code could be shared from
the mac.
2. Nokia had far less marketing power than Apple and Google (especially
outside of europe) and used it poorly. When Apple started aggressively
marketing the iPhone, Nokia just reclined on their leading position in
the European market.
that's because they knew they didn't have anything that could come
close to the iphone and android.
On 2023-08-03 21:23, Charles Jack Jones wrote:
To own an Apple product is to be p'owned by Apple because nothing
works unless you're logged into Apple servers 24/7/365 due to the
walled garden.
Bzzzzt.
Wrong.
Can applications be installed on iOS from anywhere else except that one
App Store, with a heavy Apple tax on it? Yep, that's a walled garden.
Sideloading is really a quite marginal thing on Apples, as you have to completely jailbreak the phone (TestFlight only covers official Apple developer beta programs).
On 2023-08-08 07:32, Otto J. Makela wrote:
Can applications be installed on iOS from anywhere else except that one
App Store, with a heavy Apple tax on it? Yep, that's a walled garden.
If it were a walled garden, it would not be anywhere as popular as it
is. Indeed, iPhone took off when they let 3rd party developers in to
the eco system.
If it were a walled garden, 3rd party mail and message apps would not
be allowed.
Etc. and so on.
Sideloading is really a quite marginal thing on Apples, as you have
to completely jailbreak the phone (TestFlight only covers official
Apple developer beta programs).
Sideloading is also the best way to make a phone more vulnerable to malware. I'd much rather an app pass the Apple gauntlet into the App Store.
Can applications be installed on iOS from anywhere else except that one
App Store, with a heavy Apple tax on it?
Yep, that's a walled garden.
Sideloading is really a quite marginal thing on Apples, as you have to completely jailbreak the phone (TestFlight only covers official Apple developer beta programs).
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-08-08 07:32, Otto J. Makela wrote:
Can applications be installed on iOS from anywhere else except that one
App Store, with a heavy Apple tax on it? Yep, that's a walled garden.
If it were a walled garden, it would not be anywhere as popular as it
is. Indeed, iPhone took off when they let 3rd party developers in to
the eco system.
If it were a walled garden, 3rd party mail and message apps would not
be allowed.
Etc. and so on.
You seem to be working from a different definition of a "walled garden"
than what is commonly understood. This page gives iOS as an example:
Some examples of walled gardens include: [...] Apple iOS and
other mobile devices, which are restricted to running
pre-approved applications from a digital distribution service.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_platform
Can applications be installed on iOS from anywhere else except that one
App Store, with a heavy Apple tax on it? Yep, that's a walled garden.
If it were a walled garden, 3rd party mail and message apps would not be allowed.
Yep, that's a walled garden.
nope. the only walls are self-imposed, largely out of ignorance.
On 8/8/2023, nospam wrote:
nope. the only walls are self-imposed, largely out of ignorance.
The walled garden is everywhere on an Apple iPhone
Not at all. If it were a walled garden it would not have third party
apps, competing messaging, competing e-mail, competing browsers, etc.
and so on, not to mention 3rd party hardware suppliers.
No walled garden at all.
On 2023-08-08 09:02, Otto J. Makela wrote:
You seem to be working from a different definition of a "walled
garden" than what is commonly understood. This page gives iOS as
an example:
Some examples of walled gardens include: [...] Apple iOS and
other mobile devices, which are restricted to running
pre-approved applications from a digital distribution service.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_platform
It's a bad definition of a walled garden. Perhaps I better go in
there and fix that.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-08-08 09:02, Otto J. Makela wrote:
You seem to be working from a different definition of a "walled
garden" than what is commonly understood. This page gives iOS as
an example:
Some examples of walled gardens include: [...] Apple iOS and
other mobile devices, which are restricted to running
pre-approved applications from a digital distribution service.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_platform
It's a bad definition of a walled garden. Perhaps I better go in
there and fix that.
You are free to hold your opinion, but this is what is commonly
understood by the term "walled garden".
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 73:47:54 |
| Calls: | 6,694 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,228 |
| Messages: | 5,346,920 |
| Posted today: | 1 |
