Sure they do, the water has been held by law, and it has been agreed on by the party states. That's 27 delegations against a forum poster.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Limiting Alternative App Stores and Payments to EU Due to Malware, Fraud and Scam Risks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You gotta love the implied equation Apple = the law.
Seriously though, in "anything you want" the "as permitted by the law" is omitted because it's implied.
That’s not what the poster said though. But yeah we all have to follow the law.
I’ve recently worked with A1342 MacBook. It came with original box, and there was a small manual from Apple inside. Which, among other things, taught people how to upgrade RAM and HDD. Good times…
Just saying, not proving a point. I think people are not angered with lack of upgradeability, but rather with prices for higher-specced computers coming from factory.
No and no. Many current Macs are not priced right, and we have no idea how many sales Apple have missed due to ridiculous pricing.
Most base models are priced well; most upgraded Macs are simply uncompetitive unless you find some Black Friday-like deal or buy used.
Modern PCs with 120 Hz OLEDs, affordable 32gb+ configs and upgradable storage push that bar further and further.
Mac has less threats but also less protection mechanisms. I believe macOS does scan signatures of downloaded apps against database of known harmful software, but it does not perform deeper checks like real AV software does.
As long as you only run trusted software, you’ll be good on any system.
Oh, and another somewhat related thing: I know many political activists who prefer PC solely because it allows user to quickly pull out storage drive and hide it when police comes knocking and starts breaking down the door with chainsaw. Living in Russia is fun
Surprise surprise. Apple-Whiner-In Chief Louis Rossmann has decided to chime in.
We also don't have any idea how much money they earn from people actually upgrading. I'm pretty confident Apple knows how to count. Lowering the price is by far the easiest and often most effective product development available to man, so if you believe you will make more money by lowering the price, you do it. No questions asked.
It's not strictly about money, it's about marketshare and mindshare. Also about upselling people on iCloud, Music, and earning commissions from App Store sales. Also increases chance of selling iPhone or iPad down the line, if said affordable Mac was bought by a person with Android phone (for example).
Essentially, this «milking money from storage upgrades» strategy might be effective short-term, but it will cripple Mac future in long-term. Because...
There is another aspect to this: by selling underpowered computers with 8gb and 256gb configs, Apple risks undermining reputation of Macs as fast and reliable computers.
Even back in 2021, when I've tried 8/256 M1 Mac mini, I felt slightly let down by its performance; this small but noticeable lag when open apps are swapping from SSD into memory drove me crazy. But software demands will keep on growing (which is not necessarily a bad thing), and people's data assets will continue growing, too (4K videos instead of 1080p, new games which are 50+ gigs in size, etc.).
I would assume that base-spec M3 MacBooks will become e-waste by 2026, or even earlier — they simply won't be able to browse web with reasonable performance.
And in 2026, when owner of said M3 MacBook sees relatively affordable but insanely fast thin & light Windows laptop with 120 Hz OLED, 32gb memory as a norm (which is meaningless by itself but allows for seamless multitasking) and cheap 2 TB SSD... they'd be pretty compelled to forget about Macs for a while.
PC market is less competitive than phone market, but it has not disappeared overnight with arrival of Apple Silicon.
OK - so how is that going for Apple, you say?
And how is that going?
And how is iPhone market share going? (also, Mac users are a tiny group of iPhone users, so the brand lock-in probably is more important the other way round).
How long is long-term? It has been working pretty well for pretty long. If anything, one of the things I admire most about Apple as a business is their ability to keep a long-term focus.
This was actually Jason Snell's point, come to think of it, more than overpricing: Apple's entry model has ALWAYS been underpowered. Yet, here we are. This strategy is working perfectly fine - Apple doesn't need to change strategy. It would be great for you and me if they did, but I don't expect them to do anything out of the kindness of their hearts.
I have an M1 8/256 Air, and it's working totally fine for my use, and is faster than my more expensive Windows work computer. It sounds like it wasn't for you, and that's perfectly fine. It's a strategy that has worked for decades, it's silly to think that it will suddenly stop working now, in a market where the number of people who can afford to buy more expensive things are steadily increasing.
Yes. Apple Services revolves around two things: A hefty deal with Google Search, and IAP's in games. You should expect everything Apple says and does in this situation is based on retaining that revenue.
But, I am curious to see how many people will actually install Chrome on their iPhone. I'm sure a lot of power users will, but I'm also sure that the majority of iPhone users doesn't give two ***** which browser they are using. Even on Windows, most so-called "normal" users don't even know which browser they use if you ask them - they just click on "the internet icon". Users of this forum tend to vastly over-estimate how much the average user cares about this sort of thing.
100% this. In my family, my brother is the only person I can ask to download an app and have him download it successfully on his own (well, except me of course 😁)
Well they're not, and he's wrong!
Retina MacBook Pros (excluding that weird ME864 model) were perfectly reasonable machines for the day, and perfectly priced. Maybe they were like $200 more expensive than comparable Dell XPS with 4K screen, but who cares, that's not a dealbreaker; plus, Mac was better in some regards anyway.
Non-Retina MacBook Air provided immense value. Again, maybe it costed $100-$200 more than comparable "ultrabook" (remember those?) with same specs, but it was a great overall package. Hell, even MacBook 12" was quite decent; especially Early 2016 model, when Intel finally came up with a good Core m processor.
Entry level iMac 4K and 5K were insanely good, too. Especially first two 5K models with real Fusion Drive based on 128gb flash. Expensive, sure, but reasonable, and unmatched by anything else on the market.
But nowadays...
M1 MacBook Air is a great value, of course; at $750 (Black Friday price) I would easily recommend it to many people.
But. It's not 2015 anymore. In 2024, 8gb of RAM is not enough, especially for "average users" (because they don't stare at an empty screen, they use many tabs with modern websites, usually in Chrome, plus "native" web apps like Discord), and 256gb is barely enough.
People will be frustrated with these current entry-level Macs, it's a question of when, not if.
It's up to Apple to decide if they want to earn more money but have angry customers looking elsewhere, or less money but higher user satisfaction.
Well, you may be right. But power users today are kids who like to have the latest sh*t installed, with the phone nailed to their head. Those times when you were considered a nerd, just because you know how to operate you computer are over. Today it just needs some TikTok shorts and everyone jumps ship.
All non-EU users could now listen to Pink Floyd’s “Mother” and know that Apple is their mother keeping you “right here under her wing”. Keeping this analogy: “mother should I build a wall?” Well 🍎 did build a wall and now the EU is tearing it down.
As some have already argued, by laying out the “risks” of this change, they are basically saying that Mac as a platform is insecure.
As some have already argued, by laying out the “risks” of this change, they are basically saying that Mac as a platform is insecure.