How do you access a website if all your provided with is a QR code
Can I bring my computer into to scan it
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.
Epic: Fortnite Offline Worldwide 'Until Apple Unblocks It'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can I bring my computer into to scan it
I say requirements analysis was incomplete. And has nothing to do with a cell phone in 2025 can scan a QR code.
If you’re employer tells you that going forward that for holidays & overtime etc
That you need this app & the only way to access it is by scanning one QR code
And then another QR code
Then how do you do it without a smartphone
This is a straw man argument. Your employers should give you the tools you need. In any case a one off anecdotal story is just that.
But you do agree a computer can do the job maybe not as convenient.
If my boss tells me it’s company policy & regulations that I’m required to have this app by scanning the QR code
Then I might get let go because I’m not following the rules and regulations of the company.
It’s still a straw man anecdotal argument that doesn’t negate anything that has been said. One can substitute car, scalpel, scooter for phone.
If your boss tells you it’s the rules and regulations of the company
Then they can let you go because you are no longer following company rules and regulations
That is why it’s a requirement
Still subjective and anecdotal.
Can you please show relevance to how innovation, china, smartphone requirements, new technologies (all deflections) etc relates to Apple blocking fortnight?
Because that is why apple are getting regulated because of how society is in the west.
Have you seen videos of howling teenagers when their moms cut them off Fortnight. It’s hilarious and crazy
Just about everyone in Sweden is required to have a smartphone to access their bank accounts unless they want to go to a physical location.
In a competitive market environment, they will go down - or increase less - over time.
I know, competitive markets for software distribution are not what Apple likes or is used to.
Spotify benefits from a more level playing field - and even if it’s only fair competition between Apple Music and Spotify for music streaming, consumers are going to benefit.
Closed environments are great for markets with many consumer choices. Not for duopolies.
Nonsense.
Of course it is about software applications: Epic’s (see thread title), someone else’s. This whole forum thread is about how developers can (or in Epic’s case: currently can’t) distribute applications to owners of iOS devices. And that’s also exactly what Apple intends to monetise with their App Store business: software applications and transactions for/within them for software goods.
Do GrapheneOS and Google’s Stock Android on Pixel phones compete with each other?
Well, kind of, yes, disregarding that GrapheneOS is free.
They’re basically mutually exclusive, one is installed instead (in place of) the other.
Do they compete for installation of apps and third-party application developers? No.
They run the same third-party applications from the same sources (with different sandboxing requirements).
The GrapheneOS community and their developers even recommend Google’s Play Store.
Last edited:
You're moving the goalposts. In our conversation, we were discussing customer choice in operating systems as you clearly described in the following post. Not compatibility of software and APIs for developers.
Yes! Hopefully that clears things up.
But you only have two choices essentially in mobile OS in the west that is android & iOS
And that is not going to change anytime soon
Now some other mobile OS’s exists however unless you can walk into an actual retail store and purchase a device with it pre installed then it’s irrelevant.
Because as the Chinese have shown they have
3 mobile OS’s that directly compete against each other and that is better for the consumer in various different ways
That's not true. Again, each Android manufacturer creates their own fork of android. Perhaps you can read the previous posts in the conversation, so I don't have to repeat the argument.
I started here:
It’s still android
It doesn’t matter how you dress it up
According to the latest data, Android dominates the global smartphone market with a 71.42% share, while iPhone (iOS) has a 27.93% market share
It’s still two choices
If it’s not two choices then why is that figure not different?
That is why apple are getting regulated because this is what it essentially comes down to
Sigh. Being compatible does not mean they are the same. Brave and Chrome are competing browsers. Like Android, they are based on the same open source project and use the same rendering engine (APIs for Android). But, again, they are still competitors.
Problem Statement: There isn't enough competition in the mobile phone market. Google is a monopoly.
What rational people would do: Encourage a third competitor; regulate the monopolist.
What the EU does: Let's regulate Apple to force them to be like the monopolist.
Bang up work everyone.
How do you regulate something that is
FREE to every company that chooses to use from Samsung to popfone?
And that is one of the reasons a 3rd competitor won’t emerge in the west
Easy answer, and the one that I've been advocating for. Prevent Google from entering into anticompetitive agreements with all its horizontal competitors except Apple to install Google Play Services across 70% of the market.
Plenty of ways:
- You could require Android to charge fair market value for the OS
- Unbundle Google Services and Apps (i.e. allow OEMs to pick and choose which google services to include)
- Require OEMs to offer multiple app stores by default
- Ban anti-forking clauses
- Provide incentives to companies building a third OS (financial investment, procurement commitments, etc.)
Has the US government not tried and this was
A lawyer for google’s first question
The problem is: what happens when the product is offered to consumers for free? This is true for a wide range of apps / digital products today, from search to social media to content / streaming platforms, and by extension - Google. In fact, Judge Mehta who is presiding over DOJ v. Google specifically asked this question during opening arguments.
And that is how google always avoids it
Because why else would trillion or so company give a product away for free.
Except the product isn't offered for free. Google's control of android comes from licensing Google Play Services and the Android brand. Different companies producing an android fork isn't a competition problem. Every company except Apple putting Google Play Services on top of their own android fork is anticompetitive.
Again, there are options. And, I completely fail to see the rationality in punishing Apple for Google's sins, particularly when the fix is "be exactly like Google."