Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mrkevinfinnerty

Suspended
Aug 13, 2022
1,713
5,089
@mrkevinfinnery is also kind of wrong. One doesn’t get to make overarching opinions presented as fact without anything to back it up. Overarching comments are just the fodder to be dismissed.

At any rate this debate is already far enough off topic. As far as the HomePod goes, if mark gurman said it, there must be a shred of truth. But it’s always helpful not to assume anything, as when one assumes…especially when citing 5 year old articles.

I see. So unless we have a PDF copy of Apples internal sales numbers attached to a company wide email from Tim Cook clearly stating where the aforementioned numbers sit in relation to Apples business objectives we should just not discuss it at all.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: makitango and I7guy

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
@mrkevinfinnery is also kind of wrong. One doesn’t get to make overarching opinions presented as fact without anything to back it up. Overarching comments are just the fodder to be dismissed.

At any rate this debate is already far enough off topic. As far as the HomePod goes, if mark gurman said it, there must be a shred of truth. But it’s always helpful not to assume anything, as when one assumes…especially when citing 5 year old articles.
The issue here is very simple. You say your opinion without proof, you state it as fact, others say their opinion, with proof, you say there is no proof.

While Apple is caught up in their construct of lies laid open by lawsuit documents and communications or by them stating the opposite from their own website.

There is zero credibility for Apple because already after the first lie, Apple is no longer trustworthy. And they lied multiple times.

What is also the issue here that this is just one example that is reaching mainstream coverage, we don‘t know the actual number that is feeding off unsuspecting App Store users. To believe this is an isolated incident even just this week is naive. If you count down the amount of apps Apple reported they had to remove, you are looking at substantial numbers being allowed into the App Store per hour, and that‘s just the ones who got caught.
We‘ve had countless of these in the past and it will continue happening because there is neither a code review nor that much of an attentian span from reviewers, or they don‘t have enough time and just rush them like Foxconn does iPhones during seasonal hires. Possibly also understaffed as it‘s usually the case in QA departments.

The above mentions are not just an opinion, these are things that Apple themselves reported, and higher up, Apple had to report in court or were caught while speaking in public, which I think was not very smart.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
The issue here is very simple. You say your opinion without proof, you state it as fact, others say their opinion, with proof, you say there is no proof.
Absolute rubbish. Others state an opinion as fact, without real proof. People don’t know the meaning of proof.
While Apple is caught up in their construct of lies laid open by lawsuit documents and communications or by them stating the opposite from their own website.
Citation. This is a perfect example of an opinion stated as a fact without proof. What you believe maybe common knowledge may not be or maybe different than you believe. The comment seems like a generalization of a specific event.
There is zero credibility for Apple because already after the first lie, Apple is no longer trustworthy. And they lied multiple times.
For you there is no creditabilty. I’m betting for billions there is.
What is also the issue here that this is just one example that is reaching mainstream coverage, we don‘t know the actual number that is feeding off unsuspecting App Store users.
Which is why Phil Schilller has his own opinion on this.
To believe this is an isolated incident even just this week is naive.
To believe otherwise is naive, given no actual metrics.
If you count down the amount of apps Apple reported they had to remove, you are looking at substantial numbers being allowed into the App Store per hour, and that‘s just the ones who got caught.
We‘ve had countless of these in the past and it will continue happening because there is neither a code review nor that much of an attentian span from reviewers, or they don‘t have enough time and just rush them like Foxconn does iPhones during seasonal hires. Possibly also understaffed as it‘s usually the case in QA departments.

The above mentions are not just an opinion, these are things that Apple themselves reported, and higher up, Apple had to report in court or were caught while speaking in public, which I think was not very smart.
The point is that maybe Schiller has a point. And you have to be careful about “throwing the baby out with the bath water”.

Apple as a public company, if they were found to be lying the government would have a field day with them.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: makitango

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
Absolute rubbish. Others state an opinion as fact, without real proof. People don’t know the meaning of proof.
Again, no proof. Facts were provided.
Internal emails revealed during the Epic Games v. Apple lawsuit show that employees at Apple were considering giving Netflix special treatment to convince the streaming service to not abandon in-app purchases.
But in the same presentation, Apple considered floating even more benefits to Netflix, some of which went beyond what the company has publicly offered other developers
You can also see here that Apple did not treat developers equally, this was before the 15% was introduced. As highlighted in the article, Apple did a lot just to keep getting a slice off Netflix's IAP.
That is a perfect example when you have all powers in one entitiy and no one regulating them.

So, not rubbish.

Also, Apple's part in declared as illegal anti-poaching practices to keep wages at low levels:

Real reason for no iMessage on Android (not security):

Apple's Files app getting boosted to the top in organic rankings, meaning not as an ad, and be displayed when you search for "Dropbox".
“[W]ho green lit putting the Files app above Dropbox in organic search results? I didn’t know we did that, and I don’t think we should,” he says. But he does end the conversation with “In the future, I want any similar requests to come to me for review/approval,” suggesting that he’s not entirely ruling out manual overrides.

Citation. This is a perfect example of an opinion stated as a fact without proof. What you believe maybe common knowledge may not be or maybe different than you believe. The comment seems like a generalization of a specific event.

For you there is no creditabilty. I’m betting for billions there is.
For everyone aware of the things above there is also no credibility. But keep on trying to hide those from them.

Which is why Phil Schilller has his own opinion on this.
His own words. Two pages and zero mention about security when it comes to as to why the App Store "matters".

The point is that maybe Schiller has a point. And you have to be careful about “throwing the baby out with the bath water”.
As you can see above, Phil has already shown all his points behind the curtain so there is no need to pay attention to what he or Apple says in public.

Apple as a public company, if they were found to be lying the government would have a field day with them.
They had, and all the developments these days Apple can only blame themselves for. They abused their position and did not even treat their own eco-system fairly, so regulation is what happens.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
Again, no proof. Facts were provided.


You can also see here that Apple did not treat developers equally, this was before the 15% was introduced. As highlighted in the article, Apple did a lot just to keep getting a slice off Netflix's IAP.
That is a perfect example when you have all powers in one entitiy and no one regulating them.

So, not rubbish.

Also, Apple's part in declared as illegal anti-poaching practices to keep wages at low levels:

Real reason for no iMessage on Android (not security):

Apple's Files app getting boosted to the top in organic rankings, meaning not as an ad, and be displayed when you search for "Dropbox".





For everyone aware of the things above there is also no credibility. But keep on trying to hide those from them.


His own words. Two pages and zero mention about security when it comes to as to why the App Store "matters".


As you can see above, Phil has already shown all his points behind the curtain so there is no need to pay attention to what he or Apple says in public.


They had, and all the developments these days Apple can only blame themselves for. They abused their position and did not even treat their own eco-system fairly, so regulation is what happens.
You took some snippets and turned them into a conspiracy theory. And not only that, corporations evolve over time, and what they do and how they operate changes. And additionally corporate emails dont document conversations.

I know it may come as a shock to some, but companies give special treatment to their biggest customers. This came out years ago before epic when discussing how some coding was put into iOS for Uber. That is business 101 and is nothing new. Out of the millions of developers for iOS (apple) do you think apple is going to say we treat our 10 biggest App Store customers differently. If you consider this a lie that’s your prerogative buts it’s nothing new in big business.

It’s clearly possible to have a lot of facts and still draw an incorrect conclusion.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: makitango

Samplasion

macrumors 6502a
Jul 7, 2022
575
938
corporations evolve over time, and what they do and how they operate changes
Bullseye. Corporations often change the terms after buying a product. This time, it's due to legislation.

I know it may come as a shock to some, but companies give special treatment to their biggest customers.
It's not shocking to me but, knowing that's the case, why is it shocking that some governmental entities design laws that affect the biggest companies operating in their markets? Especially if it's to level the playing field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: makitango

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
You took some snippets and turned them into a conspiracy theory. And not only that, corporations evolve over time, and what they do and how they operate changes. And additionally corporate emails dont document conversations.
So The Verge and all news outlets are just conspiracy theorists ad all the material in court are fake, and what they say in these mails are not true?
It is very easy to understand material and there is no room for interpretation.
I know it may come as a shock to some, but companies give special treatment to their biggest customers. This came out years ago before epic when discussing how some coding was put into iOS for Uber. That is business 101 and is nothing new. Out of the millions of developers for iOS (apple) do you think apple is going to say we treat our 10 biggest App Store customers differently. If you consider this a lie that’s your prerogative buts it’s nothing new in big business.
We do that in a way that is fair to all developers and we do not advantage our apps over those of any developer or competitor.
That's two lies right there, and connecting right to your point.
Newsflash, you can't be sued for lying but you also cannot expect market intervention if you get caught. Apple got caught and they now have to eat the dessert.
It’s clearly possible to have a lot of facts and still draw an incorrect conclusion.
Yes, I definitely see someone qualifying for that.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
Bullseye. Corporations often change the terms after buying a product. This time, it's due to legislation.
It’s also due to well because companies change. But yeah bad legislation usually yields bad results.
It's not shocking to me but, knowing that's the case, why is it shocking that some governmental entities design laws that affect the biggest companies operating in their markets? Especially if it's to level the playing field.
Level the playing filed by regulation is a Robin Hood’s dream.
So The Verge and all news outlets are just conspiracy theorists ad all the material in court are fake, and what they say in these mails are not true?
It is very easy to understand material and there is no room for interpretation.
There plenty of room for interpretation. Nobody is denying what is written. some take the interpretation and ratchet up the conspiracy theories.
That's two lies right there, and connecting right to your point.
What lies? There are no lies as I explained above.
Newsflash, you can't be sued for lying but you also cannot expect market intervention if you get caught. Apple got caught and they now have to eat the dessert.
Yes, dessert is a plate of targeted (bad) regulation by the EU. This would have happened regardless.
Yes, I definitely see someone qualifying for that.
For sure, it’s rampant.
 
Last edited:

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
It’s also due to well because companies change. But yeah bad legislation usually yields bad results.
Great that we're all on the same page what a bad regulation is.
Level the playing filed by regulation is a Robin Hood’s dream.
So Robin Hood's dream is active in the US because it has regulators?
There plenty of room for interpretation.
Your opinion, not a fact.
What lies? There are no lies as I explained above.
Your opinion, not a fact.
Yes, dessert is a plate of targeted (bad) regulation by the EU.
Your opinion, not a fact.
For sure, it’s rampant.
Your opinion, not a fact.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
Great that we're all on the same page what a bad regulation is.

So Robin Hood's dream is active in the US because it has regulators?

Your opinion, not a fact.

Your opinion, not a fact.

Your opinion, not a fact.

Your opinion, not a fact.
Yes all these are my opinion as said in every post. Similarly to your opinion that apple lied which is not a fact.
 
Last edited:

Samplasion

macrumors 6502a
Jul 7, 2022
575
938
Yes all these are my opinion as said in every post. Similarly to your opinion that apple lied.
Nope, they're different events. Apple saying they treat everyone equally then turning around and giving favors to the big players is the very definition of lying. AKA, they don't practice what they preach
 
  • Like
Reactions: makitango

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
Nope sorry. But if that is your take it is not mine. As I explained above.
Since Phil evidently doesn't even think and say privately what he says publicly (since we saw what he says privately vs what he says publicly), the same can count for everyone else, including the comment section here.

Besides, you can of course always say that you act faily and do good things, but the only fact is that you say it. Whether or not you think it (let alone act by it), is something completely different.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
Since Phil evidently doesn't even think and say privately what he says publicly (since we saw what he says privately vs what he says publicly), the same can count for everyone else, including the comment section here.

Besides, you can of course always say that you act faily and do good things, but the only fact is that you say it. Whether or not you think it (let alone act by it), is something completely different.
You saw what he emailed in a corporate email Vs what he may speak in private. And you have made the opinion that he lied. Or that apple lies.

That is not my conclusion and this “argument” which is now a meme, has been going around for years.
 

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
I see. So unless we have a PDF copy of Apples internal sales numbers attached to a company wide email from Tim Cook clearly stating where the aforementioned numbers sit in relation to Apples business objectives we should just not discuss it at all.
I think if Tim Apple were to provide a PDF saying that the original revenue goal for the HomePod would be $1 then he would still not question its weight.

edit: At least not here.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,310
24,041
Gotta be in it to win it
I see. So unless we have a PDF copy of Apples internal sales numbers attached to a company wide email from Tim Cook clearly stating where the aforementioned numbers sit in relation to Apples business objectives we should just not discuss it at all.
Well some proof about how apples take on the sales would settle all questions vs MR posters who seem to criticize apple for criticisms sake who are reading between the lines or relying on a third party spokespersons.
 

makitango

Suspended
Apr 15, 2012
766
1,064
Well some proof about how apples take on the sales would settle all questions vs some MR poster who is reading between the lines or relying on a third party spokesperson.
Third parties were the first to acknowledge the Butterfly Keyboard's bad design. There is not more authenticity offered by getting it from the first party, which is Apple.

That is like asking a tax criminal if they broke the law.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: I7guy

MacFarmer

macrumors regular
Mar 18, 2022
168
108
Maybe Apple should hire some AI bots to do their reviews? It can't be worse then this, right?
 

Tozovac

macrumors 68040
Jun 12, 2014
3,016
3,224
I had on more than one occasion contemplated tracking the threads (and their eventual outcomes) on a spreadsheet but ultimately never went ahead with it. But I can say that a lot of hot takes did end up on the wrong side of history.

I recently recounted about 8 of them just from the last few months alone, involving takes I felt had aged pretty poorly. But the general trend is - one bets against Apple to their own detriment.

Off the top of my head,
...
Nice list. What’s not on the list is “Apple was right to add vagueness to the interface.” As I anticipated 10 years ago, Apple's follies into the "shock and awe unnecessarily-forced interface/UI reinventions" would slowly but eventually backstep away from the uber-Flat-Design iOS7-esque forced reinvention nonsense, and head back towards function-first pre-2012/pre-iOS7. Still a ways to go but a zillion times better than 10 years ago.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.