North Dakota Senate Shoots Down App Store Bill Apple Said Would 'Destroy the iPhone'

[960design]

Just give us a choice like on macOS and maybe hide it in some „developers“ menu and 80% of the people that leave everything set to default and are the ones in danger of fraud won’t even enable / know about it anyway but let others have that choice …

We already have that option.

Android | Do More With Google on Android Phones & Devices

Discover more about Android & learn how our devices can help you Do more with Google with hyper connectivity, powerful protection, Google apps, & Quick Share.

www.android.com

Samsung makes some very impressive hardware.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

The big difference in Australia is Apple doesn’t own a search engine making money from other people’s work.

So the Apps in the iPhone are Apples work. Interesting.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Not really as shown by the Psystar Corporation lawsuit back in 2009 what Apple is doing with regard to losing down it's OS is protected by the DMCA which is less draconian than the EU's Article 17

One has nothing to do with the other. Furthermore I don’t give a damn about what Apple is protected against when it comes to allowing her to fully control things it does not own. If the law protects Apple in doing that, than the law is CORRUPT.

If the only way to be able to control the thing you own is by getting rid of it, than, you don’t really own it.

And yes, the Gov can dictate some features required for a commercial OS to be allowed to market. Nothing weird in that, take seat belts and rear mirrors on cars ... they are there because the gov required it for the protection of its users. Even if most felt that they did not need it.

As someone one said ”computers are vehicles for the mind”.

 

[Alan Wynn]

So the Apps in the iPhone are Apples work. Interesting.

The developers who choose to be in Apple’s App Store have done so voluntarily. No one is forcing them to be there. How is this so hard for you to grasp?

 

[Alan Wynn]

if the only way to be able to Control the thing you own is by getting rid of it, than, you don’t really own it.

I will make it easier for you. You do not even own the hardware, you have license to use with a specific set of conditions.

And yes, the Gov can dictate some features required for an commercial OS come to market.

At least in the United States, that would have to be tested in court.

Nothing weird in that, take seat belts and rear mirrors on cars ...

Actually, in the United States, the government cannot mandate that cars have seat belts, they can only mandate that for cars to be allowed onto public roads they need them. That is a big difference. Mandating that Apple allow someone else to be able to install their own App Store which Apple would be required to support using its intellectual property would have several constitutional challenges. This would be especially problematic if there is nothing that forces people to purchase the product in the first place.

As someone one said ”computers are vehicles for the mind”.

Just because someone made an analogy, does not make it a fact.

Again, there is an option that supports what you want. Stop trying to screw the rest of us that do not want it.

 

[theotherphil]

So the Apps in the iPhone are Apples work. Interesting.

What’s that got to do with Facebook blocking news from being shared due to a proposed law in Australia?

You really are reaching now!

 

[Maximara]

One has nothing to do with the other. Furthermore I don’t give a damn abou what Apple is protected when it comes to controlling things it does not own. If the law protects Apple ín that, it’s CORRUPT.

People have been complaining about how the DMCA has resulted in companies giving supposed copyright holders way too much power since it was signed in 1998. The abuse of the DMCA on Youtube is legion and yet in the some 25 years it has been signed nothing has changed.

 

[macsound1]

Totally understand the margin requirements large legacy retailers have used, as I’ve worked for consumer product manufacturers selling into mass retail for 30 years. My point was more about how big tech, Apple in particular, gets a lot of grief for their margin requirements for the App Store, but legacy retailers with MUCH higher margins never come up as being an issue for consumers.

I’ll date myself here with the below that I’m sure many of you young whippersnappers will give me an eye-roll for sharing.

Imagine if we went back to having to buy apps (or programs as they were called) from retailers and app developers, most of whom are individuals or small teams with limited or zero experience selling consumer products. Not only would they have to figure out how to make the physical parts (CD, card, tape, etc.) to carry their program, not to mention the packaging and logistics to move of each product, but then had to sell the product to retailers with limited shelf space, limited purchasing budgets, limited time to talk, etc. And as a consumer, you’d go to one store hoping to buy a program, only to find that they don’t have it in stock, or have the wrong version you need for your system, forcing you to go to multiple stores trying to find what you want and need.

It’s crazy to me to think that there are generations of people who don’t even realize how things used to be [in retail]. It’s funny because just today I went back to look at a photo of the downtown of my childhood, because I was trying to find an image of an old pharmacy with a lunch counter I would go to with my grandma (for a future project I’m working on). Right in a row, there was a JCPenney store, next to it on one corner was a Ben Franklin and across the street was a Woolworth’s (which also had a lunch counter). Back then (in the 60’s and 70’s), shopping was what you did to find products and I would go with my mom or grandma, and eventually by myself, from store to store checking out what they had on shelf.

That exploration in the physical world has for so many of us now become an all digital experience. Even when we go to the store, we can know ahead of time if they have the particular item we’re looking for and the price (and how it compares to other retailers). Or we entirely skip going into the physical world and order online and have the product delivered.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk...

I mean personally, and I think for alot of the world as we see it re-open and close and re-open during the pandemic, people still truly do enjoy shopping.
Of course there's lots people can do with apps and buying online but my local outdoor mall is packed with people (mostly waiting outside in line to get in) wanting to get outside and shop.
Maybe the pandemic will knock those landlords into shape who were charging such exorbitant rents, profitable retailers like Neiman Marcus and Nordstroms are moving out of some locations and many places in the San Francisco area have 50% empty store fronts.

Anyway, here's to hoping for the return of retail and the realization that retailers, virtual or physical, have overhead that most consumers can't even fathom.

 

[macsound1]

I will make it easier for you. You do not even own the hardware, you have license to use with a specific set of conditions.

At least in the United States, that would have to be tested in court.

Actually, in the United States, the government cannot mandate that cars have seat belts, they can only mandate that for cars to be allowed onto public roads they need them. That is a big difference. Mandating that Apple allow someone else to be able to install their own App Store which Apple would be required to support using its intellectual property would have several constitutional challenges. This would be especially problematic if there is nothing that forces people to purchase the product in the first place.

Just because someone made an analogy, does not make it a fact.

Again, there is an option that supports what you want. Stop trying to screw the rest of us that do not want it.

The seat belt law is a great example.
The US does not mandate vehicles have seat belts because they have no control over what those vehicles will be used for. Golf carts are a great example. They can be driven on private property and their speed is mostly regulated by the owners. Gas carts could get up to 30MPH but there is no governing body that can require seat belts.
Only vehicles designed for driving on public roads have requirements, but that doesn't stop people who live on private land from taking their golf cart on public roads, until they're caught. Even then, those areas are somewhat assumed to "allow" these types of vehicles.

 

[jmgregory1]

I mean personally, and I think for alot of the world as we see it re-open and close and re-open during the pandemic, people still truly do enjoy shopping.
Of course there's lots people can do with apps and buying online but my local outdoor mall is packed with people (mostly waiting outside in line to get in) wanting to get outside and shop.
Maybe the pandemic will knock those landlords into shape who were charging such exorbitant rents, profitable retailers like Neiman Marcus and Nordstroms are moving out of some locations and many places in the San Francisco area have 50% empty store fronts.

Anyway, here's to hoping for the return of retail and the realization that retailers, virtual or physical, have overhead that most consumers can't even fathom.

Like you, I hope this year+ of being isolated reminds people of the benefits of the shared experience of shopping at actual physical stores and retail / restaurants recover much of what was lost in revenue. I do say good riddance to a bunch of the horrid malls that have bitten the dust - I'd much prefer to see revitalization of downtown shopping, even when that means smaller stores and potential parking issues.

 

[Abazigal]

Epic Games has shown time and time again that it does not have customers’ or app developers’ best interests in mind as it relies on guerrilla warfare tactics to go up against Apple. The fact that Epic Games was responsible for the draft legislation speaks volumes as to whether or not the bill was meant to help the public.

Thankfully, common sense prevailed (again) this time round.