Where does Amazon host user-generated video content a la YouTube? This is news to me.
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.
Spotify Blames Apple for Loss of iPhone Volume Button Control of Connected Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Where does Amazon host user-generated video content a la YouTube? This is news to me.
Yes. Especially if you want others to use them. That's usually how interoperable standards work, like USB4 being based on shared parts of Thunderbolt 3.
I never said anything about Amazon hosting video content. They qualify as an online intermediation service.
Spotify can go make their own phone and create an echo system.
i am tired of Spotify crying like a baby every week.
Companies have to update their software to make it better and secure.
Apple won't get approval from Spotify before updating their software.
One app out of 100,000 apps can't dictate how apple updates their OS.
I think it should follow the patent length, 20 years, then it's open source. Hardware, software, all of it.
I work in the pharmacy industry so I deal with some situations every day.. Drug companies spend millions, and sometimes billions to get a mediation on the market, then after 20 years, they lose the rights to it. What makes other companies so special that they should be exempt?
Last edited:
I like the tight integration between software and device
you like apple eco system because of tight integration.
but at the same time you want iPhone to work like android ?
you can't have it both ways.
Sure you can. Keep a tight integration on the parts you want, and whatever else you want on the others.
I mix and match all day long, because I don't trust any particular tech company, Apple included.
"Our regulations don't hinder tech innovation, that's just something BIG TECH says to quash competition. For example, we are home to the most important music streaming company. What? Apply our latest tech regulation to Spotify? Even though they clearly meet the requirements? Don't be absurd. iPadOS clearly doesn't meet the requirements? Too bad, GATEKEEPER - it's too similar to iOS."
But sure, the DMA is a perfectly clear law about increasing competition and fairness in the European market.
Agree, how dare Apple update API.
EU should force Apple to use Spotify API to wirelessly play music and force apple to pay Spotify to use their API.
and force Apple to make AirPlay and iOS open source so that other manufacturers use it for free and compete with Apple.
Apple has lot of money they can invest in R&D, other companies don't have money to invest in R&D so Apple should help their competitors.
it does.
EU basically created a monopoly USB.
EU wanted micro USB to be the standard on all devices.
imagine using micro USB to charge mobile devices.
USB was sleeping till thunderbolt kicked UBS's ass.
USB was happy with 200 mbps speeds.
we would still be struct with USB if thunderbolt didn't come up with new technology.
iPhones market share is like 30% in EU ?Spotify only has 55% of the EU market, so they're not exactly a monopolist, although I appreciate the sentiment.
so why is Apple a monopoly in EU ?
After a length of time, say 20 years like our patent system, then yes.
From my post above: I work in the pharmacy industry so I deal with some situations every day.. Drug companies spend millions, and sometimes billions to get a mediation on the market, then after 20 years, they lose the rights to it. What makes other companies so special that they should be exempt?
It's not. The DMA doesn't use the phrase monopoly and it doesn't care about monopolies. It's about gatekeepers, not monopoly.
The DMA is based on total users, regardless of percentage of market. You can be 1% of the market, but if you have 45 million users, it applies.. You can be 100% of the market, but if you have 10 million users, it doesn't apply.
You responded to my YouTube comment, hence my assumption.
I fail to see how Amazon being an intermediation service has anything to do with competition in the Music Streaming industry. Amazon also streams music, yes, but that is not the reason they are identified as an intermediation service gatekeeper.
edit: spelling is hard.
Because Spotify is EU company.
they don't have any other tech company in EU other than Spotify.
EU is just making money off of US tech companies.
And somehow a competition law that doesn't consider competition makes sense to some people.
You seem to have forgotten your own point.
You said that music didn't qualify and video did because there wasn't as much competition in the video market.However, I pointed out that Amazon qualified despite being in a more competitive market than Spotify.
I think Apple and Airplay would gain a lot if we saw wider adoption. Maybe Apple could have even made it the industry standard for local audio and video streaming. Instead, we now have a many competing protocols, and none of them is really widely supported.
Publishing standards for free is not so uncommon in the PC/MAC space. Think about Thunderbolt and how Intel made it free to use, so it gets wider adoption.
Yes and no.
The issue is that Microsoft is not only an Operating System vendor but also a vendor of software security products. The EU stated that Microsoft cannot use their significant market power in the OS market to give an unfair advantage to their other products, so Microsoft has to give third-party software security products the same access to OS features it gives to its own.
Note that the EU does not specify any particular type of access, only that Microsoft has to provide the same level of access they provide to their own product, no more, no less.
IMHO the decision of the EU is correct, as the alternative would lead to any third-party software security product to have inferior capabilities by design compared to Microsoft's which is obviously an anti-trust issue.
Microsoft could remove kernel access from their own security products: that way, they would not be required to provide it to third-parties. Microsoft is blaming the EU instead because they likely want to have the cake and also eat it: have kernel access for their products but preventing third-parties from also having it, basically crippling any third-party.