That was sarcasm which clearly went over the heads of a number of people.
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.
Tim Cook Ordered to Attend 7-Hour Deposition in Apple vs. Epic Games Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is as ridiculous as saying Nintendo has a monopoly on the Nintendo platform.
This is nonsensical. Car companies have been doing the same for decades.
As I will keep pointing out 30% is the industry standard.
As been pointed out by other all this would do would be to turn the iOS market into the same kind of garbage fire Cesspool of a train wreck that the Android market is because quality control is nonexistent.
Yep, Epic have a monopoly on the Epic Store and I’m going to sue them for an anti-trust violation because I can’t sell my virtual clothing and fake $$$ to the kids.
That‘s why the market definition is too narrow. Of course Apple have a monopoly on their own product. This is expected and allowed under anti-trust laws.
Not only Epic, but also Apple, and We fools defend them here... humans are a strange species.
That's non-sense and you now that, otherwise please point me to the "official" Apple bootloader and hardware specs and to the official bootloader unlocker, and also to the flashing tool inclusive its sources...
Actually as shown by psystar there may be other factors then "reverse engineering" that could make it illegal ie DMCA. Remember the A(number) chips have not only ARM code but what ever Apple added which if accessed "avoids, bypasses, removes, descrambles, decrypts, deactivates or impairs a technological protection measure without Apple's authority for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to Apple's copyrighted works."
Yes they do because those resellers are bound by Apple’s terms in order to be authorised to resell their products.
The boot loader is Apple’s software….you know, the one that you have to licence to use. If you want to boot an alternative OS, you’ll have to write your own boot loader like Correllium has done (a link to which can be found earlier in this thread).
You're talking about official resellers, there a many non-official resellers out there. There is no legal limitation of reselling a product. Everybody can sell a iDevice, which renders this statement invalid.
What makes this statement so magical is the original quote is not about individualism—rather it's about tax avoidance.
When Ben Franklin wrote this in ~1755 he was referring to the damage done to the national interest by people who refused to pay their taxes—specifically the aristocratic Penn family who were preventing the Pennsylvania assembly from taxing them to pay for the French and Indian war.
The fact you're using it to defend Epic who seeking to avoid Apple's service fees—which are essentially platform taxes—proves irony is alive and well in 2021!
The bootloader is Apple SOFTWARE, not hardware. I've already posted the link to Project Sandcastle. Someone is making it work. Just because you or I can't do it, doesn't make it non-sense.
I spent thousands of dollars on a Canon camera. I don't expect to be able to use Sony lenses or for the camera to load the Sony Alpha OS. Sure, I can get an adapter and physically mount the lens, but it doesn't have full functionality. Kind of like follow our rules or use the open web-framework. It's there with limited functionality.
Just because I WANT something to be one way or another, doesn't create any legal obligation to do so. There are alternatives within the market. The fact that Epic is still doing fine and hasn't closed shop after getting booted from the iOS App Store is evidence that the market alternatives work just fine. They are peddling their wares on Android.
even if your correct sometimes you can’t tell sarcasm very well over the internet as opposed to face to face conversations
Then don’t be so stupid in buying a product from a non-official source. I certainly wouldn’t be buying a $2,000 phone from Shady Steve out the trunk of a car.
That's based on reverse engineering, which Apple also officially disagree. If this were the case, Apple would have to provide all the specs to hardware inclusive their precious secure enclave.
It's not about being shady Steve, there are many "serious" Tech Shops selling iPhones without being an "official" Apple reseller.
I‘m not sure what more you want that hasn’t already been answered? Just because it’s difficult, doesn’t mean Apple has to help you. You do with it what YOU want.
I have the option to be a nuclear scientist. I choose not to because it’s hard and I’d have to expend to much effort to make it work.
Good you didn't, you would have nuked us all already by being unable to grasp topics
. Reverse engineering is not allowed by Apple and that's why they don't provide specs for their hardware, things like registers, etc. If I reverse engineer iPhones, and start selling them with freebsd, they would sue me to hell.
Last edited:
Except Microsoft already dominated (and still dominates at 87%) the PC landscape and used that to curb stomp Netscape Navigator. Apple at best controls 25% of the mobile market (and that is limited to the US. Worldwide they are at 16%). Apple has NEVER dominated any general market the way Microsoft did (and still does). Comparing the two is as the old saying goes comparing Apples and oranges.
I posted this on another thread but I’ll repeat it here as it add value:
The free market can choose the Single App Store of the iOS ecosystem or the more open Android compatibles. There’s great choices out there. What you are arguing for is to remove my choice for an ecosystem with a single App Store. This is one of the things that differentiates Apple from it’s competitors.
I choose the iOS ecosystem exactly because of the single App Store. A single, trusted entity with my credit card details. A single point of contact for all of my subscriptions. A very narrow attack surface area for hackers and a company with the resources and motivation to keep my data safe.
I do not want to go to an epic store for their games and give them my CC details.
I do not want to go to a MS store for my Office software and then give them my CC details.
I do not want to go to an Adobe Store and give them my CC details.
I do not want an Affinity store and give them my details.
I do not want an Activision store and give them my details.
I do not want an EA store and give them my details.
Etc, etc, etc.
You say that I could continue to use the Apple App Store and nothing would change for me but you fail to consider that these companies will not be releasing their app on the Apple Store when they have their own stores.
It will turn into the Wild West of poor user experience and large attack surface area for hackers. I would then have to change my CC/ personal details with every store for any change in my circumstances. There will be multiple privacy policies etc etc. This is exactly the problem that iOS fixes and just because it has always been different on desktop, doesn’t mean we should embrace the suck on mobile.
NO THANK YOU!
So in arguing that Apple should allow other App stores to increase user choice, you actually end up reducing user choice. I, and all the other users like me, will no longer have the option to choose an integrated experience.
The free market can choose the Single App Store of the iOS ecosystem or the more open Android compatibles. There’s great choices out there. What you are arguing for is to remove my choice for an ecosystem with a single App Store. This is one of the things that differentiates Apple from it’s competitors.
I choose the iOS ecosystem exactly because of the single App Store. A single, trusted entity with my credit card details. A single point of contact for all of my subscriptions. A very narrow attack surface area for hackers and a company with the resources and motivation to keep my data safe.
I do not want to go to an epic store for their games and give them my CC details.
I do not want to go to a MS store for my Office software and then give them my CC details.
I do not want to go to an Adobe Store and give them my CC details.
I do not want an Affinity store and give them my details.
I do not want an Activision store and give them my details.
I do not want an EA store and give them my details.
Etc, etc, etc.
You say that I could continue to use the Apple App Store and nothing would change for me but you fail to consider that these companies will not be releasing their app on the Apple Store when they have their own stores.
It will turn into the Wild West of poor user experience and large attack surface area for hackers. I would then have to change my CC/ personal details with every store for any change in my circumstances. There will be multiple privacy policies etc etc. This is exactly the problem that iOS fixes and just because it has always been different on desktop, doesn’t mean we should embrace the suck on mobile.
NO THANK YOU!
So in arguing that Apple should allow other App stores to increase user choice, you actually end up reducing user choice. I, and all the other users like me, will no longer have the option to choose an integrated experience.
Of course it is... that's why I've made that point repeatedly above about reverse engineering. It doesn't change the fact that it is possible. Not easily done, but possible.
In the end, none of it changes the fact that Apple is not legally obligated to host competing stores on its platform until the legal system says it must do so. And that will be a very difficult argument to win.
I pay money for a ticket to a Dallas Cowboy's football game, thereby allowing me entry (under terms of license of the ticket) to the stadium (which was subsidized by tax revenues) and the event. The concessions for the event are limited. There is a single licensed vendor (Jerry Jones - who may opt to sub-license to others) and a single license for beer (Miller/Coor's). Just because I want to have a Bud Light, doesn't mean I can. Jerry Jones dictates the terms of the marketplace. I can't just set-up and start selling in the parking lot.
I don't disagree. I'm only providing the legal background of the real question at hand. But, let's be honest... Apple has absolutely pushed its own products to the top of every search result in the past. But, did that hurt Spotify? I doubt it.Except Microsoft already dominated (and still dominates at 87%) the PC landscape and used that to curb stomp Netscape Navigator. Apple at best controls 25% of the mobile market (and that is limited to the US. Worldwide they are at 16%). Apple has NEVER dominated any general market the way Microsoft did (and still does). Comparing the two is as the old saying goes comparing Apples and oranges.
Yes there is. Try transferring your digitally purchased software product some time. Odds are you can't. Heck there are limitations (via functionality) on what software that is still on physical format and isn't an object finding game or yet another candy crush clone.