Tim Cook 'Practicing for Hours' Ahead of Epic Games Testimony Expected This Week

[quarkysg]

No. I bought some Apple devices. I don’t give my money to Apple, neither do they give their money to me.

Huh?! You said you bought Apple's stuffs. I presume those are bought for your own use? If that's the case, it is money from you to Apple. I'm confused now.

What is this about Apple giving money to you as well? Weird twist in argument.

Haven’t said it was legal or illegal in the current framework. That is for judges to decide I guess.

It's good then that you agree the judge will judge based on existing laws. Not based on some imaginary digital regulation framework.

According to the American constitution everyone’s rights go as far as the right of others. iOS are Apple’s property, the third party Apps and its digital services aren’t. Yes, they invested millions in developing products and services and are being rewarded for that last time I checked. Currently the right of App/Business owners is being pushed to be close to 0 in these kinds of ecosystems. By the way, so does the rights of customers. The “right” is being privatized with the pure absence of law or regulations for the tech/digital space regarding the very notion of property … these notions are being challenged by the fluidity of digital materials and its constructs.

I'm not familiar with the American constitution, but I'm fairly sure that it accord you your rights as an individual, but I'm also fairly sure that it does not allow you to impose your wants upon others. Apple as an organisation should be protected of it's rights. Is it right for an American citizen to force another organisation to change when it has done nothing to break the American law, but because said individual felt that the organisation is too greedy? Does the American constitution allows that? What rights are being 'privatised' here? This is clearly unconstitutional. Maybe you want to point everyone in this forum to this so that we can all be educated?

By all means, challenge Apple by writing to your local representative to have the law/constitution rectified. And also stop enriching Apple so that they know people are upset with them if people felt so strongly towards Apple.

If we stopped paying for things we use every time we disagree with something than probably we not buying anything. There is a balance and trust that in the end things works out. Things aren’t black and white. Its up for the interested parties, case in case third party digital services and App Stores to fight for what they think it theirs while also paying for stuff use as their are doing. They have every right to do so … and valid points backing it up. This does not mean that one should not have an opinion on the matter.

Isn't this what is supposed to be done in a democratic and capitalistic society?

In a pure capitalist society “voting through the wallet” it would overload any rights, so yes. In a democratic society no, there are other values at play. In a joint venture of both values, yes, and no.

I'm not sure if you're here just for entertainment or you really wanted changed. You have options. You claimed to have bought Apple's devices, and yet you showed extreme dissatisfaction towards Apple due to their policy. There are other device option you can purchase but you continue to push money Apple's way. This is really weird. You have options to get Android smartphone and tablets. You can stop buying Apple and go Android. The Android world seems like exactly what you wanted is it not?

AFAIK, in a democratic society, you elect your leaders so that your leaders, in theory, works hard to address your issues. In a capitalistic society, you vote with your money. Products are priced based on what the market can bear. There's no overload here in this discussion. Looks like you're being overly dramatic. Again, nobody is forced against their free will to do anything in this discussion.

It looks like you are an American citizen, which is a democratic capitalistic country. So if you think existing laws is inadequate, raise it with your elected representative. Stop buying Apple products and choose alternative. Doing what EPIC does achieves nothing and waste taxpayer funds.

Don't really understand your joint venture statement. What has it got to do with anything?

 

[duanepatrick]

true

I see... You are a man of culture as well.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Huh?! You said you bought Apple's stuffs. I presume those are bought for your own use? If that's the case, it is money from you to Apple. I'm confused now.

Does Apple give me products? So why are you going on the principle that I give money to Apple. I give money to my children, not Apple.

Why are you offering advice over what should I buy or not? Did I ask your advice?

This thread I believe is for people to give their opinions over what it’s at stake, the App Store policies and related litigation.

Since our understanding over basic things like this is so different I guess any further discussion is pointless. Would be basic beyond what I have time. My opinion is given and sustained.

Have fun.

 

[Expos of 1969]

Does Apple give me products? So why are you going on the principle I give money to Apple. I give money to my children man, not Apple.

Since our understanding over basic things like this is so different I guess any further discussion is pointless.

Have fun.

You clearly stated twice that YOU bought 1k of Apple stuff.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

AFAIK, in a democratic society, you elect your leaders so that your leaders, in theory, works hard to address your issues. In a capitalistic society, you vote with your money. Products are priced based on what the market can bear

Exactely what I said, You mentioned a democratic capitalist sociecity so its a mix of both. Democracy does not end with universal suffrage. I think you may need to go back to school on this matter.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

You clearly stated twice that YOU bought 1k of Apple stuff.

Yes. Apple devices & accessories. Need a list? It was an example showing that my stance does not relate to everything Apple. Its very specific. This issue hand is not abstract, is very specific. Just because I buy Apple products it does not make make my less positive opinion less credible, it should be the opposite actually. Are you a kid?

 

[Expos of 1969]

Yes. Apple devices & accessories. Need a list? It was an example showing that my stance does not relate to everything Apple. Its very specific. This issue hand is not abstract, is very specific. Just because I buy Apple products it does not make make my less positive opinion less credible, it should be the opposite actually. Are you a kid?

You are making no sense. Good afternoon.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

You are making no sense. Good afternoon.

Better not jump in a conversation between other people extracting stuff with no context, I guess. You may have missed some information no?

Good afternoon to you too.

 

[arlomedia]

Are you suggesting that any developer can dictate what Apple should charge for allowing their apps to be listed in the iOS App Store?

No, but if developers were allowed to release on the platform any other way, many would, and Apple would have to set its store fees relative to the value it provides in order to compete.

Then someone will say, "But exclusive control over the App Store protects users." Then I'd say, "If you feel you need that protection, you could keep using the App Store." The only real purpose I see for prohibiting alternatives is that it lets Apple collect some extra billions in revenue from these arbitrary fees.

If Apple needs that money, maybe it should charge for some of its own apps rather than taking a cut of third-party apps. The current situation is perverse if you think about it: developers not only have to give a chunk of their revenue to Apple, but in many cases have to compete against free apps from Apple. Under that model, the overall cost to consumers would be similar, but the money would go to whomever makes the best apps.

The funny thing is, I like Apple and have for a long time. But this is an area where their 2008 business model doesn't fit with the current industry landscape. Apps are no longer a novelty and people aren't "discovering" them by browsing the App Store.

People need to realised that nobody is being forced to buy iOS devices or to develop for iOS devices right? Don't like what you see, walk away.

I guess nobody was "forced" to buy gas from Standard Oil or phone service from AT&T when they were monopolies either, but many businesses and consumers couldn't realistically avoid it.

 

[quarkysg]

Does Apple give me products? So why are you going on the principle that I give money to Apple. I give money to my children, not Apple.

Why are you offering advice over what should I buy or not? Did I ask your advice?

This thread I believe is for people to give their opinions over what it’s at stake, the App Store policies and related litigation.

Since our understanding over basic things like this is so different I guess any further discussion is pointless. Would be basic beyond what I have time. My opinion is given and sustained.

Have fun.

Wow! More deflections! It looks like this is your argument strategy?

You have stated your bought stuffs from Apple. This means that you use money (hopefully yours) to exchange it for Apple's products or services. So Apple received monetary benefits from you and you received tangible benefits from the transactions. So in short Apple received money from you and you received product or services Apple produces. Are you saying that this is not true, or that you lied about purchasing Apple products or stuff as you wrote?

I am not angry at Apple at all. Just yesterday bought 1k of Apple stuff and wasn’t iPhones, iPads or Macs.

Fair point that you did not ask for purchasing advices, but seeing that you're so passionate about the issue, I just thought I might point out to you that you have options and that maybe would make you feel a lot better in future if you bought competing products and services. You know feeding a monster (in this case Apple) will only make the monster stronger.

I respect your opinion and I disagree with them, and therefore this debate. I do not resort to name calling and asking people to go back to school tho.

And I'm having lots of fun in the debates, otherwise I would not be in this forum. Thank you very much.

Exactely what I said, You mentioned a democratic capitalist sociecity so its a mix of both. Democracy does not end with universal suffrage. I think you may need to go back to school on this matter.

I did not state anything about universal suffrage. I'm not that altruistic. More deflections?

In my response to you I clearly stated a high level concept of democracy and capitalism. I did not mix both up. You can have a democracy and at the same time capitalism. You either agree of disagree. Asking me to go back to school is a form of deflection and kind of rude. So far you have not rebutted any of my arguments but providing deflections after deflections.

Why are you continuing in your investment/spending on Apple's products if you think Apple is such a monster? I'm really curious to know, and also at the same time confused by your actions.

Better not jump in a conversation between other people extracting stuff with no context, I guess. You may have missed some information no?

Good afternoon to you too.

Didn't you also jumped into the discussion when I responded to another poster?

IMHO, @Expos of 1969 has context in his/her reply where he/she pointed out your deflections in that you claimed to have bought Apple 'stuff' but then claimed that you didn't give Apple money, and then go on about your opinions on Apple. Huh? Seriously?

 

[Expos of 1969]

Wow! More deflections! It looks like this is your argument strategy?

You have stated your bought stuffs from Apple. This means that you use money (hopefully yours) to exchange it for Apple's products or services. So Apple received monetary benefits from you and you received tangible benefits from the transactions. So in short Apple received money from you and you received product or services Apple produces. Are you saying that this is not true, or that you lied about purchasing Apple products or stuff as you wrote?



Fair point that you did not ask for purchasing advices, but seeing that you're so passionate about the issue, I just thought I might point out to you that you have options and that maybe would make you feel a lot better in future if you bought competing products and services. You know feeding a monster (in this case Apple) will only make the monster stronger.

I respect your opinion and I disagree with them, and therefore this debate. I do not resort to name calling and asking people to go back to school tho.

And I'm having lots of fun in the debates, otherwise I would not be in this forum. Thank you very much.


I did not state anything about universal suffrage. I'm not that altruistic. More deflections?

In my response to you I clearly stated a high level concept of democracy and capitalism. I did not mix both up. You can have a democracy and at the same time capitalism. You either agree of disagree. Asking me to go back to school is a form of deflection and kind of rude. So far you have not rebutted any of my arguments but providing deflections after deflections.

Why are you continuing in your investment/spending on Apple's products if you think Apple is such a monster? I'm really curious to know, and also at the same time confused by your actions.


Didn't you also jumped into the discussion when I responded to another poster?

IMHO, @Expos of 1969 has context in his/her reply where he/she pointed out your deflections in that you claimed to have bought Apple 'stuff' but then claimed that you didn't give Apple money, and then go on about your opinions on Apple. Huh? Seriously?

Difficult to have an intelligent debate with folks who spin like a top. You are commended though for trying.

 

[quarkysg]

Difficult to have an intelligent debate with folks who spin like a top. You are commended though for trying.

Yeah, well, I have time on my hands.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Some p

Wow! More deflections! It looks like this is your argument strategy?

You have stated your bought stuffs from Apple. This means that you use money (hopefully yours) to exchange it for Apple's products or services. So Apple received monetary benefits from you and you received tangible benefits from the transactions. So in short Apple received money from you and you received product or services Apple produces. Are you saying that this is not true, or that you lied about purchasing Apple products or stuff as you wrote?



Fair point that you did not ask for purchasing advices, but seeing that you're so passionate about the issue, I just thought I might point out to you that you have options and that maybe would make you feel a lot better in future if you bought competing products and services. You know feeding a monster (in this case Apple) will only make the monster stronger.

I respect your opinion and I disagree with them, and therefore this debate. I do not resort to name calling and asking people to go back to school tho.

And I'm having lots of fun in the debates, otherwise I would not be in this forum. Thank you very much.


I did not state anything about universal suffrage. I'm not that altruistic. More deflections?

In my response to you I clearly stated a high level concept of democracy and capitalism. I did not mix both up. You can have a democracy and at the same time capitalism. You either agree of disagree. Asking me to go back to school is a form of deflection and kind of rude. So far you have not rebutted any of my arguments but providing deflections after deflections.

Why are you continuing in your investment/spending on Apple's products if you think Apple is such a monster? I'm really curious to know, and also at the same time confused by your actions.


Didn't you also jumped into the discussion when I responded to another poster?

IMHO, @Expos of 1969 has context in his/her reply where he/she pointed out your deflections in that you claimed to have bought Apple 'stuff' but then claimed that you didn't give Apple money, and then go on about your opinions on Apple. Huh? Seriously?

I am passioned about the tech and the tech industry up to include having the balls to criticize publicly huge companies, even the ones my passion endorses.

I endorse companies as much as I criticize. In fact, I am more critical of companies I endorse than the ones that I don’t.

I also criticize my children, people that I love, when I think they are doing something wrong yet don’t think of swapping them or immediately moving away from them. Believe they can upset me a lot more than Apple.

I believe that this is part of a healthy human behavior. You may not of course. You may find it odd, strange or hypocritical … still my life experience says it more often not the case than it is.

Anyway, thank you for thinking about ways of making me feel better about this issue. But don’t worry, I don’t really feel as bad as you might think.

“In my response to you I clearly stated a high level concept of democracy and capitalism. I did not mix both up. You can have a democracy and at the same time capitalism.”

I think democratic capitalism is the best political model we have at the moment.

In this model the pure concept of “voting through wallets” is unconstitutional. Meaning that it’s acceptable if not fundamental yet not without boundaries. This boundaries are defined by many things including the idea of private property, privacy, security, education, healthcare, individual or shared. That is how both coexist.

Case in case I gave an example in the App Store policies were I believe the concepts of property and its boundaries are being abused in favor of ones private property over the others. Simple has that. Just because one may be able to “abandon” their property and move somewhere else does not invalidate that abuse.

If we believe that the stock market is one of the best examples of capitalism working … than how do you explain the phenomenon that the digital market looks far less regulated and way more liberal than the stock market itself? Not even on the stock market “vote by wallet” has no boundaries case in case the recents incidents regarding Game Stop.

Concluding, equating defending Apple App Store policies and their unquestionable right to enforce them as defending Capitalism is naive at best. Even more naive is the pure “vote by wallet” as the litmus test of a Capitalistic framework… is nothing but a sound bite. It is an important part yet not the only thing relevant in such a framework.

There is space to be a defensor and believing in democratic capitalism and be critical of App Store policies of this kind. Your prose might lead people to believe that isn’t the case, where it is indeed.

Everyone loves a shinning start, I do. But not everyone gets blinded my its luminescence.

Cheers.