Show me anyone who says "yes" to that question....is that what you say to your mac? or do you only use apps from Mac App Store? and if you say yes, I don't believe you.
And I'll show you a liar.
Show me anyone who says "yes" to that question....is that what you say to your mac? or do you only use apps from Mac App Store? and if you say yes, I don't believe you.
If courts continue to rule that Apple is not in violation of anti-trust laws, that's precisely a scenario that would impel upon Congress the need for new legislation. U.S. antitrust laws haven't been updated since before software was even a thing. The entire point of Congress is to enact laws.Why doesn't Apple have the right to control its own operating system? Have U.S. courts found Apple to be in violation of anti-trust laws? No.
I've never purchased ANYTHING from Microsoft's App Store. I'm not forced to, unlike Apple. The ability to purchase whatever I want from wherever I want has always existed for Windows.Why isn’t the current system perfect?
iPhone released in 2007.
iPad 2010.
Windows 10/11 are sometimes available with an S version.
They do not include virus software, as it is not necessary.
You can only install apps from the Microsoft Store.
Virtually every device I know of can be set not to allow any 3rd party apps.
Right. Because that's exactly how every other computing platform works, and especially because Apple owes absolutely none of its success to a vibrant 3rd-party app ecosystem.Time for Apple to block all but their barebones base level APIs from apps that don't go through the App Store.
If developers don't want to pay Apple anything, they shouldn't reap the rewards from the billions Apple has spent on development of iOS and hardware over the years.
Show me anyone who says "yes" to that question....
And I'll show you a liar.
Thanks for the clarification. I am not sure this bill really open competition or even has the same intent as the BOCs you mention. I would actually think that using market cap and size as a trigger would be more risky. The concept of a closed App Store architecture (single App Store on a device) is the same regardless of market cap. Xbox store is only store on Xbox, Sony store is only store on PlayStation, App Store is only store on iOS. Sounds punitive to target only the one store on a platform over $xx market share.The threshold for proving punitory action via Bill of Attainder is extremely high. For example, in 1998 AT&T sued the FTC over provisions in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, in part claiming violation of Bill of Attainder. Unlike the American Innovation and Choice Online Act law we're discussing today, which only targets thresholds of market cap and size, the act in 1996 actually singled out the Bell companies by their name in the legislation. Easy win for AT&T right? Nope - AT&T still lost, with the appellate court ruling:
We hold that s 271 does not violate any of the constitutional provisions raised by BellSouth. The section does not violate the bill of attainder clause, because it does not inflict "punishment" on BellSouth. Instead, it is a rational and nonpunitive congressional enactment that serves to open tele- communications markets.
In other words, the court interpreted the intent of the bill as opening markets rather than punishing AT&T. The same interpretation has held for most antitrust legislation, that their intent is to protect markets and consumers rather than hurt the affected companies, irrespective of how targeted and selective the legislation is written.
Condescending people really are the worst thing to happen to computing innovation ever.. their insecurity and false sense of superiority overwhelms them..phone people really are the worst thing to happen to computing innovation ever.. their fear overwhelms them..
Condescending people really are the worst thing to happen to computing innovation ever.. their insecurity and false sense of superiority overwhelms them..
well, here is where we go apart, again, I think that scenario will actually happen.First thing when side loading would be enabled would be all the social media app (FB, TikTok and such) making their apps available on their own websites and put a whole new slew of new and old tracking mechanisms into those apps, then the hackers will start to create posts/links on those social media and start the scenario described in the post you responded to ... there are billions of people who blindly click on social media posts, they have no idea what might be behind this. You (I assume) and myself are the exception in that we pay attention and understand the dangers but 90+% of the user base are not. That user base will then go to Apple and ask for support, and when Apple will (rightfully) say sorry, they will start screaming about Apple ... that I what I believe is Apple's core motivation, their entire support model/user experience will suffer ...That's what i call imagination. Or is it sci-fi? @jz0309 ?
Feinstein and Padilla may, however, be familiar with Apple’s lobbyists.The bill, which was first introduced over the summer, would require major changes to the App Store if passed in its current incarnation. It is designed to prevent "dominant platforms" from "abusing their gatekeeper power" by favoring their own products and services over those of competitors.
Senator Dianne Feinstein criticized the bill and said that it targets a "small number of specific companies," and Senator Alex Padilla said that it was difficult to "see the justification for a bill that regulates the behavior of only a handful of companies while allowing everyone else to continue engaging in that exact same behavior."
I guess Feinstein and Padilla are unfamiliar with our country's long history of antitrust legislation, which specifically and uniquely targets any company with dominant power as the means to prevent monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior. To wit, those laws, and the long string of enforcement precedents they produced, explicitly outline behaviors that are illegal for a dominant player but legal for others.
While Democrats and Republicans seem to be far apart on most issues, there are a handful of issues where there is notable bipartisan support. Infrastructure was one and passed the Senate 69-30. Big tech is another issue and this bill passed out of the 22-member committee with the support of 5 Republicans. In fact, I would say Manchin and Sinema would be in favor of this bill due to its bipartisan support, which those two are all about.Don't worry. The GOP side of the Senate (plus DINO's Manchin and Sinema) are on a roll of not passing anything.
They won't break their blocking streak by passing this...
Couldn't agree more.but there are hax0r doods trying to get in their phones every day... so that means nobody gets freedom.
Well, the burning of witches also worked out, we have no witches anymore.Show me anyone who says "yes" to that question....
And I'll show you a liar.
Please give us a list of the software you have written that is on a billion devices that has zero bugs.Yeah, because iOS is so badly developed it’s open season for malware.. remember the clicker trojan? Or the many “interaction-less” bugs ? ‘Allowed’ by apple to install via apps in the ‘secure’ appstore.. never discovered by apple..
Secrecy is apple’s thing, not security
I said goodbye to macOS security since I first started using Macs back in the late 1980s when we were able to get apps (freeware, shareware, paid ware) from anywhere we wanted and can still to this day. You know what? Zero problems since.
But go ahead and continue to spread your (and Apple's) FUD
Oh, please![]()
Who defines they are a trusted party ?Sideloading would also allow apps from trusted parties you’ve installed already with features an possibilities without the straight-jacket-limitations apple imposes..
Couldn't agree more.
the general public cell phone users are non-technical and/or misinformed, their paranoia hurts everyone.
I think that's a little unfair. People shouldn't have to have a fully working understanding of how a phone OS works, surely the whole point of advancement is to obscure that stuff away and just let you tell a machine what to do. People have been dumb/bad as computers since their invention, they're now just able to be dumb/bad in different ways.As tech progresses, its users are becoming dumber and dumber.
I do see your point and we probably agree.I've never purchased ANYTHING from Microsoft's App Store. I'm not forced to, unlike Apple. The ability to purchase whatever I want from wherever I want has always existed for Windows.
What you spell out is that you HAVE CHOICES. You can set your devices to allow only one source of apps, or not. BUT you have that choice. Not so with iPhone/iPad apps. See the difference?
I’m looking for the finger button.Right. Because that's exactly how every other computing platform works, and especially because Apple owes absolutely none of its success to a vibrant 3rd-party app ecosystem.
What happened to the downvote button? I don't have to be angry at something for it to be wrong.
I think that's a little unfair. People shouldn't have to have a fully working understanding of how a phone OS works, surely the whole point of advancement is to obscure that stuff away and just let you tell a machine what to do. People have been dumb/bad as computers since their invention, they're now just able to be dumb/bad in different ways.
And if you do want to sideload use Android. Problem solved!Thumbs up. If you don’t want to side load, don’t.
And if you do want to sideload use Android. Problem solved!