Tim can't stand on a moral high ground while helping jail a big portion of the world population. This is why Tim should stay out of politics, he makes Apple look like a hypocrite.
So if the rules of THAT land said images of child abuse was fine, then you would expect Apple to support this and not remove any such images as they are ok in THAT country where they are selling their phones?
Funny how it's ok to have encryption in foriegn countries but when it's local the gov wants access.
These days they take your phone at the airport in America and go thru it. They do not do this in China. Each country has its positives and negatives while China may have their negatives they have a little more freedom at the airport with their iPhones compared to Americans in America. Not sure which is worse, not being able to download a VPN app from local Apple Store in China or having to hand over your smartphone to customs at airport for it to be searched like some Americans do in America. Your rights to personal privacy is invaded upon by both China and America but in just different ways so before being critical of others we should realize that our system isn't exactly perfect either. Apple is in the middle of all this as they just want to sell their iPhones.Don't you love it when politicians pretend they know anything about technology?
They've obviously got people telling them 'jump on this', without a clue as to how much it exposes them as frauds bearers of the double standard.
Personally, I'm glad they're doing it, though. Exposes the frauds for all to see. Don't stop being cool and up with the technologies, people!
P.S. That's why the state department funds TOR, so Americans can have privacy. {wink}
To me that suggest there are people from the U.S. government spying in China and soon with their fancy iPhone X.
It is a monopoly, similar in style to when coffee machine makers sue companies making compatible capsules because they are protected by a patent.
IANAL, but the fact that alternatives exist doesn't mean that it's not an abuse of monopoly power, e
.g.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.
Monopolies don't have to be global. Apple's monopoly is not on smartphones, but on iOS app DISTRIBUTION.You keep insisting but you’re still wrong. It’s not a monopoly. You can buy an android phone if you don’t like how the iPhone works. The market is quite healthy. iPhones aren’t even a majority let alone a monopoly.
That’s like saying McDonalds has a monopoly on Big Mac distribution. It’s meaningless and not remotely illegal (in the US at least). If you want to side load apps, easy solution: get an android phone.Monopolies don't have to be global. Apple's monopoly is not on smartphones, but on iOS app DISTRIBUTION.
Alright, looks like it’s not conducive to converse with you. Hope you’re not using Apple products then, but enjoy your stay in the forum.
Good day.
A patent grants you a legal monopoly.That’s like saying McDonalds has a monopoly on Big Mac distribution. It’s meaningless and not remotely illegal (in the US at least). If you want to side load apps, easy solution: get an android phone.
But you can't us iOS apps on android. The only solution is jailbreak/root. But then you lower the security level on your phone.That’s like saying McDonalds has a monopoly on Big Mac distribution. It’s meaningless and not remotely illegal (in the US at least). If you want to side load apps, easy solution: get an android phone.
But you can't us iOS apps on android. The only solution is jailbreak/root. But then you lower the security level on your phone.
But you can't us iOS apps on android. The only solution is jailbreak/root. But then you lower the security level on your phone.
I did not say they have an obligation (unless an antitrust action decides so).Yup, that’s how it works, you weigh the different strengths and weaknesses each product offers and go with the one you like the most. Despite what cube seems to believe customers aren’t magically entitled to have everything they want.
Apple is well within it’s legal rights. It’s fine to suggest they or hope they change but they are under no legal obligation to do so at this point, no matter how many times cube insists otherwise.
I did not say they have an obligation (unless an antitrust action decides so).
You are imagining things.You’re entire argument is about how they have an illegal monopoly. It’s exactly what you said. They do not. You are wrong.