103
“You don’t need to use us for payments but you still need to pay us for the payments we had nothing to do with” is perfectly monopolistic
Well, they do provide the AppStore and the whole underlying infrastructure. So a fee in and off itself is not unreasonable.
However, since the AppStore is the only channel for selling/downloading apps it reeks of monopoly (which Apple is rightly being investigated for).
It is unreasonable if they are not the one providing payment infra.
They already charge developers 100$ pa for the app store account. If that doesn't cover their costs, they can increase it, but going after 3rd party payments is pure greed.
Why does providing the App Store entitle them to a percentage of in app purchases instead of, say, a fee per download or something?
If you think about it, a fee per app download is a lot less flexible when it comes to monetising purchases. Means free apps either become paid or shove into you a lot more micro transactions. That exact model is what made devs get mad at unity (although unity doesn’t provide the download infrastructure and it was on top of a cut)
Fair. I still don’t think that entitles Apple to a cut of purchases in the app, but you’re right that a download fee sucks.
Sounds eerily similar to taxes.
Taxes contribute to providing services and infrastructure to the people. This takes money from the people and deposits it into the bank accounts of the wealthy. I see two very different things.
Guys, could you just stop buying Apple crap? They are just another big company that will do anything to make money, no matter how much they are already making. They don't care about consumers' rights and would probably rather they were done away with. Giving Apple money is just giving the big bully money.
Every company you can buy a smartphone from is "another big company that will do anything to make money, no matter how much they're already making." This is an issue with capitalism, not just inherently Apple. Don't fault people for using the tool that works best for what they're doing.
There are, however, several less-monopolistic companies you can/should consider buying from.
Ones that don’t just run on Google software anyway and still support modern applications? I loved my Windows Phone, but man was it frustrating not having really any third party apps.
I can and will fault them. Not every company you can buy a smartphone from is big. FairPhone exists, Murena exists, and if you look around you'll probably find more.
And even if you absolutely have to buy from a big brand, there's no need to give that money to the richest company on the planet.
You know that you don't have to declare copyright in every comment you make, yeah? All I can think of is the "Tryin' to make a change :-/" SMS signature meme.
I just bought a MacBook because I’ve been trying to do Linux for work but there are some things that just don’t work and I’m not interested in Windows. I’m turning into an Apple bro, someone help me.
It really doesn’t matter… there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Just use what’s more practical or better in any way for you.
That's a cop out. If you make no effort, then of course nothing will change. You can look for brands that try to be ethical like FairPhone or Fair Trade brands. If all you do keep buying from the biggest, baddest brands out there, well, you're part of the problem. They wouldn't be rich without people like you.
There are no “good” brands under capitalism. The issue is not of the moral failing of individual companies. We can’t solve the issues of capitalism by “consuming” right.
You think fairphone have no slave-labour rare-earth metals in them?
Riddle me this: can flawed being create a perfect system?
Also, is your "solution" to living in an evil, capitalistic society being a consumer of the biggest capitalistic brands?
You think fairphone have no slave-labour rare-earth metals in them?
Everything is black and white? There's no in-between? Fairphone is thus as bad as Apple?
It doesn’t matter if they are “bad” or not bro. The issue is the system. And it’s not a matter of morality. I don’t give a fuck if it’s “evil” or “good”. Even in a perfect capitalist world where all companies were “fair”something, we would still be destroying the planet with climate change and exploiting the labour of people in the third-world.
And who cares about “perfect”? I only care about meaningful change that helps not destroy the planet. Buying a fairphone is not it.
The only thing that will help is a fucking revolution. So the BEST thing any of us can do is to radicalise those around us and organize.
The only thing that will help is a fucking revolution. So the BEST thing any of us can do is to radicalise those around us and organize.
First you need to know what kind of a system you'd want. Second, revolution is a big big goal. Small steps.
I only care about meaningful change that helps not destroy the planet. Buying a fairphone is not it.
And buying Apple is? Fairphone is trying to do something good. Their entire goal is to try to do good. Apple is just out here making fat stacks with "good" being more stacks. They pretend they're pro-privacy, pro-climate, pro-whatever, but it's all bullshit.
You are very naive if you think fairphone is trying to “do good”. They are, like every single corporation under capitalism, trying to make a profit. They found a niche and are carving their market share within it. If they could, they would become Apple. If you don’t think so, again, you’re being naive.
kekw, says the dude talking about revolution and overthrowing the capitalist system.
look in the mirror
Cause capitalism was born with the Big Bang and will die with the heat death of the universe right buddy? Lmao.
I think that is a useless mental model. It doesn't help you make decisions except those that lead to revolution. The person you're replying to is trying to point that out. If I want to buy a phone, which should I buy? Your rhetoric says "whichever one will lead to revolution", which really isn't helpful.
I don’t think you understood me. What I mean is “which product do I consume under capitalism” is a useless question. No consumption under capitalism will lead to a better world. Buying from fairphone or apple will make 0 difference to what actually matters.
Revolution is not a state of consumption. And surviving under capitalism won’t make revolution less likely either. So it’s a false dichotomy. Buying apple instead of fairphone won’t make a revolution less likely.
Yes, but you, who I assume follow this mindset, do buy things under capitalism, since you must in order to live. How, then, do you decide?
I buy what I believe will be best for me. I don’t feel bad to buy from x company instead of y. I just buy it and don’t give a fuck.
I am VERY aware that my individual consumption actions will have 0 impact on anything.
You can use alternatives to Apple’s phones, tablets, desktops, headphones; but there is no Macbook alternative. It is just too good for mobile usage. Fortunately it ain’t restricted as iPhone’s.
I hear this all time to time and I just don't understand it.
My 9-year-old Windows laptop does literally everything I need a mobile notebook to do (which unfortunately includes a bunch of software like AutoCAD which just gives a double middle finger to Linux). It's reliable, boots quickly, doesn't frequently bug out, has more than enough battery to never make me stressed and scrambling for outlets, and all these things. It's windows 10 and not signed into an MS account. It can run powershell, python scripts, all those little sugar things that make computers less horrible to use. I'm not forced into any weird proprietary rabbit holes by the OS and have all MS telemetry shut down on it.
If not for bad actors like AASHTO or AutoDesk, I'm quite confident the notebook would be working just as well with something like Mint Linux on it.
What the hell is it that Macbooks are doing that my notebook can't? I just don't get it.
I'm full-time arch user btw but sometimes I need/want to go to office or a place like coffee shop. There I'm using Macbook. My pros are:
- about 10 hours usage
- no fan noise
- fast as f*ck (not as fast as desktops TBH)
- good screen. I can easily see screen in sunny days (I don't know about it's tech but I guess it is OLED or MiniLED)
- and the most important pro to me is: a touch pad that optimized for laptop usage. It has so many shortcuts to use whole system with only touchpad.
There are different laptops that have some of these features, but I have yet to find one that has them all. I hope this situation will improve with ARM laptops.
Well, I certainly don't get 10 hours, more like 5-6, but have also never in my life and hopefully never will need to sit in the same public place for 10 continuous hours using my notebook. God help me, my life is so off the rails if that ever happens that I don't even want to consider it.
The rest of those things my budget notebook does just fine. Maybe if I used these touchpad shortcuts that the Mac offers it would change my life, but I've always massively preferred navigating the OS with the keyboard and have always found the way Mac application windows and taskbars work totally unitiutive and fighty.
On the whole though, even if I accept everything you said at face value, it's still just... not an argument for "there is no alternative". Seems to me my ancient ASUS is a perfectly reasonable alternative, especially considering it was a less than a third the price of the Macbook even when it was new. Plus it's repairable. I can open it up and change out components myself, with just a screwdriver.
I don't sit in front of the computer for 10 hours either :D However, convenience of not carrying a charging cable with me is cool. I think we can agree that the Macbook does some things differently than other laptops. While these features seem useful to me, they may be inconvenient for you.
Macbook has its own unique UX and is not generic like other laptops. When I say "there is no alternative", I actually mean that there is no laptop with Macbook-like usage. Of course, hardware can be better or worse.
If you're developing apps for Mac or making music, I can definitely understand. For sure there are reasons not to go windows and then you're just left with Mac, but many many people just look for excuses - or don't care about budding monopolies. I find fault with that 🤷
My company uses Teams and Outlook, both of which have to be PWA on Linux and they’re terrible in that form. Also, being able to run Logic and Final Cut will be an added bonus. The main reason for the switch is reliability, macOS isn’t an amazing OS for tweaking and personalizing down to the kernel level, but it is great for having an environment to just get stuff done. I’ve worked with numerous macOS devices in the past and have never felt like they are unreliable.
Nah
Google isn't any better. And there aren't a lot phone operating system options you can choose from.
Google isn't better, Android is: it's opensource.
There are not many Android phones that actually let you flex the open source benefits of AOSP. Android as it is packaged on many devices is not open source, and nor are the devices willing to fully let you install what you want. Ironically some of the only choices you have with the highest degree of freedom are from google.
Strange when the party receiving the “commission” gets to dictate the terms of that commission.
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
103 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37443 readers
330 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS