Very likely they might use some common frameworks that are shared between macOS, iOS, and watchOS to design (e.g. SwiftUI) and writing the whole stack for non-Apple platforms simply wouldn't make sense.
3,855 karma · joined April 28, 2015
If I stop responding to your comments it's usually because you aren't worth responding, not because I don't have a counterargument.
Time is precious.
iOS 26.4.2, Safari, sound is on.
I'd love to see an agent doing work, then launching app on iOS sim or Android emu to visually "use" the app to inspect whether things work as expected or not.
Apple simply won't fix it.
Literally everything. The sound is still great and battery is awesome. But I doubt it will last long.
(Just to be clear: I've used it A LOT over the years, and is already worth every penny I spent on it)
I have over-the-ear Momentum 3 and love it, but if APP3 provides better sound quality and better ANC I might consider switching as Momentum 3, while I love it, is bulky, heavy, and started to wear off and break down.
Why? Obviously close-to-zero market. It was unbelievable how those people though those projects would even succeed.
Don't want to use social media? Don't use it. No one can decide for others.
Almost everyone I know use VPNs only to bypass restrictions, not for fear or privacy.
But forcing is never a right thing.
I don't think we should be expecting moral values from any company over a certain size, be it Apple, Google, or anything else. They "care" about privacy as long as they profit from it directly as device/service sales or indirectly with brand value/trust/PR.
2. AFAIK Apple isn't doing anything illegal by pulling out this app. Malicious compliance? Perhaps. Illegal? Nope. If Apple doesn't do this, then it would indeed attract legal issues due to the first point.
An OS should NOT need antivirus, it needs proper sandbox and containerization.
If (as as it is) Apple is still controlling apps via notarizarion/digitally signing apps of and recognizing developers, and if the app is developed for something that would land Apple in legal trouble (e.g. it makes it easy to freely and illegally download music and Apple also has legal contracts with record labels as they have Apple Music, and not only legal but it also affects Apple's own music revenue too) as the app has passed explicit notarization of Apple (in other words: Apple "knowlingly" allowed them and greenlighted them by notarizing the app), wouldn't it cause legal trouble for Apple?
For that, it's the logical behavior for a company like Apple to stop allowing the app.
Again, I'm not supporting it, but I can imagine where it's coming from and that makes sense from a business perspective as torrenting on mobile has almost no legal use cases. We all know you have not installed it to download your favorite Linux distro to your iPhone.
One (a big entity with enough resources) should take this as an opportunity and create a new, third truly open alternative to iOS and Android (no, I'm not talking about an AOSP fork, I'm saying something totally new) and let iOS/Android have their thing as they want, letting consumers decide between the three instead of forcing vendors into ridiculous business decisions like forcefully opening their own platforms for others.
Why not?
"Would?" Google has zero incentive to do that.
I also tried sending a "hello" message anyway, and after it, another completely empty incoming message was added.
Am I missing something obvious?
If there was a hypothetical phone with this hardware with iOS, that would be really nice.
No one can dictate who can watch something or not.