Exactly.
262 karma · joined March 5, 2023
Okay, so what's the point of what you said? For reference, you said:
>Good, switch to it for a couple of years, use multiple vendors and then let everyone know how Android is a viable alternative to iOS.
What, then, is the point of what you said? You seem to believe that Android is not a viable alternative to iOS. What specific actions do you believe Apple should be required to take here?
Sure you can. You can decide which is more important to you: "Having an iPhone" or "Using Spotify on my mobile phone."
"I want Apple to be forced into making the same choices that its competitors made because those competitors' devices are, collectively, a miserable hellscape," isn't the winning argument you seem to think it is.
...and if you "want the blue bubble" you must give up control over your messaging to Apple.
Correct. There is no reason the iPhone cannot be both.
There is also no reason why Apple should be required to make it both simply because that's what a vanishingly small number of vocal malcontents wish for.
The claim wasn't that nobody was sideloading for privacy settings. The claim was "Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies."
>I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws.
Oh, that's a great idea. We should definitely rely on laws alone for this. VC-backed technology firms are well-known for willingly abiding by the spirit of laws—especially privacy laws. They definitely aren't filled with people whose entire job is finding the slimist things they can get away with.
Or—and I'm just spitballing here—we could have both the additional privacy laws and also a competitive marketplace where at least one vendor decides to use privacy as a market differentiator while leaving people free to choose to buy from other vendors with other priorities.
You should have multiple options, but third parties should not be required to provide you with an option that gives you 100% of what you'd like to have.
"I get to choose" does not mean "I get to have a bespoke solution."
1. Epic. 2. Unlike Google, Apple each year pours thousands of hours of developer effort into making it harder for Facebook to track users without their consent. The difference between "what is allowed in the store" and "what is possible on the device" is greater on iOS.
Have you ever paused to consider why your mobile unicorn doesn't exist?
Tell me you haven't read the TOS without telling me you haven't read the TOS.
Some Amazon employees certainly overreacted too quickly by disabling this guy's services, but Amazon certainly has the right to disable an account and discontinue service for any reason not expressly prohibited by law (and this isn't one of them).
I do. And I also realize how much worse it'd be if Apple didn't gate user data behind OS-level user consent dialogs.
Apple isn't telling me that I can't be trusted. Apple is telling me that it's a stupid idea to trust third-party developers with unfettered access to my data, and they're not even a little bit wrong. This has been happening at least since the "Foursquare is uploading and storing every user's contacts" fiasco well over a decade ago.
> Now can the adults use their devices?
Of course. Feel free to bring to market your wonderful headset that allows VC-funded startups to create a never-ending torrent of privacy hellscape diarrhea apps you can enjoy until they implode.
>The Vision Pro does not provide foveated rendering if you do not go through the Apple renderer. There's some extremely vague wording regarding Metal supporting it, without any API documentation out.
That's because the API has yet to be released to developers. Perhaps you can wait until it is to get your mouth all frothy, sunshine.
Hardware company entices consumers to buy more hardware. Film at 11.
>If it were a Surface-like product instead, with full macOS, I'd have bought an iPad in a heartbeat.
Ah yes. The Surface, the device that showcases the appeal of running an OS designed for mouse/keyboard input with a thin veneer of touch support spackled on top. It's amazing Apple isn't sprinting to release a product along those lines.
A restriction for which I am thankful.
>Vision Pro is destined to keep being a toy fully steered by Apple.
I trust Apple a lot more than I trust the "let's figure out how to fingerprint users based on how they scroll and other metrics and use it to sell ads" crowd.
>You can't access eye tracking,
A restriction for which I am thankful.
>so say good bye to foveated rendering.
Vision Pro does foveated rendering.
Good thing Apple isn't marketing it as a replacement for a MacBook then.
[Citation needed]
Yes, that's rather the problem—there isn't just one way to do that, which makes it a portability issue.
He's not saying that monolithic kernels make recovery easier in this case. He's saying that microkernels don't make these failures easier to recover from in practice, so you may as well take the performance gains that you will get from the monolithic kernel instead of giving up those gains for theoretical recoverability advantages that you won't actually usually see in practice.
By who?
The iPad introduction explicitly presented the iPad as a complementary device situated between the smartphone and the laptop.
It's justified if people pay it.
>Nowadays I can buy a miniPC with a Ryzen5 and 32GB of RAM for around 400€, but the cheapest Mac mini nowadays sells for over 700€ and comes with 8GB of RAM and an absurd 256GB SSD.
So what's the problem?
If you like running Linux on your Ryzen5 miniPC with 32GB of RAM for 400€, you're more than free to do that. Apple's not stopping you.
This also puts it in last place.
I do not doubt that it also happens to white people. The point is that it happens to white people at a disproportionately lower rate than it does to non-white people.
Over the past 25 years, I've been pulled over maybe a dozen times or so for various things (speeding, headlight out), etc.
Not once have I turned off the engine. Not once have I been instructed—or even asked—to turn off the engine.
I'm white, but you probably guessed that already.
Facebook is the company that almost single-handedly gutted the media industry over the past ten years with such smash hits as "just post all of your news stories directly on Facebook" and "pivot to video based on these absolutely fabricated numbers!" so I suppose he does indeed have some insight on what makes a horrific partner.
Okay, now come up with a definition of "use" that effectively eliminates squatting-for-profit that doesn't also eliminate legitimate uses for having multiple domains that don't look like they're "being used"