It's a very easy workaround. But there's also Dropbox, etc.
If someone doesn't want to transmit files through Apple's servers, suggesting to use Dropbox instead is rather lame. Apart from fears that companies could intentionally cheat on you and your privacy, sharing files through iTunes is _intended_ not to be shared with others, while DropBox is _intended_ to be shared, so it is more likely that hackers might be able to "share" your data.
Now seriously, while I need a password that cannot be cracked when it turns up in a 10 million password collection that hackers have "liberated", any celebrity trying to protect things that they _really_ don't want to be seen needs a password that cannot be cracked by someone who investigates their lives, finds all the schools they have been to, the names of all pets they owned, and so on and so on.
I have passwords that resist random or dictionary attacks, but that could be cracked if someone investigated my life very thoroughly. That's fine because no hacker does that. Not if I was a celebrity.
It used to be that Apple, was a bad player in this area by unnecessary collecting data.
Could you give some examples of that? Google is a company whose sole purpose is to collect data about you and hire it out to advertisers. Apple's purpose is to make devices and sell them to end users.
Google was the company who quite accidentally added code to their ads when running on a Microsoft browser that went around the user's privacy settings, and quite accidentally added different code when running on Safari that went around the Safari user's privacy settings.
But when it's internationally it's going to take so long for it to be investigated that the statute of limitation will kill it before it's coming to court. It may even happen on federal level as it's often not considered to be a prioritized issue.
Statute of limitations usually doesn't work if the case is being investigated, and definitely not if it is an ongoing matter. The idea is that it is unfair if you are accused ten years after something happened and you have no idea how to defend yourself; that doesn't apply if you have been harassing someone for years.
My suggestion: A law that first, Mr. X should always have completely unrestricted rights to access any information about any accounts created in the name of X (after going through appropriate steps to identify himself, and with protection against 10,000 Joe Smith's accessing each other's accounts. But in this case, Matthew Herrick should, after showing his passport and an affidavit of his employer that he is the only Matthew Herrick working at that restaurant, complete rights to any account of anyone claiming to be Matthew Herrick working at this restaurant.
And the second step, a law that signing up requires giving information that identifies the person signing up - with laws protecting this information unless the supposed owner (Matthew Herrick in this case) demands that the information will be made available.
I bet there are some guys here with clever ideas to make this work.
Qualcomm isnâ(TM)t shutting down Apple sales in Europe. In Germany it is very easy to get a preliminary injunction which Qualcomm did - the price is that Qualcomm had to put $1.5bn into escrow to pay Appleâ(TM)s damages when this preliminary injunction finally fails. Apple cannot sell their cheaper phones in Apple Stores in Germany, but can continue selling in other stores, and Qualcomm quite likely will have to pay any damages caused to Apple through this.
Itâ(TM)s NOT against the AppStore rules at all. The AppStore rules say: IF you purchase through the app, it must go through the AppStore. And Netflix cannot advertise other payment methods in the app. As long as users find the Netflix website without help through the app and pay there, this is absolutely within the rules.
I have no idea what their app looks like, but I assume it starts with a page where you enter your Netflix username and password, and thatâ(TM)s fine. If thereâ(TM)s a button âoego to the Netflix website to payâ it will be removed from the store. And if there was a button âoeSubscribe through iTunesâ, that button has just been removed by Netflix. Absolutely fine according to the AppStore rules.
Apple has a long standing tradition that they have the same terms for everyone. No matter how big or small you are. It started with the iTunes Store where Apple negotiated term with the five biggest record companies, and then they told everyone âoethese are the terms, and we take records from any record company accepting these terms, no better and no worse than the big five, and no negotiationsâ.
Netflix agreed to the App Store rules, and the still do. Obviously itâ(TM)s up to them to write the app to be most beneficial to Netflix, as long as they agree to the AppStore rules.
You have a subscription through Netflixâ(TM) website and had one for ten years. Unless Netflix says you canâ(TM)t use it with their iIS app, it will just work and you pay nothing extra. However, if you paid for a subscription through the iOS app, then Netflix (not you) paid 15% to Apple. Similar if you paid through a Google app, not through the website.
The only change is that Netflix is removing your ability to go through the iOS app.
The U.K. government has plans that you need to supply a passport number soon to watch porn. What an opportunity: 5 million passport numbers that you can sell one each to five million privacy-conscious Brits who donâ(TM)t want their porn habits leaked.
EE (the first one I checked) has unlimited calls, unlimited messages, and 60GB data per month for £30 per month. Yes, mobile data is one area where it looks like American providers are absolutely ripping you off.
Also, contracts usually have phone and service separate, so when your phone is paid off you stop paying for your phone as long as you keep your old phone.
Increasing prices even further would kill the 1-2 year upgrade cycle they try to push everyone into.
Who is 'they'? Not Apple. My current iPhone is about four years old. I'll replace it when it stops working. It just got a brand new original Apple battery for £25.
Apple has actually worked _against_ pushing people into upgrades by releasing 6/6s, 7/7s 8/8s where each model was indistinguishable from the previous one unless you had a very, very close look, so your friends couldn't say "ok look, that poor guy is using an old phone".
How fuckin' thin does a phone have to be? The problem is not a few mm of thickness these days; it's that phone makers are making the phone too wide and tall to fit in a pocket. Thickness is just an excuse used by marketing droids to remove features.
Another fine example of prejudiced opinion versus reality. Since the iPhone 6, iPhones have become thicker with every generation.
There's nothing available from Apple that I can buy. I do consulting work that requires me to be able to remove the SSD.
That's a problem that you share with how many people? And I suppose you are paid well for your consulting work, so you can easily afford to buy a new MacBook for it, do your consulting work, let them wipe the hard drive, and sell it on eBay. Then you add the money you lost to the bill.
Here's the reality: Apple hasn't increased any iPhone prices whatsoever.
The cheapest models are gone. The iPhone 7 to iPhone 8s+ have all become cheaper, without exception. The iPhone X has been replaced with an improved model for the same price. And there are two new models, one at a top end price, one considerably lower.
The highest prices are all for storage options that were not available before.
The Mac Pro drives me crazy. Every time I start Word, it yells at me to upgrade my OS. I can't upgrade my OS. I have to get a new machine. The current Mac Pro is garbage. The new Mac Pro probably will be as well. And supremely over priced.
You have an 11 year old Mac Pro, and you are complaining that it didn't last? Seriously?
If you are using an 11 year old Mac Pro, then you don't need a new one. A midrange iMac will make you sooo happy.
I'm an iOS developer and a longtime Apple fan, but I'm having trouble finding a reason to upgrade from my iPhone 6S (even though Apple's offering me $200 in trade-in value for it).
I think you mean that as a critique, but really that's the best recommendation you could make for buying Apple products.
You can take your $2800 loaded iPad and bend it easily with your hands, among other flaws. I wouldn't even expect that from a $100 tablet.
I recommend you buy a brick for less than $1 if you want something unbendable.
The price of that iPad is high because it comes with a shitload of memory. The price for the most expensive iPad has changed because there was no iPad with that much memory for sale. And only a total idiot would try if they can bend a device they paid $2,800 for with their hands. Are you a total idiot? Do you need a terabyte of storage? If neither, shut up.
Prior to Apple Music streaming existing, you could buy a Spotify subscription via iTunes and it cost either $1 or $2 (I donÃ(TM)t recall exactly) more than buying from Spotify directly.
Spotify is of course allowed to have different prices, depending on where you subscribe.
"Apple pulls Netflix from App Store; shifts focus to Apple original paid programming"
There are two possibilities: Netflix followed the App Store rules, or they didn't. If they didn't follow the App Store rules (which is unlikely), they will be pulled.
The App Store rules are quite simple: If you pay through the app, you have to pay through the App Store. You cannot have a link in your app that leads you to a different payment method. You can have a website with different payment methods, that's absolutely fine, but you cannot link to it from the app.
If users cannot figure out how to pay Netflix, those users will be lost as customers.
The whole Brexit debacle is being handled by people that are bungling it purely out of spite. The UK is to the EU as the US is to NATO - pay for everything all the time but get bullied by your only reason and biggest dependent - Germany
Talk about deluded. The Brexit negotiations were done by professionals on the EU side and by unprepared amateurs on the UK side - no wonder they got their ass handed to them. And what you call "spite" and "being bullied" should have been the simple realisation that the EU negotiators act in the best interest of their member states - and the UK isn't one.
Hey dude, your a dumb ass, this is not innovation, but easy shit any coder could do even in the 80s.
This is a misunderstanding. There is no patent on the code. There is a patent on the action. And there are many things that get patented that _could_ have been done in the 80s, but nobody came up with the idea of doing it.
Of course it is Qualcomm's bad luck that today, with developers used to lots of graphics effects, any decent developer can on the spot replace this apparently patented animation with one that isn't patented out of the million possible animations. Or at least not patented by Qualcomm.
There is one thing wrong with your post: There _were_ companies that had licensed MacOS (like PowerComputing), and they were a big problem for Apple that Steve Jobs got rid off when he returned to Apple.
Psystar, on the other hand, was just two chancers with no license to install MacOS X on their computers at all. They sold less than 1,000 computers. They get hit with $30,000 for copyright infringement (statutory damages for copying ONE work, MacOS X - if I make illegal copies of a CD with 15 rubbish songs, that's 15 songs, so I can be charged 15 times as much), and $2,500 per computer sold for DMCA violation. Apple never saw a penny of this, nor did Psystar's lawyers ever paid. Because they managed to sell a few computers with MacOS X installed, but they didn't manage to make a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a very easy workaround. But there's also Dropbox, etc.
If someone doesn't want to transmit files through Apple's servers, suggesting to use Dropbox instead is rather lame. Apart from fears that companies could intentionally cheat on you and your privacy, sharing files through iTunes is _intended_ not to be shared with others, while DropBox is _intended_ to be shared, so it is more likely that hackers might be able to "share" your data.
Celebrities should use 2-factor.
Now seriously, while I need a password that cannot be cracked when it turns up in a 10 million password collection that hackers have "liberated", any celebrity trying to protect things that they _really_ don't want to be seen needs a password that cannot be cracked by someone who investigates their lives, finds all the schools they have been to, the names of all pets they owned, and so on and so on.
I have passwords that resist random or dictionary attacks, but that could be cracked if someone investigated my life very thoroughly. That's fine because no hacker does that. Not if I was a celebrity.
It used to be that Apple, was a bad player in this area by unnecessary collecting data.
Could you give some examples of that? Google is a company whose sole purpose is to collect data about you and hire it out to advertisers. Apple's purpose is to make devices and sell them to end users.
Google was the company who quite accidentally added code to their ads when running on a Microsoft browser that went around the user's privacy settings, and quite accidentally added different code when running on Safari that went around the Safari user's privacy settings.
But when it's internationally it's going to take so long for it to be investigated that the statute of limitation will kill it before it's coming to court. It may even happen on federal level as it's often not considered to be a prioritized issue.
Statute of limitations usually doesn't work if the case is being investigated, and definitely not if it is an ongoing matter. The idea is that it is unfair if you are accused ten years after something happened and you have no idea how to defend yourself; that doesn't apply if you have been harassing someone for years.
My suggestion: A law that first, Mr. X should always have completely unrestricted rights to access any information about any accounts created in the name of X (after going through appropriate steps to identify himself, and with protection against 10,000 Joe Smith's accessing each other's accounts. But in this case, Matthew Herrick should, after showing his passport and an affidavit of his employer that he is the only Matthew Herrick working at that restaurant, complete rights to any account of anyone claiming to be Matthew Herrick working at this restaurant.
And the second step, a law that signing up requires giving information that identifies the person signing up - with laws protecting this information unless the supposed owner (Matthew Herrick in this case) demands that the information will be made available.
I bet there are some guys here with clever ideas to make this work.
Qualcomm isnâ(TM)t shutting down Apple sales in Europe. In Germany it is very easy to get a preliminary injunction which Qualcomm did - the price is that Qualcomm had to put $1.5bn into escrow to pay Appleâ(TM)s damages when this preliminary injunction finally fails. Apple cannot sell their cheaper phones in Apple Stores in Germany, but can continue selling in other stores, and Qualcomm quite likely will have to pay any damages caused to Apple through this.
Itâ(TM)s NOT against the AppStore rules at all. The AppStore rules say: IF you purchase through the app, it must go through the AppStore. And Netflix cannot advertise other payment methods in the app. As long as users find the Netflix website without help through the app and pay there, this is absolutely within the rules.
I have no idea what their app looks like, but I assume it starts with a page where you enter your Netflix username and password, and thatâ(TM)s fine. If thereâ(TM)s a button âoego to the Netflix website to payâ it will be removed from the store. And if there was a button âoeSubscribe through iTunesâ, that button has just been removed by Netflix. Absolutely fine according to the AppStore rules.
Apple has a long standing tradition that they have the same terms for everyone. No matter how big or small you are. It started with the iTunes Store where Apple negotiated term with the five biggest record companies, and then they told everyone âoethese are the terms, and we take records from any record company accepting these terms, no better and no worse than the big five, and no negotiationsâ.
Netflix agreed to the App Store rules, and the still do. Obviously itâ(TM)s up to them to write the app to be most beneficial to Netflix, as long as they agree to the AppStore rules.
You donâ(TM)t pay extra.
You have a subscription through Netflixâ(TM) website and had one for ten years. Unless Netflix says you canâ(TM)t use it with their iIS app, it will just work and you pay nothing extra. However, if you paid for a subscription through the iOS app, then Netflix (not you) paid 15% to Apple. Similar if you paid through a Google app, not through the website.
The only change is that Netflix is removing your ability to go through the iOS app.
The U.K. government has plans that you need to supply a passport number soon to watch porn. What an opportunity: 5 million passport numbers that you can sell one each to five million privacy-conscious Brits who donâ(TM)t want their porn habits leaked.
EE (the first one I checked) has unlimited calls, unlimited messages, and 60GB data per month for £30 per month. Yes, mobile data is one area where it looks like American providers are absolutely ripping you off. Also, contracts usually have phone and service separate, so when your phone is paid off you stop paying for your phone as long as you keep your old phone.
Increasing prices even further would kill the 1-2 year upgrade cycle they try to push everyone into.
Who is 'they'? Not Apple. My current iPhone is about four years old. I'll replace it when it stops working. It just got a brand new original Apple battery for £25.
Apple has actually worked _against_ pushing people into upgrades by releasing 6/6s, 7/7s 8/8s where each model was indistinguishable from the previous one unless you had a very, very close look, so your friends couldn't say "ok look, that poor guy is using an old phone".
How fuckin' thin does a phone have to be? The problem is not a few mm of thickness these days; it's that phone makers are making the phone too wide and tall to fit in a pocket. Thickness is just an excuse used by marketing droids to remove features.
Another fine example of prejudiced opinion versus reality. Since the iPhone 6, iPhones have become thicker with every generation.
There's nothing available from Apple that I can buy. I do consulting work that requires me to be able to remove the SSD.
That's a problem that you share with how many people? And I suppose you are paid well for your consulting work, so you can easily afford to buy a new MacBook for it, do your consulting work, let them wipe the hard drive, and sell it on eBay. Then you add the money you lost to the bill.
Here's the reality: Apple hasn't increased any iPhone prices whatsoever.
The cheapest models are gone. The iPhone 7 to iPhone 8s+ have all become cheaper, without exception. The iPhone X has been replaced with an improved model for the same price. And there are two new models, one at a top end price, one considerably lower.
The highest prices are all for storage options that were not available before.
The Mac Pro drives me crazy. Every time I start Word, it yells at me to upgrade my OS. I can't upgrade my OS. I have to get a new machine. The current Mac Pro is garbage. The new Mac Pro probably will be as well. And supremely over priced.
You have an 11 year old Mac Pro, and you are complaining that it didn't last? Seriously?
If you are using an 11 year old Mac Pro, then you don't need a new one. A midrange iMac will make you sooo happy.
I'm an iOS developer and a longtime Apple fan, but I'm having trouble finding a reason to upgrade from my iPhone 6S (even though Apple's offering me $200 in trade-in value for it).
I think you mean that as a critique, but really that's the best recommendation you could make for buying Apple products.
You can take your $2800 loaded iPad and bend it easily with your hands, among other flaws. I wouldn't even expect that from a $100 tablet.
I recommend you buy a brick for less than $1 if you want something unbendable.
The price of that iPad is high because it comes with a shitload of memory. The price for the most expensive iPad has changed because there was no iPad with that much memory for sale. And only a total idiot would try if they can bend a device they paid $2,800 for with their hands. Are you a total idiot? Do you need a terabyte of storage? If neither, shut up.
Prior to Apple Music streaming existing, you could buy a Spotify subscription via iTunes and it cost either $1 or $2 (I donÃ(TM)t recall exactly) more than buying from Spotify directly.
Spotify is of course allowed to have different prices, depending on where you subscribe.
"Apple pulls Netflix from App Store; shifts focus to Apple original paid programming"
There are two possibilities: Netflix followed the App Store rules, or they didn't. If they didn't follow the App Store rules (which is unlikely), they will be pulled.
The App Store rules are quite simple: If you pay through the app, you have to pay through the App Store. You cannot have a link in your app that leads you to a different payment method. You can have a website with different payment methods, that's absolutely fine, but you cannot link to it from the app.
If users cannot figure out how to pay Netflix, those users will be lost as customers.
Complete failure. Possibly because of the nightmarish idiotic posters that they had to promote this. Made me want to throw up.
The whole Brexit debacle is being handled by people that are bungling it purely out of spite. The UK is to the EU as the US is to NATO - pay for everything all the time but get bullied by your only reason and biggest dependent - Germany
Talk about deluded. The Brexit negotiations were done by professionals on the EU side and by unprepared amateurs on the UK side - no wonder they got their ass handed to them. And what you call "spite" and "being bullied" should have been the simple realisation that the EU negotiators act in the best interest of their member states - and the UK isn't one.
Thanks - I can use that as one of the primes in my 82 billion bit private key - lets see the NSA crack that!
They will have no problem cracking that at all, because that prime number will be _known_.
Hey dude, your a dumb ass, this is not innovation, but easy shit any coder could do even in the 80s.
This is a misunderstanding. There is no patent on the code. There is a patent on the action. And there are many things that get patented that _could_ have been done in the 80s, but nobody came up with the idea of doing it.
Of course it is Qualcomm's bad luck that today, with developers used to lots of graphics effects, any decent developer can on the spot replace this apparently patented animation with one that isn't patented out of the million possible animations. Or at least not patented by Qualcomm.
There is one thing wrong with your post: There _were_ companies that had licensed MacOS (like PowerComputing), and they were a big problem for Apple that Steve Jobs got rid off when he returned to Apple.
Psystar, on the other hand, was just two chancers with no license to install MacOS X on their computers at all. They sold less than 1,000 computers. They get hit with $30,000 for copyright infringement (statutory damages for copying ONE work, MacOS X - if I make illegal copies of a CD with 15 rubbish songs, that's 15 songs, so I can be charged 15 times as much), and $2,500 per computer sold for DMCA violation. Apple never saw a penny of this, nor did Psystar's lawyers ever paid. Because they managed to sell a few computers with MacOS X installed, but they didn't manage to make a profit.