I prefer my clothes hand woven but it's so hard to find artisanal weavers these days. And the rate they want! Outrageous when other clothes cost next to nothing.
Even if it's a foregone conclusion that self-driving cars will take over, continuing to support human drivers in the meantime smoothens the transition for them.
I'm of the opinion that Apple will never natively allow unmanaged code outside macOS due to app store revenue. I mean if the AVP fails it would be a huge write down but if it wins and allows people to circumvent the Apple tax that's still a fail for the company.
I know. This is the real reason, not the purported "security issues". Apple just wants to sell their hugely expensive cake and eat it. The only reason that macOS is not locked down is historical. Because it's always been open and people would be screaming if they took it away.
It's a shame as a user. I paid for the device, I should decide what happens on it. Apple doesn't have an innate right to store revenue.
You could still do enforcement through legal rather than technical means, though.
Disallow installing apps from outside the App Store, provide no system UI to do so. Prohibit apps from being app stores themselves or running code that didn't pass app review, with exceptions for dev tools etc. Make apps able to escape the sandbox, at least in some ways.
Even if an app somehow sneaks past app review and gives users unfettered access to their devices, it can't ever get too many users. If it's unpopular, it's not a concern to Apple, if it becomes popular, Apple will know about it and can levy very heavy contractual fines on the dev.
It's worth mentioning none of these concerns affected Android / Google Play, even though it's fairly easy to sideload and even install custom app stores there.
The only phones that come with alternative stores are from Chinese manufacturers, which isn't going to be an issue for Apple as the operating system isn't open source.
The OPs main point was that the existence of sideloading or third-party app stores hasn't led to major security issues. And apps still have to comply with the sandboxing.
Your ideas are explicitly illegal in the EU and, if the law ever passes, would be illegal in the US too. Frankly I think we are past having to figure out ways for Apple to tax software usage in all circumstances, just wait for the law to catch up and it's all moot. In fact, just the Epic case seeks to rewrite what amounts to 70% of App Store spending: gacha games being able to link to their own billing options.
> The legislation aims to prevent Big Tech companies from "self-preferencing" their own products at the expense of competitors.[3] Under AICO, covered platforms would be forbidden from disadvantaging other companies' products or services.
I think AI will make every complicated process much more accessible as you can interact with a, rounds to free, teacher that can explain each piece in the appropriate level of detail for your skill level.
I think the difference is everyone knew market penetration on cell phones would be close to 90%. This may be better than the Quest but is it going to take AR/VR mainstream? Seems iffy. In which case drawbacks may never get ironed out.
Presumably they're looking at comparable shoppers before and after one starts Ozempic during the same time period. Or are you implying people are starting Ozempic to avoid buying food?
I’d suspect it has something to do with signing up for an Ozempic discount card (which many people did / still do). Pretty sure they’re allowed to sell that data (their privacy policy seems to allow as much).
I use an (awkwardly) pocketable keyboard as my daily driver. It's cool to be able to do real tasks but also not really a big enough value add to always keep with me.
