A few years ago I may have paid a few dollars to have some QR code stickers printed with links to a website discussing how insecure scanning a QR code in the wild is. I may also have put them over the top of a few "scan here for X" things I found in the wild.
you're comparing quotes about two different things.
"Today, we’re announcing that there are more than 1 billion monthly active viewers of podcast content on YouTube."
vs
"Last year, viewers watched over 400M hours of podcasts monthly on living room devices."
You can't do any meaningful maths with these two figures.
open standards like iMessage and Facetime, right?
Apple good. Google bad. I love my chosen corporate god and foresake all others.
I have read a few places that it also only applies to Pixel phones sold by Verizon
this time it's for real
No, the EU is saying that Apple's decision not to release in the EU is an admission by Apple that their product is anticompetitive
I've been following this one and I see a lot of younger people compare it to the first gen iPhone, but I think the Newton is a better example. The hardware just wasn't ready to deliver the product in a way that people would make part of their daily lives.
Maybe you don't remember the original iPhone. It was also a clusterf**k of unreadiness. Zero app support beyond what came on the device, no copy and paste support, no multitasking....
But the iPhone *did* have a pretty decent web browser. It was not the first browser on a mobile device, but it was the first one that wasn't painful to use. Being able to access web content while out and about was a compelling use that other devices didn't offer.
I don't see a similarly compelling use for Apple's headset (yet?)
This is already quite popular on the Quest headsets. Not exactly sexbots but a range of sex toys that sync up to the 3d porn videos
I'm not familiar with the details of the criteria. It seems more important to note that iPhone and Android phones *both* meet the criteria and *both* must make changes to comply with the law.
The EU law applies to all corporations that have a significant market share, as defined by some criteria they came up with. Apple meets the criteria which is why they must follow the law. Android also must follow the exact same law. There won't be as many changes on the Android side since Android already meets many of the criteria.
No one has suggested punishing Apple for being successful. You can relax about that, this is about Apple being anti-consumer.
But what about when the overwhelming majority of the Affected Consumers, i.e., Apple Users, would actually prefer that things stay just the way they are?
Are there studies or surveys that indicate this is true? If the EU government is indeed acting against the will of their populace, that's an important factor.
Apple is just trying to protect you from the danger of playing games without microtransactions or monthly subscriptions. It's for your own good.
No one has suggested punishing Apple for being successful. You can relax about that, this is about Apple being anti-consumer.
The difference between reality and unreality is that reality has so little to recommend it. -- Allan Sherman
