- This topic has 84 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 months, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Why isn’t their “ecosystem” model illegal? Shouldn’t selling a product that only works if you buy another product from the same company be a crime? Shouldn’t holding people’s personal data inside an unnecessary ecosystem be a crime? Isn’t it anticompetitive to force people to buy a product that isn’t really even all that great on its own just because they already bought all your other stuff?
-
Uhm, why should it be illegal? Just don’t buy Apple products then
-
>holding people’s data hostage shouldn’t be illegal
>anticompetitive behavior shouldn’t be illegal
>forcing people to buy substandard products simply because they bought other substandard products shouldn’t be illegal
the state of mactoddlers.-
GOVERN ME HARDER
-
>yes daddy keep enslaving me and freaking me over with zero accountability i’m your obedient scrote
-
Nobody is forcing you to buy Apple shit you government boot licker scrotebrain
-
They are going to keep doing it as long as scrotebrains keep buying their products.
"No one’s asking you to buy their products!"
OK but first of all, yes they are. They are literally asking you to buy their products. That’s what advertisement is.
And also, people who buy their products are scrotebrained. Taking advantage of scrotebrains is moral to a certain degree, but should they ever decide to stop being scrotebrained and buy something else, they’re bonked and that’s the problem.-
So, you think the government should control corporations?
-
scrotebrained corposcrote
-
fuck you scrote
-
-
Yes. Would you rather corporations control the government?
See
. It’s not about whether or not you are literally being forced to buy their products at gunpoint. That’s not the point. The focus is their malicious practices that you are subjected to if you DO choose to buy them. Don’t you think if you choose to buy Apple products you should also have the choice to stop using them and buy something else if you decide you don’t like them after all?
-
>Yes. Would you rather corporations control the government?
what about none?-
So you’d rather giant conglomerates just wreak havoc on the entire world with no one to put them in check? Why even bother having laws in the first place? Let’s just descend into anarchy together. Legalize murder and child rape.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
>GOVERN ME HARDER
>but, like, with Apple instead of the actual government -
In this case, it would be more like "FREE ME FROM CORPORATE SLAVERY" y’know? Not all government is fundamentally bad. God I hate libertarians so much. "Hurr why can’t I sell meth to kids??? Gvmt sux ;((("
-
NOBODY
FORCES
YOU
TO
BUY
APPLE
PRODUCTS
There’s nothing justifies government regulations in this case. Check Google example and see how governments can ignore anti trust laws. It’s easy to escape from all Apple shit, but it does not apply for Google. Are you freaking scrotebrained? You can use most Apple products without using anything else without any problems.-
NOBODY
FORCES
YOU
TO
FORNICATE
There’s nothing that justifies government regulations. Spend 22+ years in school, 18 of them compulsory, then go through internships, then you can marry only to get no fault divorced.
-
-
-
-
No one forced you to buy from Apple in the first place.
-
That’s like arguing that pyramid schemes should be legal because no one asked you to get involved in the first place. These dynamics are considered abusive for a reason.
-
-
-
…that’s two posts each on average. you realize you’re quoting people who are literally arguing with each other, right? brainlet.
-
Now it’s 23/8, still the IP count did not change. So, it’s all (You)
-
>t. what is discussion?
people will typically write more than one post in a thread, that’s how this works. it’s not surprising at all, or at least it shouldn’t be.-
His samescroteging is so freaking obvious, anon.
-
-
-
-
-
You can take out your data through official apps.
Apple actually is pretty nice when it comes to standards, even their Notes app uses a standard protocol, while none other does this.
Look at Google who will ACTUALLY hold your data hostage, if you want to take your photos out, they intentionally fuck up EXIF data for you to prevent you from ever stopping Google Photos.
-
-
-
It’s okay if a company refuses to support some stuff. What should be illegal is withholding source code and intentionally hindering interoperability.
-
freaking freetards. Gimme. Gimme. Gimme. Bet you’ve never created anything anyone would want to buy. Try to invent or engineer something and see what it costs to do it properly. Still want to give it away?
-
The reason withholding source code is immoral is because you literally don’t know what’s going on in your own computer unless the company that makes that computer tells you.
And even then, they could totally be lying. So you never really know. Don’t you think that’s kind of a vulnerability?-
>you literally don’t know what’s going on in your own computer unless the company that makes that computer tells you
You know what’s going on your own computer nevertheless your program running is open source or not because your CPU is going to run some kind of machine code AND this code can be turn back to C code. Cope harder freetard, reverse engineering is a thing.-
>"having to reverse engineer your own shit just to know you’re not being spied on is better than not having to reverse engineer your shit to know you’re not being spied on"
>and yet has the audacity to tell others to cope harder
-
-
-
>Still want to give it away?
Yes. I would want the buyers to actually get their money’s worth. I would also love to see them make my product interact with other things in ways I had not foreseen. Why make toys when you can make hardware?
-
-
-
They are going to keep doing it as long as scrotebrains keep buying their products.
-
This. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy freaking Apple products. You’re annoyed by Apple? Then don’t buy their products. Asking government to ban more shit is scrotebrained. Regulations suck and do not work. See: Google monopoly
-
-
> Shouldn’t selling a product that only works if you buy another product from the same company
many people only own iphone or only own macbook what exactly are you talking about.-
You try setting up an Apple Watch without first owning an iPhone and get back to me on that
-
So, don’t buy an Apple Watch if you don’t own an iPhone in the first place?
-
Alternatively, Apple could just make the Apple Watch work with other devices or on its own so that that way you could buy a really nice smartwatch without having to own other shit just for it.
-
Yes, but what should be illegal here and why? You can buy a Galaxy Watch or any other smart watch in the market.
-
>Yes, but what should be illegal here
The anticompetitive practices.
>and why?
Because anticompetitive practices are malicious and counterproductive for the type of economy we’ve developed.
>You can buy a Galaxy Watch or any other smart watch in the market.
Yes, but, again, that’s not the point. You’re not a great listener, are you?
What valid reason does Apple have to lock the Apple Watch into exclusive iPhone-woke af operation other than raking in the coins? -
why is it that a galaxy watch works just fine as a standalone product, in fact literally every other smart watch does, but apple’s watch specifically ONLY functions if you have an iPhone so that if you decide you want an Android phone you have to throw away the watch as well?
-
-
-
-
-
-
I mean, I use a Macbook Pro and an iPhone 12 Mini but I don’t really use any Apple service, so not sure what you mean.
I use Nextcloud for cloud backup (with Mountain Duck to sync the files on my laptop). MacOS and iOS also natively support CardDAV and CalDAV so my contacts, calendars and reminders are synced through Nextcloud (in the native MacOS and iOS apps). The Nextcloud app on iOS does automatic photo backup so no need for iCloud Photos either. I use Startmail for email, which I synced in the native email clients as well.
If I decide to get an Android phone or another laptop with Linux, I’m not going to lose anything except Airdrop, which is pretty convenient but can easily enough be replaced by network sharing.-
-
Next level cope. Imagine being an anti- or pro- cultist. The fact is yeah, Apple product will try to convince you to use the Apple ecosystem, but if you choose not to, they actually comply better than most other brands. Android doesn’t even support CardDAV and CalDAV, which is a freaking joke, nor does Windows.
-
where is the cope?
-
I explained in details why you were wrong and all you could replay was "lol didn’t ask". You’re a schizo cultist. Don’t use Apple products if you don’t want to, but when you’re saying false shit out of your ass, you just come across as an idiot.
-
But I wasn’t the OP
-
Don’t lie, this whole thread is just you and me bucko.
-
-
-
-
-
cope
-
-
-
The GPL should be state-mandated
-
Well bicycle companies do the same, so do car manufactures, ikea, etc… Who decides what components are the *standard*? Why should android switch to lightning cable?
-
>Well bicycle companies do the same, so do car manufactures, ikea, etc…
The fact that other bad companies do similar bad things doesn’t justify the ethics of doing it.
>Who decides what components are the *standard*?
The consumer.
>Why should android switch to lightning cable?
No one said they should. Actually, most people are advocating the exact opposite because Lightning is a proprietary standard and USB-C is open.-
>The consumer.
In this case, the corporations have already won.The consumer continues to buy Apple, thereby accepting the standards they use.
-
>The consumer continues to buy Apple
Because they’re literally forced to, that’s the problem. Apple is under no pressure to adopt open standards simply because they’re not worried people will leave.
They’re not worried people will leave because no one has a choice. That’s what should be illegal. It’s anticompetitive.-
>Because they’re literally forced to
No they are not, they can buy any android phone>Apple is under no pressure to adopt open standards simply because they’re not worried people will leave.
then the consumers have decided, it is acceptable-
>No they are not, they can buy any android phone
Sure. As long as they leave behind pretty much all the data they’ve poured into their iPhone and trash all the other expensive hardware that’s compatible with the iPhone as well. You get rid of your iPhone and you also have to get rid of your AirPods, Apple Watch, Apple TV, whateverthefuckelse, etc. This decreases the likelihood of them actually making that jump. They are being held hostage. Switching away from Apple’s products would have negative effects on them not because their products are superior but because of deliberate retaliative efforts taken by Apple to prevent them from doing so.
Do you see where I’m going with this?Good for you, but you are not everyone. The fact that you haven’t been harmed by Apple’s anticompetitive practices doesn’t mean no one else has.
-
>The fact that you haven’t been harmed by Apple’s anticompetitive practices doesn’t mean no one else has.
Who has actively been harmed by that?-
Everyone who has ever complained about wanting to stop using Apple’s products but been unable to because they got caught in their loop.
>"Well, it was known from the beginning that I’m a rapist, your honor. She still decided to go on a date with me anyway, honestly she should’ve seen it coming from a mile away."
>"Oh wow. Yeah you’re right, case dismissed."
>*bangs gavel*
Gee, I didn’t know the precedent of unethical behavior directly invalidates the unethical nature of it lol-
>Everyone who has ever complained about wanting to stop using Apple’s products but been unable to because they got caught in their loop.
To me that sounds like a scrotebrain.
We should ban unhealthy food and alcohol first.-
>To me that sounds like a scrotebrain.
See>Taking advantage of scrotebrains is moral to a certain degree, but should they ever decide to stop being scrotebrained and buy something else, they’re bonked and that’s the problem.
-
No matter how much you repeat your arguments, Apple is still one of the least harmful offenders looking at all global megacorps.
If we had to regulate this there would be hundreds that I would take on first.
You’re just too focused on computers because you live in your own little bubble. -
>No matter how much you repeat your arguments,
I’m only repeating them because you keep repeating your own talking points while also refusing to address mine.
>Apple is still one of the least harmful offenders looking at all global megacorps.
LMAO. LMFAO.
How much did they pay you to say that?
>If we had to regulate this there would be hundreds that I would take on first.
That’s fine, as long as Apple is included on that list.
>You’re just too focused on computers because you live in your own little bubble.
I’m focused on computers because this is the technology board. -
-
>How is Apple actively harming users if we ignore the biggest way they’re actively harming users, the one way that just so happens to be the whole point of the thread?
>Are they literally going around, injecting people with AIDS? No? Exactly. Have a seat hunty.
>*z-formation snaps and sashays away* -
Okay so you have zero arguments and just go back to infantile derogatory greentexting.
Hardly surprising. -
Your argument is scrotebrained and I’m exemplifying that by highlighting how scrotebrained it truly is.
You’re asking me to list ways Apple is harming consumers external to the main concern of this entire thread. That’s scrotebrained. I’m going to mock you for being scrotebrained if you’re being scrotebrained. -
>Apple is still one of the least harmful offenders looking at all global megacorps.
lol tell another one
-
-
-
-
well, it was well known from the beginning that Apple has no open standards. If you bought all these iProducts you knew exactly what you will get yourself into.
-
-
-
>They’re not worried people will leave because no one has a choice
Lmao take your meds. I flipflopped between Apple and Android several times, where the fuck is the problem to switch?
-
-
-
-
-
>companies shouldn’t be allowed to set orphanages ablaze…idk it should be illegal or sumn
>"WOW, DID YOU SERIOUSLY JUST ADVOCATE TIGHTER GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS? THIS IS JUST LIKE 1984. THAT BOOK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A WARNING AND NOT A BLUEPRINT, Y’KNOW."
this stupid freaking website-
the orphanes wanted to be put out of their misery.
-
-
-
Same argument as "should Sony be allowed to sell PS5 digital if your only choice is PS Store"
-
Gaming consoles shouldn’t exist at all.
-
Neither should computers. We should go back to the days when your car or tv didn’t need a computer to function.
-
this, consoles are an abomination
-
-
-
>LE ABEL BAD DXXX
seethe freetard
your hobby freetard shit will never be successful
you will always be begging for people to use your trash that has to be given away for free -
-
-
>their
-
yes
-
-
The idea of manufacturer ecosystems is stupid but there aren’t any products, aside from the Homepod, that only work if you have other Apple products. But that begs the question; Why would you buy a shitty botnet speaker that only works with products you don’t have anyway?
-
>freetard screeching intensifies
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.