Not sure why this seems to be so important here. Why does anyone need to provide public evidence? Im not advocating for one side or the other, but as regular people we aren't privy to any dealings with Huawei or the government's understanding of their software/hardware.The US government doesn't need to provide any evidence even if it's sitting on mounds of it.
Thanks for taking the time to write up an even-keeled take on this subject. There is no doubt a lot of butt-hurt people out there looking to scapegoat Apple for something terrible, so it seems like anytime Apple ends up in the news everyone and their mom runs out to give their misinformed 2-cents.
Apple has consistently grown its App Store and revenues year after year, and they did that in the face if reducing commissions.
I can see the other side here. People love their iPhones. Why wouldn't you. And they want a more open environment to use that device. I don't think Apple is being nefarious with its practices but its certainly not an idiot and will take what the market will give it. If App Store revenues are up and up and up and devs keep making apps that sell in that marketplace then their behavior won't drastically change year over year.
Apple is very sensitive to the developer community. Back in the day, literally nobody made apps for macOS. Their whole approach to developing has catered to bringing on developers and getting them to buy into the ecosystem. Do I agree with every aspect of it? No. But Apple has spent a lot of money and time developing APIs and engines for app developers to use to quickly move app ideas out into the market. This is often overlooked. Yes it sucks to have to use Xcode when you're favorite IDE is [insert here]. And yes you need to own a Mac to run it.
So parts of their system need to be opened up a little. But claiming Apple has done "damage" to you, the app buyer, is a bit of a stretch. You aren't entitled to Apple's tech. Using an app on an iPhone comes with its baggage. If you don't like that, there are alternatives. And I bet if you allowed this whole thing to play out like some would like, those alternatives would prove to be swamps of despair that will only lead to major security, billing, and distribution issues that will make life for those clamoring for the change wish it had never come.
That being said I hope a middle ground is struck. I hope we do see some software markets come alive that allow for some apps that don't "clash" with Apple's own offerings and get struck down on that basis. I, for one would live to see a Steam market for games :)
I have read many articles over the years about how Apple controls leaks. Leaking can and does harm a company's plans and potential for impact in a market, and employees that don't understand that and want some fame or notoriety for leaking details shouldn't be a part of the organization. That being said I work for a company that has company secrets and releasing those to news outlets would be embarrassing for me and for my employer. Why do it? These aren't state secrets and they aren't leaks tied to whistleblower issues. they are product releases and feature announcements. People thinking they are making a difference leaking sensitive information are just looking for attention and aren't repeating their employer.
Apple does and can take action, as any company can, about the divulgence about sensitive information.
I get that certain leaks are purposeful. And the thing is this leaked memo might have been a test to find out who is leaking information. So while this story looks stupid on the face of it, it probably identified a leaker they have been tracking for some time.
I for one, love the idea of this whole thing. I love when defunct and generally insolvent nations place massive emphasis on the wrong syllables. I also love it when government leaders use language like "homos" and "busting evil." You can really feel the tide turning in their favor with all the top notch decision makings going on. Remember folks, the number one priority for all governments should always be busting all the evil especially if that evil comes in the form of peaceful people jerking off to a computer screen.
I used to have issues. My last contract with them ran out. I moved to an area that did not offer their service. They were polite. But I did receive about 3 follow up calls asking why I cancelled when I clearly explained why when I cancelled. Just plain stupidity.
Apple and Google have loyal followers and spend an awful amount of time and energy providing customer service that leaves the customer feeling generally pleased with the service. Is Comcast actually saying that going into a Comcast store is equivalent to going into an Apple store? Seriously I hate going out to the mall, but I have never left an Apple store pissed or wondering why my life sucks balls all of a sudden.
I can't imagine the person who said "wait, if it goes to their mailbox directly, it's not a call". WAT? Voicemail is a function of calling. "Sorry I couldn't speak to you, but I figured I'd make you listen to me anyways".
Thank God for iPhone's visual voicemail. Swipe left to delete.
That being said, dialing voicemail uses minutes on most plans. So legislators are allowing telemarketers to run up someone's bill just for the user to delete the voicemail. That is unless that has changed. I haven't paid for "minutes" in years. But I do remember using minutes to dial my voicemail.
And to those that DON'T have visual voicemail, you're asking them to listen to potentially infinite voicemails to get to the actual voicemails that matter to them.
What a crock of shit. What person would push for this legislation without having someone write blank checks in their name to do it for them? The answer is NOBODY. That being said, first person to find this legislator asshole's cell phone number should just spam the ever living fuck out of him until this legislation gets trashed.
I am so sick of these types of lawsuits. I don't believe we need to get rid of the patent system at all, but I do hat e it when non-practicing entities have the right to sue those that are trying to make a product. Gets really old and I bet these attorney's are making quite a nice living off the backs of smaller companies that cant afford to protect themselves.
To the author's point, any company or industry that uses untold millions or billions of dollars to suppress competition and prevent newcomers to the market should be kept in check by some institution, either government or otherwise.
But the irony of this thought process is that companies like Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc. buy and fund startups on a regular basis to promote growth in nascent industries. Apple and Google routinely buy and invest in AI, AR, chip manufacturing, entertainment, financial transactions technology etc. in hopes of incorporating that technology into their portfolios or products in the future.
This is wholesale different from what IBM and ATT did in the 60's and 70's where they did everything they could to prevent such ideas from making it to the forefront of the public eye.
Further, these companies compete with each other in so many ways, often times unsuccessfully. Google spends God-knows-how-much money on other platforms that are either DOA or abandoned. Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Amazon do the same. But that spillover trains and curates some of the best tech talent on the planet, and often times that talent goes on to create new and exciting technologies that Apple and Google and Microsoft will never touch.
Making a case that these companies need a check by the govt. because people choose to use their products is misguided and ultimately sounds like a person who wants to have his cake and eat it too.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by profssrfink.