3 ms·
Your entire post can basically be tl;dr'd as "It's Apple's product so they can do anything they want and therefore there is no reasonable discussion to be had a
by statictype 15y ago
Your entire post can basically be tl;dr'd as "It's Apple's product so they can do anything they want and therefore there is no reasonable discussion to be had about whether or not it makes sense or is offensive or the right thing to do"
There are real issues with gpl code that makes other derived works also gpl and there are reasonable discussions to be had about it besides "the person who created it can do whatever he wants. End of story". Same thing applies here.
- zak_mc_kracken 15y ago> "It's Apple's product so they can do anything they want and therefore there is no reasonable discussion to be had about whether or not it makes sense or is offensive or the right thing to do" The problem is also that it's this kind of attitude that allowed Microsoft to illegally leverage its monopoly to pressure other markets, with the excuse that "Hey, you don't have to use Microsoft if you don't like their terms".
- johnthedebs 15y agoThe crucial difference here being that Microsoft had a monopoly.
- wazoox 15y agoIn the tablet world, so far Apple enjoys a near monopoly.
- dangson 15y agoWith tablets, Apple has a competitive advantage, not a monopoly.
- zak_mc_kracken 15y agoApple has had over 90% market share since the iPad came out. It's a monopoly by all definitions of the word.
- wazoox 15y agoA beginning monopoly is not necessarily the fruit of unfair practices or abuse of power. But when a company has more than 70% of a market worldwide, it's a monopoly. By definition, monopoly is a competitive advantage. Because Apple volumes in tablet sales dwarfs all of its competitors, it necessarily has an enormous advantage on price buying screens, RAM, flash, etc.