• Pup Biru@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    93
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    see, apples a hard one… i usually agree with breaking companies up, but most of apples value comes from their extremely tight integration. would that be possible if they were separate? i don’t know - i wouldn’t want to lose the value that i get from apple products

    like, how would that work?

    you’d usually split like hardware and software, but we have m series chips and macos working so damn well because they collaborated really closely

    or iphone, mac, homepod? airdrop between devices, airplay, etc is pretty seamless and i’m not sure how well that’d work if they were separated… and again the m series chips are there because they planned for scaling up an iphone to mac size quite a while ago

    retail maybe - that could be a good option, but honestly probably a drop in the ocean and wouldn’t solve anything

    perhaps if they separated app store from the rest of apple, or music - like a services division? they’re not so tightly integrated (yet)

    or perhaps they should just be separated and be made to deal with it - then we would hope they don’t get a bunch of shit business majors in to run them who don’t understand apple and want to make their turf as profitable as possible… but that always ends up happening eventuallly

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      84
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      you’d usually split like hardware and software, but we have m series chips and macos working so damn well because they collaborated really closely

      You don’t need to split the OS, it’s the App store that needs to be split out, and web browser to be free to choose like in Windows and Android. Microsoft had a judgement on that when they were a monopoly, so they were legally required to offer alternative web browsers equal access on Windows.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        And yet, Microsoft is trying to push Edge down windows users‘ throat…

        It’s not quite as bad as effectively not allowing other browsers but it’s not far behind. Apple is less obnoxious than that on macOS. They won’t beg for you to use Safari

        • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          At least with Edge it’s not disrupting the market by pushing an inferior rendering engine, like they did in the IE era. That by itself held the web back a good couple of years, and they were fined for abuse of their monopoly.

          But at any rate, all of this is whataboutism - the issue is with Apple’s abuse of their position right now.

          • accideath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh yea, they absolutely do and I’m glad the EU is forcing them to open up. I personally prefer Safari, so I’m mainly looking forward to the sideloading but that didn’t mean that the rest of the world shouldn’t be able to install a real firefox or chrome.

            In all honesty, I can understand the browser engine lockdown less than the appstore lockdown. There’s some point to the argument, that sideloading might open the door to viruses, etc. but the browser argument is based on battery life. It’s not 2010 anymore, phones can handle chrome…

    • pineapple_pizza@lemmy.dexlit.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Integration between products can be done well through standards and public apis. Apple just doesn’t expose this functionality to other developers because they want you stuck in their system because of the benefits of the integration between products.

      • Eggyhead@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        34
        ·
        10 months ago

        Because they have counter arguments or because they like stuff that you don’t?

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          no, its because they come up with all sorts of egregious and nonsensical arguments to defend apple no matter the shitty thing they do.

          if an apple product was killing babies they would bend over backwards to justify how it cant be apples fault.

          their marketing did a number on peoples head, in a scary fucking way.

          no way i would ever justify the shitty things google does just because I use a fork of their os on my shitty phone.

          • Eggyhead@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            27
            ·
            10 months ago

            they come up with all sorts of egregious and nonsensical arguments

            In the first sentence, and then

            if an apple product was killing babies

            in the very next…

            If Apple users are horrible, logic like this ensures that “fanboy” haters remain a tier worse.

            • umbrella@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              you are bending over backwards to misinterpret what i said, and you prove my point somewhat.

              • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                18
                ·
                10 months ago

                They didn’t bend over at all. You literally made a ridiculous argument while complaining about other people doing that.

                You really think if Apple killed babies people would be ok with that? Of course you don’t.

    • MudMan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      I mean, yeah, turns out that when you are in a quasi monopolistic position in many different markets and you get to decide the rules for all of your competitors you can absolutely integrate your “ecosystem” very smoothly. Go figure.

      Their stubbornness on this makes the software/hardware divide the most obvious and a good place to start. Right now they’re keeping the hardware hostage to benefit first party software and exclude everyone else’s. That clearly has to change.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        has anyone attempted using right-to-repair laws to gain direct access to the hardware they purchase? i like the idea of purchasing a phone i can do whateverthefuck i want with

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      Just an opinion, but if they were forced to use open standards between products then it would still be easy to tightly integrate features between the various “companies”. The problem is this would also allow everyone else to play alongside them, meaning Apple would no longer have a monopoly on such things, and the open standards might even gasp be used by other operating systems. But what do I know about Apple products, they may already be using open standards?

    • JTskulk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 months ago

      “Tight integration” means the company’s software works well with their other software. It doesn’t mean locking out all others, whether they integrate well or not.

    • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      If there’s any company that doesn’t need to be broken up, it’s Apple. They only really have 3 core functions: hardware, software, and cloud services. And the cloud services really only matter to people using their hardware and software.

      A better approach for Apple specifically are pro-consumer regulations. Breaking them up seems unnecessary to me.

      • Eggyhead@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        Breaking up the music, tv, news, arcade, banking, and possibly cloud storage branches makes more sense to me than simply divorcing hardware from software. Not that I see any reason to do that since competition for those services already thrives on Mac/iOS.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        You seem to have forgotten that there were Safari and iTunes for Windows, and QuickTime player (for whatever reason everything was associated with that on our PC in my childhood, so I didn’t know it’s Apple) too.

        There’s nothing in any of their services which would make them useless outside of the ecosystem, provided Apple doesn’t intentionally kill itself with behaving stupid.

        Actually if that breakup happens, then maybe in like 10 years something decent may come out of it.

    • ryannathans@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      This argument is dumb, open up the specs, APIs, etc and allow integration with their products. There’s no reason only Apple should be able to write software for these products. The specification makes the product appear seamless, there’s no reason it couldn’t remain so if others developed or manufactured for the platform.

    • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m fine with Apple retaining interoperability between their first party software products, they just need a way to bypass the walled garden. If they have sideloading (everywhere and without restrictions) and ideally also bootloader unlocking, they provide a sanctioned path around the walls of their ecosystem and now it’s up to the user to choose to leave that garden. If the user is comfortable there, they can stay. Trying to fuck over sideloading is the issue here. I’m fine with the App Store being restrictive if there’s a way around it, and simply sideloading an app shouldn’t break the rest of the OS’s capabilities.

    • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      separate the phone branch from the desktop computer branch. that’d be a good start.

      I understand the logic behind not wanting to separate hardware and software, that’s the only selling point Apple has over any other manufacturer. So just make the iPhone a different company.

      • BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’d ruin what makes Apple products so good. The fact is, people like Apple because everything is connected. It’s one of the largest draw points of apple and would only piss 90% of the users off for no tangible benefit to anyone else.

    • penquin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      That doesn’t mean jack shit. Just because they have integration, doesn’t mean they get a free pass on this shit.

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      yep, you have great points. also everythings cloud-y, so no geographic lines to draw ala ma bell. not a ton of diversification.

      theyre building a car though?