> This isn’t illegal. Equivalent to a “No outside food and drink” sign or not letting randos sell things in your own storefront
In that case, someone else owns the storefront. I own my phone, not Apple.
If Apple would like to claim that I merely lease my phone, they need to update all their marketing so it isn't misleading. They should also be on the hook for repairs (without AppleCare), and all the other responsibilities that typically accompany a leased product.
> Equivalent to a “No outside food and drink” sign or not letting randos sell things in your own storefront
Your phone isn't Apple's storefront. Their storefront is. Prohibiting their customers from patronizing any other store is clearly anti-competitive.
> It’s not illegal just because you don’t agree with the philosophy of a closed ecosystem
It's not legal just because you agree with the philosophy of a closed ecosystem. "A closed ecosystem" is inherently anti-competitive and should be illegal.
> Equivalent to a “No outside food and drink” sign
Really?
When you buy food from the grocery store, the grocery store goes to your home and physically prevents you from also eating food from a different store at the same time, in your own home?
When people buy a phone, they own it. They are using it in their own home.
No, a grocery store does not force you to only eat food from them, in your own home.
They do not prevent you from mixing milk from their store with cookies from a different store.
Not sure I agree with not starting work on it right away so you don’t finish early but, I’ve learned that constantly delivering earlier than you say can make people not believe your estimates - ditto for always being late
Yeah, it's very hard to describe. Almost like you perceive the present moment and the past couple seconds at the same time. Time seems to pass by you very quickly but, then you look at the clock, and it's only been 5 minutes
That being said, I can't imagine having to hunt while on a lot of psychedelics
You just need to find an arcade with some candy cabinets, those are seated. Also, most of them are set up for one player per cab with your opponent sitting on the other side of you
> The reality is all these machines are basically PCs now
You could make the opposite argument back in the day. Arcade hardware was what home PCs, and consoles, tried to emulate. The truth is, these still use specialized hardware even if they end up targeting embedded Linux or embedded Windows (or a combination of the two). They are also incredibly efficient with their use of hardware
They only way to reach a significant market share is to put up with it, wouldn't that count as abusing their position? They don't have to care, because they know that developers have no choice, and in the process they increase their hardware sales? Imagine if google wanted to produce end-user hardware. Then they limit their SDK/NDK to only work on that new hardware. And, this isn't any magic or special hardware. Just an added EULA that restricts legal use, and lack of developer support. This is pretty much apple has done. Of course, doing something like that on an already established market would be suicide. But, developers would have also to a much larger extent chosen not to target Apple hardware, if it wasn't for the market share. That's why it is abusive and a case of anti-trust. They get away with it because of their market share.
This isn’t illegal. Equivalent to a “No outside food and drink” sign or not letting randos sell things in your own storefront
It’s not illegal just because you don’t agree with the philosophy of a closed ecosystem