this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
58 points (90.3% liked)

Technology

59152 readers
2312 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
58
iOS 18 could 'sherlock' $400M in app revenue | TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Reminds me of some of the anticompetitive behaviors that Amazon has long engaged in. Among other practices, they use their privileged position in the marketplace to gain insight into markets, then force sellers out of business by producing the same products at a loss. In this way, third party sellers on Amazon serve the purpose of conducting market research for Amazon.

It’s remarkable that Apple has been able to generally maintain such a cordial relationship with developers for this long. Hopefully change is coming.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago

Money talks. They can continue making these anti-competitive moves indefinitely, while the regulators allow it. Just look at a fine that Amazon got hit with this week. It's not even a rounding error for them, but would put another business into the grave instantly.

When your brand is worth 3 trillion doll hairs, some minuscule fine won't even put a dent into your plans

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

IMHO, the big thing is the AI stuff. The propagation of LLMs and diffusion models were always going to be a big threat to certain companies, and that cat is out of the bag. MS and Google have already started integrating those things into their products, and it was really just a matter of time before Apple did the same. 

Trail selection also feels like something that is inevitable for Apple and Google. The trails have been in both companies maps for years, and both companies have smart watches with GPS and hiking workouts. I’m not shocked that you can now actually tap on a trail. This feels more like an obvious missing feature. 

And the other little stuff - a calculator on the iPad? Window snapping? Passwords moved the applications folder instead of the preference panel? Timed reminders finally showing in the calendar? The only shocking thing is that these features weren’t part of the 1.0 products.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Apple has a history of stealing features from Jailbreak community, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they did the same to existing apps.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago

It’s hardly theft to add new features to your product.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I don't really get what the problem is. Should Apple just stop developing new features?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I understand why it’s a loss for some developers, but I don’t think we should prevent Apple from integrating something in iOS just because of it.

You could also say these developers just benefited from the fact that Apple omitted to integrate some obvious features.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Building features instead of apps is always a precarious situation.

Also, ironically, wouldn’t software patents help here? (I’m not advocating for them. But…)

If software patents are uncool. And Sherlocking isn’t cool. Then… how does one even begin to adjudicate this?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This is a very similar question to piracy vs unauthorised AI training and I think the underlying thing is power and agency.

It’s absolutely possible, consistent and valid to be for something in a situation where it equalises power and against it in a situation where it skews it even worse towards inequality.