With Apple launching Fitness+, they launched just another service with an anti-competitive advantage. While they take almost 100% of what’s left after taxes etc., other services are forced to use In-App-Purchases of which Apple takes 30%. I don’t understand how some people defend Apple for this and think this behavior benefits them. Actually, it only leads to a decrease in the quality of non-Apple services, because they somehow have to try to compete with Apple, but get 30% less of the revenues. But in the end I don’t really care, I don’t buy any of Apple’s overpriced products with false privacy promises and platform lock-in anyway.
View
Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram, published a blog post with “7 myths Apple is using to justify their 30% tax on apps”. He explains quite well why Apple’s practices are not fair and disproves many arguments that you can regularly read from Apple fans on Hacker News or in comments on tech news sites.
View
Updated on
Will Oremus has written a long article on OneZero (Medium paywall) that discusses whether Apple is an illegal monopoly or not.
View
Updated on
Matt Baer, the creator of the writing platform write.as, writes about Apple’s privacy focused marketing and how that doesn’t matter when your iPhone is full of apps like Facebook, Instagram or Google.
View
Sorry for sharing a Medium.com link, but this is an article I really want to highlight.
View
That was it, Google, the launch event, where there was really nothing that wasn’t already known from various leaks (which you did yourself). Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL was clear, Google Home Mini, a larger Google Home and a new Pixelbook. Only I hadn’t heard of the Pixel Buds before.
View