Apple in court over anticompetitive behaviour again

calico_pie · 12-12-2014, 23:22

Quote:

Always thought it strange that the competition laws that were so eag eagerly enforced against MS, never were against apple. Even though there ecosystem was fast more Sticky and closed off than windows ever was.

Perhaps the decreasing market share keeps the hounds at bay, or there is a distinct lack of resolve somewhere.

Or, here's a thought.

It's just completely different?

DevonBloke · 12-12-2014, 23:31

I've lost track of this thread now.
All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats????
Have they gone totally mad???
The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!!
My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!!
They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off.
I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things.
Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!!

alanwarwic · 12-12-2014, 23:32

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12...ng_december_6/

So yes, 2003 was the year when it all kicked off.
Musicmatch were launching their own music store and Jobs was ready to boot out the bundled software Septempber that year.

And it seems the resulting sabotage was not the only option, but obviously far quicker and safer than the possible lawsuit.

'While denying that his comments at the time (when Real Networks were a challenger in 2004) were angry, Job said:
They don’t sound too angry to me when I read them ... Usually, a vehement — I don’t know about the word ‘vehement,’ but a strong response from Apple would be a lawsuit'

You can't command your own price from non proprietary gadgets, and that is part what MusicMatch store would have made the iPod.
Its the same today. I mean, if iMessage worked how users wanted it to, they might then go out and upgrade to a competitors phone. Its the same thing with MusicMatch, them not having to use the iTunes store and longer term, the iPod.

Everything Goes · 13-12-2014, 01:30

The trial is coming to an end as Friday was the last day for evidence and the Jury will decide next week.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/12/7...-far-from-over

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevonBloke

I've lost track of this thread now.
All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats????
Have they gone totally mad???
The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!!
My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!!
They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off.
I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things.
Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!!

That is how they are designed, so they are clearly very good. It's all about the bass

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 06:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everything Goes

The trial is coming to an end as Friday was the last day for evidence and the Jury will decide next week.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/12/7...-far-from-over

That must be a different case, as they are referring to the 'DRM' trial, and we've been told it has nothing to do with DRM

Besides, we have all the appeals to look forward to.

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 06:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

I sort of remember being wowed by MusicMatch Radio way back. This says it was 2001 for a US subscription service, MusicMath Radio MX..
http://www.macworld.com/article/1017392/musicmatch.html

Did you have a US subscription?

Quote:

Yes I recall the Dell part too. So what was the date of the iPod update that killed the MusicMatch 99 cents pre track music store ?

After they had hacked round the DRM, there where updates for each new hacked version.

slattery69 · 13-12-2014, 07:24

this is a link to what the plaintiffs are taking apple to court for-

https://ipodlawsuit.com

this was the original sign up page if you wanted to be part of the class action law suit.

tdenson · 13-12-2014, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

You aren't anyone to criticise a persons posting history when yours is littered with foolish attempts to exonerate apple no matter what they do. If you actually paid attention to peoples arguments and actually took them in, stopped making things up you THINK people have said when they said no such thing, and maybe were a bit friendlier on here, people might cut you some slack.

BIB - LOL

I find that rich. Yes, it's arguable that CP's posts are pedantic, but rude, no. Conversely, virtually every response of yours to him is littered with personal abuse.e.g. in the very quote above you call him foolish.

It's an interesting study in human psychology that such blind hatred of a company renders people unable to follow through a reasoned argument, that may not be true of you but it is true of several on here.

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevonBloke

I've lost track of this thread now.
All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats????
Have they gone totally mad???
The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!!
My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!!
They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off.
I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things.
Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!!

They didn't buy Beats for the headphones - the main reason they did?

Jimmy Iovine.

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdenson

BIB - LOL

I find that rich. Yes, it's arguable that CP's posts are pedantic, but rude, no. Conversely, virtually every response of yours to him is littered with personal abuse.e.g. in the very quote above you call him foolish.

It's an interesting study in human psychology that such blind hatred of a company renders people unable to follow through a reasoned argument, that may not be true of you but it is true of several on here.

Perhaps its a fine line between pedantry and looking at the devil in the detail.

The thing with Napster though - that was pure pedantry!

shaggy_x · 13-12-2014, 11:21

There's a panorama special about Apple later this week. I wonder if it will discuss this case

slattery69 · 13-12-2014, 11:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

They didn't buy Beats for the headphones - the main reason they did?

Jimmy Iovine.

Only apple know why they bought them. Some reports say as they wanted to appeal to a younger audience , some reports say they were impressed with the beats music service and want it for iTunes radio. Other reports as you rightly point out say it was for Lovine. Thought IMO if they only wanted Lovine they could have got him without buying beats

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 11:42

On the subject of rudeness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Ugh. Same old CP. Once again you think people are picking on apple blah blah... You need to stop trotting out that same old soundbite. It's very boring now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Its always the "everyone else is wrong and I'm right" attitude from you. Oh, and before you start on the "who is everyone", that will be the 98% majority who think you are incorrect again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

There is nothing apple will do that you will ever hold your hands up and admit was foolish. The attitude comes from your arrogance in thinking everything you say is correct and apple never do anything wrong. We have seen this all before.

Except they are not reasonable arguments. Repeating what some article has said with absolutely no thought process added from you shows it is a bit rich.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Your attitude is a know it all attitude.

You just have a severe attitude where you believe you are always right and everyone else is always wrong. Theres a name for that....

This is why debating with you is stale and very boring.

Utter twaddle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Yeah, i'm done with you. Complete waste of time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Well i suggest you hop on over and tell apple you have it sussed then.

Since you know it all as always, and think you are spot on, I'm sure you can squash this case immediately!! You know, since everyone here and across there is wrong

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

No, don't you dare start that usual nonsense about this place not being for me. I've been here longer than you pal, and you are the only one in the many people i speak to on here that i have a problem with.

You sure are good at starting arguments for the sheer hell of it aren't you? Bit of a troll.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

What i mean about you having it sussed, is you seem to have all the answers. So i suggested you pop across and give apple a hand and also to let the people know who brought the case up that apple arent to blame and it's the naught record labels instead.

This is why these discussions with you are sheer hell on earth, and about as boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

You have a great knack of trying to turn your daftness onto other people.

You chose to deliberately start a argument based on something that wasn't there. That's trolling.

It might be a bit hard for you to understand or do, but that's the answer.

Also, if you actually bothered to read the post and the link in it, you would have seen its nothing to do with the mapping service instead the find my phone service provided by Google. But you are so pigheaded you stick to one thing (mapping) and run with it. It's a theme with you.

Same old rubbish. This isn't about you disagreeing with me since there is nothing to disagree about. This is about you obviously bored so trying to start something. That's trolling whether you like it or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

No, your mistake. Your so fixated on apple you cant possibly see they do anything wrong. That's the issue here and always is with you.

Anyway, ive answered your questions over and over. Something i won;t be doing again. This discussion im done with. Talk with yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

This is something he does a lot yet will deny. An apology will never, ever happen!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Rounds and round in circles goes CP.....

Very boring now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiggles

when yours is littered with foolish attempts to exonerate apple no matter what they do. If you actually paid attention to peoples arguments and actually took them in, stopped making things up you THINK people have said when they said no such thing, and maybe were a bit friendlier on here, people might cut you some slack.

And yet:

Quote:

I haven't reduced this discussion into personal digs.

And the Find My Phone is an Apple service by the way, not Google's.

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by slattery69

Only apple know why they bought them. Some reports say as they wanted to appeal to a younger audience , some reports say they were impressed with the beats music service and want it for iTunes radio. Other reports as you rightly point out say it was for Lovine. Thought IMO if they only wanted Lovine they could have got him without buying beats

I think Iovine was probably the main reason though. And with Beats they got their streaming service which they'll likely bake into iOS.

If Beats didn't have Iovine or the streaming service and was literally just a company that made trendy headphones, I doubt Apple would have bought them.

Zack06 · 13-12-2014, 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

And the Find My Phone is an Apple service by the way, not Google's.

Almost correct, but not quite. Find My iPhone is an Apple service.

Find My Phone is an app on the Google Play Store. Though I think it doesn't match up to Google's own Android Device Manager service.

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 11:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaggy_x

There's a panorama special about Apple later this week. I wonder if it will discuss this case

I look forward to either Panorama raising concerns which will all be deemed true, or Panorama not raising concerns, in which case it will be considered a media coverup

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by slattery69

this is a link to what the plaintiffs are taking apple to court for-

https://ipodlawsuit.com

this was the original sign up page if you wanted to be part of the class action law suit.

Is that the right link?

It doesn't mention anything about removing tracks.

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 11:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zack06

Almost correct, but not quite. Find My iPhone is an Apple service.

Find My Phone is an app on the Google Play Store. Though I think it doesn't match up to Google's own Android Device Manager service.

Nearly, it's actually just called "Find IPhone"

slattery69 · 13-12-2014, 12:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

Is that the right link?

It doesn't mention anything about removing tracks.

Thats it the reason behind the case. page was originally meant for people to sign up to be part of the class action

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 12:50

On the Find My (i)Phone thing - my point was that Apple used to used Google's mapping for their service, but switched to using their own mapping.

calico_pie · 13-12-2014, 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by slattery69

Thats it the reason behind the case. page was originally meant for people to sign up to be part of the class action

OK, just wanted to check.

Because I've apparently been talking nonsense throughout this thread for saying things like:

The case against Apple is not that they removed music from iPods. Its that they sought to prevent music using non FairPlay DRM from being compatible with iPods.

They claim that all of this made the price of an iPod artificially high.

I might be missing something, but can anyone explain how restricting what can be played on an iPod make it more expensive?

Surely if its less functional, people are less likely to buy it, so the opposite would be true.

I touched on that in a reply to Alan earlier (post 246) - can you reply to that post when you get a chance Alan? Like I say I might be missing something, but the argument seems a bit back to front.

Everything Goes · 13-12-2014, 13:01

Quote:

A former iTunes engineer testified in a federal antitrust case against Apple Friday that he worked on a project “intended to block 100% of non-iTunes clients” and “keep out third-party players” that competed with Apple’s iPod.

Plaintiffs subpoenaed the engineer, Rod Schultz, to show that Apple tried to suppress rivals to iTunes and iPods. They argue that Apple’s anticompetitive actions drove up the prices for iPods from 2006 to 2009

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/12/...k-competitors/

http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/13/a...s-competitors/

Zack06 · 13-12-2014, 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by kidspud

Nearly, it's actually just called "Find IPhone"

Perhaps if you're using an "IPhone". Whatever that is.

But for iPhone users, the app is called "Find My iPhone".

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/find...376101648?mt=8

kidspud · 13-12-2014, 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zack06

Perhaps if you're using an "IPhone". Whatever that is.

But for iPhone users, the app is called "Find My iPhone".

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/find...376101648?mt=8

So it is.

When it is installed on my iPad, it just says 'Find iPhone'

12-12-2014, 23:22	#251
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by swordman Always thought it strange that the competition laws that were so eag eagerly enforced against MS, never were against apple. Even though there ecosystem was fast more Sticky and closed off than windows ever was. Perhaps the decreasing market share keeps the hounds at bay, or there is a distinct lack of resolve somewhere. Or, here's a thought. It's just completely different?

12-12-2014, 23:31	#252
DevonBloke Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Totnes, Devon Posts: 6,694	I've lost track of this thread now. All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats???? Have they gone totally mad??? The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!! My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!! They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off. I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things. Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!!

12-12-2014, 23:32	#253
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12...ng_december_6/ So yes, 2003 was the year when it all kicked off. Musicmatch were launching their own music store and Jobs was ready to boot out the bundled software Septempber that year. And it seems the resulting sabotage was not the only option, but obviously far quicker and safer than the possible lawsuit. 'While denying that his comments at the time (when Real Networks were a challenger in 2004) were angry, Job said: They don’t sound too angry to me when I read them ... Usually, a vehement — I don’t know about the word ‘vehement,’ but a strong response from Apple would be a lawsuit' You can't command your own price from non proprietary gadgets, and that is part what MusicMatch store would have made the iPod. Its the same today. I mean, if iMessage worked how users wanted it to, they might then go out and upgrade to a competitors phone. Its the same thing with MusicMatch, them not having to use the iTunes store and longer term, the iPod.

13-12-2014, 01:30	#254
Everything Goes Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In the future.... Posts: 11,259	The trial is coming to an end as Friday was the last day for evidence and the Jury will decide next week. http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/12/7...-far-from-over

13-12-2014, 06:09	#255
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by DevonBloke I've lost track of this thread now. All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats???? Have they gone totally mad??? The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!! My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!! They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off. I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things. Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!! That is how they are designed, so they are clearly very good. It's all about the bass

13-12-2014, 06:12	#256
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by Everything Goes The trial is coming to an end as Friday was the last day for evidence and the Jury will decide next week. http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/12/7...-far-from-over That must be a different case, as they are referring to the 'DRM' trial, and we've been told it has nothing to do with DRM Besides, we have all the appeals to look forward to.

13-12-2014, 06:25	#257
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic I sort of remember being wowed by MusicMatch Radio way back. This says it was 2001 for a US subscription service, MusicMath Radio MX.. http://www.macworld.com/article/1017392/musicmatch.html Did you have a US subscription? Quote: Yes I recall the Dell part too. So what was the date of the iPod update that killed the MusicMatch 99 cents pre track music store ? After they had hacked round the DRM, there where updates for each new hacked version.

13-12-2014, 07:24	#258
slattery69 Forum Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 204	this is a link to what the plaintiffs are taking apple to court for- https://ipodlawsuit.com this was the original sign up page if you wanted to be part of the class action law suit.

13-12-2014, 08:49	#259
tdenson Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,214	Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles You aren't anyone to criticise a persons posting history when yours is littered with foolish attempts to exonerate apple no matter what they do. If you actually paid attention to peoples arguments and actually took them in, stopped making things up you THINK people have said when they said no such thing, and maybe were a bit friendlier on here, people might cut you some slack. BIB - LOL I find that rich. Yes, it's arguable that CP's posts are pedantic, but rude, no. Conversely, virtually every response of yours to him is littered with personal abuse.e.g. in the very quote above you call him foolish. It's an interesting study in human psychology that such blind hatred of a company renders people unable to follow through a reasoned argument, that may not be true of you but it is true of several on here.

13-12-2014, 11:16	#260
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by DevonBloke I've lost track of this thread now. All I would like to say is as a bit of an Apple fan, WTF are they doing buying Beats???? Have they gone totally mad??? The audio quality of beats is at best, shite!!!!!! My farther-in-law got a pair for his birthday, I listened to them and had to pretend they were really good.. They were crap. All bass and nothing else!! They cost the purchaser £90 and I felt sorry for them that they had been sucked into the whole celebrity "great audio" thing and had in fact, been completely ripped off. I have a cheap (£36) pair of Sennheiser headphones that would wipe the floor with a pair of 200 quid beats shitty crappy things. Apple have totally lost the plot I'm afraid!!! They didn't buy Beats for the headphones - the main reason they did? Jimmy Iovine.

13-12-2014, 11:18	#261
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by tdenson BIB - LOL I find that rich. Yes, it's arguable that CP's posts are pedantic, but rude, no. Conversely, virtually every response of yours to him is littered with personal abuse.e.g. in the very quote above you call him foolish. It's an interesting study in human psychology that such blind hatred of a company renders people unable to follow through a reasoned argument, that may not be true of you but it is true of several on here. Perhaps its a fine line between pedantry and looking at the devil in the detail. The thing with Napster though - that was pure pedantry!

13-12-2014, 11:21	#262
shaggy_x Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Deep South (Yorkshire) Posts: 3,416	There's a panorama special about Apple later this week. I wonder if it will discuss this case

13-12-2014, 11:32	#263
slattery69 Forum Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 204	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie They didn't buy Beats for the headphones - the main reason they did? Jimmy Iovine. Only apple know why they bought them. Some reports say as they wanted to appeal to a younger audience , some reports say they were impressed with the beats music service and want it for iTunes radio. Other reports as you rightly point out say it was for Lovine. Thought IMO if they only wanted Lovine they could have got him without buying beats

13-12-2014, 11:42	#264
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	On the subject of rudeness. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Ugh. Same old CP. Once again you think people are picking on apple blah blah... You need to stop trotting out that same old soundbite. It's very boring now. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Its always the "everyone else is wrong and I'm right" attitude from you. Oh, and before you start on the "who is everyone", that will be the 98% majority who think you are incorrect again. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles There is nothing apple will do that you will ever hold your hands up and admit was foolish. The attitude comes from your arrogance in thinking everything you say is correct and apple never do anything wrong. We have seen this all before. Except they are not reasonable arguments. Repeating what some article has said with absolutely no thought process added from you shows it is a bit rich. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Your attitude is a know it all attitude. You just have a severe attitude where you believe you are always right and everyone else is always wrong. Theres a name for that.... This is why debating with you is stale and very boring. Utter twaddle. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Yeah, i'm done with you. Complete waste of time. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Well i suggest you hop on over and tell apple you have it sussed then. Since you know it all as always, and think you are spot on, I'm sure you can squash this case immediately!! You know, since everyone here and across there is wrong Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles No, don't you dare start that usual nonsense about this place not being for me. I've been here longer than you pal, and you are the only one in the many people i speak to on here that i have a problem with. You sure are good at starting arguments for the sheer hell of it aren't you? Bit of a troll. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles What i mean about you having it sussed, is you seem to have all the answers. So i suggested you pop across and give apple a hand and also to let the people know who brought the case up that apple arent to blame and it's the naught record labels instead. This is why these discussions with you are sheer hell on earth, and about as boring. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles You have a great knack of trying to turn your daftness onto other people. You chose to deliberately start a argument based on something that wasn't there. That's trolling. It might be a bit hard for you to understand or do, but that's the answer. Also, if you actually bothered to read the post and the link in it, you would have seen its nothing to do with the mapping service instead the find my phone service provided by Google. But you are so pigheaded you stick to one thing (mapping) and run with it. It's a theme with you. Same old rubbish. This isn't about you disagreeing with me since there is nothing to disagree about. This is about you obviously bored so trying to start something. That's trolling whether you like it or not. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles No, your mistake. Your so fixated on apple you cant possibly see they do anything wrong. That's the issue here and always is with you. Anyway, ive answered your questions over and over. Something i won;t be doing again. This discussion im done with. Talk with yourself. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles This is something he does a lot yet will deny. An apology will never, ever happen! Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles Rounds and round in circles goes CP..... Very boring now. Quote: Originally Posted by Stiggles when yours is littered with foolish attempts to exonerate apple no matter what they do. If you actually paid attention to peoples arguments and actually took them in, stopped making things up you THINK people have said when they said no such thing, and maybe were a bit friendlier on here, people might cut you some slack. And yet: Quote: I haven't reduced this discussion into personal digs. And the Find My Phone is an Apple service by the way, not Google's.

13-12-2014, 11:52	#265
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by slattery69 Only apple know why they bought them. Some reports say as they wanted to appeal to a younger audience , some reports say they were impressed with the beats music service and want it for iTunes radio. Other reports as you rightly point out say it was for Lovine. Thought IMO if they only wanted Lovine they could have got him without buying beats I think Iovine was probably the main reason though. And with Beats they got their streaming service which they'll likely bake into iOS. If Beats didn't have Iovine or the streaming service and was literally just a company that made trendy headphones, I doubt Apple would have bought them.

13-12-2014, 11:54	#266
Zack06 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 27,438	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie And the Find My Phone is an Apple service by the way, not Google's. Almost correct, but not quite. Find My iPhone is an Apple service. Find My Phone is an app on the Google Play Store. Though I think it doesn't match up to Google's own Android Device Manager service.

13-12-2014, 11:55	#267
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by shaggy_x There's a panorama special about Apple later this week. I wonder if it will discuss this case I look forward to either Panorama raising concerns which will all be deemed true, or Panorama not raising concerns, in which case it will be considered a media coverup

13-12-2014, 11:56	#268
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by slattery69 this is a link to what the plaintiffs are taking apple to court for- https://ipodlawsuit.com this was the original sign up page if you wanted to be part of the class action law suit. Is that the right link? It doesn't mention anything about removing tracks.

13-12-2014, 11:57	#269
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by Zack06 Almost correct, but not quite. Find My iPhone is an Apple service. Find My Phone is an app on the Google Play Store. Though I think it doesn't match up to Google's own Android Device Manager service. Nearly, it's actually just called "Find IPhone"

13-12-2014, 12:33	#270
slattery69 Forum Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 204	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie Is that the right link? It doesn't mention anything about removing tracks. Thats it the reason behind the case. page was originally meant for people to sign up to be part of the class action

13-12-2014, 12:50	#271
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	On the Find My (i)Phone thing - my point was that Apple used to used Google's mapping for their service, but switched to using their own mapping.

DS Forums

Apple in court over anticompetitive behaviour again

13-12-2014, 12:53	#272
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by slattery69 Thats it the reason behind the case. page was originally meant for people to sign up to be part of the class action OK, just wanted to check. Because I've apparently been talking nonsense throughout this thread for saying things like: The case against Apple is not that they removed music from iPods. Its that they sought to prevent music using non FairPlay DRM from being compatible with iPods. They claim that all of this made the price of an iPod artificially high. I might be missing something, but can anyone explain how restricting what can be played on an iPod make it more expensive? Surely if its less functional, people are less likely to buy it, so the opposite would be true. I touched on that in a reply to Alan earlier (post 246) - can you reply to that post when you get a chance Alan? Like I say I might be missing something, but the argument seems a bit back to front.

13-12-2014, 13:01	#273
Everything Goes Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In the future.... Posts: 11,259	Quote: A former iTunes engineer testified in a federal antitrust case against Apple Friday that he worked on a project “intended to block 100% of non-iTunes clients” and “keep out third-party players” that competed with Apple’s iPod. Plaintiffs subpoenaed the engineer, Rod Schultz, to show that Apple tried to suppress rivals to iTunes and iPods. They argue that Apple’s anticompetitive actions drove up the prices for iPods from 2006 to 2009 http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/12/...k-competitors/ http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/13/a...s-competitors/

13-12-2014, 13:09	#274
Zack06 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 27,438	Quote: Originally Posted by kidspud Nearly, it's actually just called "Find IPhone" Perhaps if you're using an "IPhone". Whatever that is. But for iPhone users, the app is called "Find My iPhone". https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/find...376101648?mt=8

13-12-2014, 13:56	#275
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by Zack06 Perhaps if you're using an "IPhone". Whatever that is. But for iPhone users, the app is called "Find My iPhone". https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/find...376101648?mt=8 So it is. When it is installed on my iPad, it just says 'Find iPhone'