jaypro

Cosmetic defect is not the same as cosmetic damage. Cosmetic defect would be like, mismatching fabric colors. Cosmetic damage would be like, later on, if some bleach accidentally got on the fabric. I would think most cases would be obvious whether it was damaged or defective.

Just follow https://support.apple.com/en-al/guide/shortcuts/apdb71a01d93/ios#:~:text=Create a JavaScript shortcut,it to the shortcut editor. here is the javascript dots = document.getElementsByClassName("Product__SlideshowNavDot is-selected")[0]; alert( document.getElementsByClassName("Product__SlideOverlay")[Array.from(dots.parentNode.children).indexOf(dots)].innerHTML);

This is a common UX issue with mobile vs desktop. Responsive webpages have been moving away from using hover events because you can't really hover a mouse over something on a touchscreen. There is no difference between hover and click/touch. The store already uses click event for enlarge/full screen of the product photo. Probably the best solution is for them to just add the model name and size text to always show on the enlarged/full screen view. But that would be a fix on their end. As for you, if you're on iOS, can probably write a quick Shortcut with some javascript that would message back the model name and size.

Oh thats optimistic thinking. I was thinking more like duo boot bootcamp windows on intel macs. Where you actually have to reboot your entire phone everytime you want to change between iOS and Android. So you don't get apple software with android functionality. You get one or the other. And Apple can be like..see? no problem regulators..you can side load if you want to. iPhone with alternate app store. Not iOS with alternate app store.

But that's my entire argument. That companies WILL try and it will negatively impact the paying customer. Things like Denuvo DRM will make their way onto mobile. Sure, pirates and torrenters and sideloaders can figure out and download cracked DRM free versions.. But normal people would suffer with extra DRMs.

I was just thinking…if Apple is forced to allow side-loading…they would probably do it in the most contrived and crap way they could get away with. Like..bootcamp Android for iOS So essentially you just bought Apple hardware for android software. No mixing of gardens, just let you leave…but then you never would have bought the iPhone in the first place.

I don’t want to have to go price comparison shopping for different apps like on Windows. Oh Epic Games charges $X for game while Steam charges $Y. I just want it to be convenient and consistent. Of course, I think apple takes too fat of a cut of the revenue. A single app developer isn’t big enough to make a big enough noise to change this. But together, they could have an impact. But, then, most of the biggest devs wouldn’t want this to be regulated…since they also take advantage of this. Meta, with their new Metaverse revenue sharing and all their popular iPhone apps. Google, play store, and all the google and youtube apps.

Theres a clear difference between Microsoft’s and Apples case. Microsoft tried to make edge a more “stickier” default browser. Enough people hated Microsoft’s ways, that Microsoft found it necessary to backtrack on it and make it easier again to change browser. They chose to backtrack due to negative consumer sentiment. In Apple’s case, they should only have to open up their walled garden if it makes financial sense for them I.e. enough consumers leave the platform because they prefer a more open ecosystem. Rather than government intervention and regulations forcing them to.

You may not only have the choice of using App Store. The next big game could be a side load exclusive. And if you really want to play it, I don’t think many would be like .. “nah I won’t play it, I care too much about my security” It doesn’t even have to be exclusive. Companies would probably just offer a free skin or something if you side load versus thru the App Store. And security is not limited to just your own phone. Everyone who has your phone number in their contacts is a potential security risk to you. An unsecured phone can leak all their saved contact info. Phone numbers, addresses, and more. Anyone you talk to or communicate with, who has a compromised phone is a security risk to you. Linus just went over a real world case with his wire transfer fraud. His email wasn’t compromised, but the guy on the other end’s was.

Yeah its 100% DRM. Some App Store DRM benefits: Developers don’t need to program their own into their apps. Users don’t have to deal apps requiring always on connection. Duolingo is another example of micro transaction for extra ‘lives’. Obviously its not impossible to work around this. But if it was super simple to install an infinite life mod for Duolingo, and becomes mainstream, it would certainly impact their revenue. I would expect them to implement some DRM on their end, like a server-sided life counter. Which would mean you could no longer use the app when you don’t have signal, like in a subway ride. It’s just like the Xbox One original announcement. With the always online DRM. It’s not like discs aren’t a form of DRM. They are, but they are different form with different restrictions, some better some worse.

That’s not the point. It’s the slight inconvenience or hurdle that they rely on. I’m pretty sure right now, you can just change your system clock for to refill lives…but that’s too annoying enough to users that they will just pay $ for more lives. Infinite life mod candy crush is already a thing. It’s the first result on a google search. https://apkmody.io/games/candy-crush-saga If this becomes too commonplace/mainstream.. They will kill it. One way or another. Just like YT Vanced. Consoles and smartphones right now mainly rely on controlled system environment DRM. PCs and Macs and other desktops have a heavier reliance of individual app based DRM. I don’t think this is enough of a reason to block all side loading, but it is a valid argument against it nonetheless.

Making side loading easily accessible is going to end with an increase of DRM on mobile. You can clearly see that on PC and Mac. So...there is a clear, objective negative impact to people who have no intention of ever side loading. I don't think its enough of an impact to outweigh the benefits, but it is a negative that would be arguable.

YT also has to weigh in the fact that Youtube Premium users *would* be a a great demographic to market ads to. They have the disposable income to pay $ to skip ads. So they have to charge much more than just balancing out the value that user would have contributed had they watched ads. I would suspect Youtube Premium had an impact on CPM, since the "best" demographic of people with disposable income AND willing to spend it...no longer watch the ads. You missed the one demographic that are morally against adblock and therefore buy YT premium. No idea how large that group is..but it must exist, right?

The hurdle does exist on Android. Yes its not as big of a hurdle as having to jailbreak your iPhone, but the phone doesn't come out the box with side loading enabled. Once something becomes mainstream enough, then companies will go after it since it hurts their bottom line. And my argument isn't even theoretically. Vanced started to become big enough, so Google shut it down. As for the medical device, its a similar problem. Companies won't develop products that lose them money. Probably they were subsidized by Samsung to only release on their devices. And they would also obviously like the re-occurring revenue from having to buy replacements when the battery dies. So, by using your knowledge to work around it, such as a cracked version or replaceable battery mod, you can save some money. But if this workaround becomes easy enough that anybody can do it, the company obviously won't sit around and do nothing about it. They'll either make it harder...or raise the price of their product. So I think anyone that wants to benefit from the economical advantages of sideloading, should want side-loading to stay where it is.. Niche, but not impossible. So that if you really want to, you can do it, but its not stupid-easy where now its popular and companies work against it.

Yeah that's the same conclusion I had. Try to figure out which has more value.. % of users that will turn off ad block to watch video % of users that would watch ad free video, but then go and buy merch or something. In the end, it all boils down to money and not really principles or views on what or what isn't piracy. Youtube offers a ad-free version, its called Youtube Premium. LTT offers a second source of ad free version, Floatplane. People want more money (in this case, by saving money), so just use adblock, its like a free version. Businesses also don't care about the principles, they also just want more money. They don't usually take the nuclear option and block all access to the site, since the users still provide some sort of value, like increased traffic or engagement.