Apple Approves Bitcoin Wallets

[BitcoinBulls]

That's the method that gets you to the top in Silicon Valley: steal an idea -> tweak slightly -> profit.  

I wouldn't worry too much about it, but this is not the fantastic news some sources are making it out to be.  That's why we try to avoid all the fluff and give you the news you actually need.  

[Littleshop]

My ex was an apple fan-girl(?) and even though I tried with all the logic in the world to explain to her why monopoly on infrastructure is a bad thing, she wouldn't listen. Ordinary people just don't give a flying fuck about openness and the importance of real free competition.

There is real competition now. Apple vs Android vs Windows.

Openness - it's not the best for all situations. Most people actually want CLOSED systems.

Take this example:
An OPEN party is happening at a friend's house. Anyone can come to the party. Bring whatever alcohol, drugs they want. Parents will be gone for the weekend. Enjoy!
A CLOSED party is happening at another house. The parents are supervising. No alcohol or drugs allowed. Only a strict guest list is allowed. Entertainment and food provided.

Comparing apples and oranges does not make sense.

If you think that monopoly on infrastructure is totally awesome, there is just nothing I can say that will resonate with you.

Apple is Microsoft from the 90's all over again.

You were not around microsoft in the 90's if you think that.  Microsoft was closed source but not a walled garden. 

[bbeagle]

We could do and I will do. I honestly believe they try to monopoly everything and have failed.

I don't think you understand what Monopoly is.

Nintendo does not have a monopoly, although they control all the software that is released on the Wii or Wii U. There are other players like Microsoft and Sony. This is exactly what Apple is.

Microsoft was declared a monopoly in the 90s when over 95% of the computers had Windows. ALL the software was written for windows, with very little ports to other manufacturers. Microsoft used it's monopoly of Windows by going after other markets, like web browsers. By putting Internet Explorer in windows, microsoft immediately got a 95% browser share, thus winning the browser wars automatically. Apple can't do anything of the sort, EVER, with a 20% market share, and they can't even try. It's pointless even saying they would try, because it's impossible and makes no sense.

[BillyBobJoe]

looks like the Apple haters have hijacked your thread.

Haters will hate.

[bananaControl]

My ex was an apple fan-girl(?) and even though I tried with all the logic in the world to explain to her why monopoly on infrastructure is a bad thing, she wouldn't listen. Ordinary people just don't give a flying fuck about openness and the importance of real free competition.

There is real competition now. Apple vs Android vs Windows.

Openness - it's not the best for all situations. Most people actually want CLOSED systems.

Take this example:
An OPEN party is happening at a friend's house. Anyone can come to the party. Bring whatever alcohol, drugs they want. Parents will be gone for the weekend. Enjoy!
A CLOSED party is happening at another house. The parents are supervising. No alcohol or drugs allowed. Only a strict guest list is allowed. Entertainment and food provided.

Comparing apples and oranges does not make sense.

If you think that monopoly on infrastructure is totally awesome, there is just nothing I can say that will resonate with you.

Apple is Microsoft from the 90's all over again.

You were not around microsoft in the 90's if you think that.  Microsoft was closed source but not a walled garden. 

Word documents? But yes, Apple is actually much worse than MS ever was.

[bananaControl]

looks like the Apple haters have hijacked your thread.

Haters will hate.

That was a very constructive and convincing argument. Thank you for sharing.

[Littleshop]

My ex was an apple fan-girl(?) and even though I tried with all the logic in the world to explain to her why monopoly on infrastructure is a bad thing, she wouldn't listen. Ordinary people just don't give a flying fuck about openness and the importance of real free competition.

There is real competition now. Apple vs Android vs Windows.

Openness - it's not the best for all situations. Most people actually want CLOSED systems.

Take this example:
An OPEN party is happening at a friend's house. Anyone can come to the party. Bring whatever alcohol, drugs they want. Parents will be gone for the weekend. Enjoy!
A CLOSED party is happening at another house. The parents are supervising. No alcohol or drugs allowed. Only a strict guest list is allowed. Entertainment and food provided.

Comparing apples and oranges does not make sense.

If you think that monopoly on infrastructure is totally awesome, there is just nothing I can say that will resonate with you.

Apple is Microsoft from the 90's all over again.

You were not around microsoft in the 90's if you think that.  Microsoft was closed source but not a walled garden. 

Word documents? But yes, Apple is actually much worse than MS ever was.

Where  Word documents default encrypted or protected in any way?  Nope.  Could you export to common formats?  Yes.

[Silly Money]

looks like the Apple haters have hijacked your thread.

Haters will hate.

That was a very constructive and convincing argument. Thank you for sharing.

Lol. I think most people on this forum hate Apple and with very good reason. Theyre kind of the opposite of what most of us are about.

[bananaControl]

Where  Word documents default encrypted or protected in any way?  Nope.  Could you export to common formats?  Yes.

It wasn't an open format and it wasn't documented correctly, making it impossible to make a text-program that could open and save word documents 100% correctly. There was always something that was broken... A bit of the same tactic they used in their implementation of CSS and HTML in IE. To the end user MS products always just seemed to work a little better than anything else, though of course we know that the real reason was of a different nature than just better quality.

And yes, you could save in other formats, but again, Word just magically seemed to be better at reading the other formats as well.

[Its About Sharing]

Not if the closed propertarian version wins. One company controlling the most widely used crypto currency would be a nightmare of proportions for everyone who cares about freedom and equal rights and opportunities for everyone. Sadly, most people don't give a shit, so maybe we deserve just that.

It needs a lot of support from the people, bitcoin has that support for various reasons.

Ordinary people know and trust (god knows why!) Apple as a company and brand, to them Bitcoin is noting more than a geeky pyramid scheme, so who would they choose you think?

A propriatary version may just be a pump and dump scheme in the end, as we see with many alt coins.

Apple would not profit from that, so no.

Apple will make a coin where mining hardware is build into all of their products (Or maybe just the iBeacon thingy or POS units) and then they will collect the mining fees themselves. They learned how to make money by being the middleman from iTunes and the sales of music. They will basically do the same thing here.

My ex was an apple fan-girl(?) and even though I tried with all the logic in the world to explain to her why monopoly on infrastructure is a bad thing, she wouldn't listen. Ordinary people just don't give a flying fuck about openness and the importance of real free competition.

This is actually an interesting thought, and while I have never thought of it until now, it seems very feasible that Apple would do something like this.   Wouldn't you, if it were your company?

I thought the same thing (interesting thought) at first, but Apple will need permission before using your electricity, CPU/Chip, internet, etc. It might not be as easy as it seems. Now, if they can pay out coins for using your rig or offer other compensation, then they might have something. But now we are back to centralized "money". And be sure, there will be billions of ICoins (what a sick though, almost makes me want to Ipuke in the Itoilet.)

IAS

[bananaControl]

looks like the Apple haters have hijacked your thread.

Haters will hate.

That was a very constructive and convincing argument. Thank you for sharing.

Lol. I think most people on this forum hate Apple and with very good reason. Theyre kind of the opposite of what most of us are about.

Sadly some are just very poor at saying why exactly, making it look like nothing but immature personal hate and jealousy.

[Silly Money]

What would they be jealous of? I dont hate them exactly but I don't like them because of many of their business practices.

[bananaControl]

Not if the closed propertarian version wins. One company controlling the most widely used crypto currency would be a nightmare of proportions for everyone who cares about freedom and equal rights and opportunities for everyone. Sadly, most people don't give a shit, so maybe we deserve just that.

It needs a lot of support from the people, bitcoin has that support for various reasons.

Ordinary people know and trust (god knows why!) Apple as a company and brand, to them Bitcoin is noting more than a geeky pyramid scheme, so who would they choose you think?

A propriatary version may just be a pump and dump scheme in the end, as we see with many alt coins.

Apple would not profit from that, so no.

Apple will make a coin where mining hardware is build into all of their products (Or maybe just the iBeacon thingy or POS units) and then they will collect the mining fees themselves. They learned how to make money by being the middleman from iTunes and the sales of music. They will basically do the same thing here.

My ex was an apple fan-girl(?) and even though I tried with all the logic in the world to explain to her why monopoly on infrastructure is a bad thing, she wouldn't listen. Ordinary people just don't give a flying fuck about openness and the importance of real free competition.

This is actually an interesting thought, and while I have never thought of it until now, it seems very feasible that Apple would do something like this.   Wouldn't you, if it were your company?

I thought the same thing (interesting thought) at first, but Apple will need permission before using your electricity, CPU/Chip, internet, etc. It might not be as easy as it seems. Now, if they can pay out coins for using your rig or offer other compensation, then they might have something. But now we are back to centralized "money". And be sure, there will be billions of ICoins (what a sick though, almost makes me want to Ipuke in the Itoilet.)

IAS

This is why I think that they might only be putting the mining hardware into the iBeacon hardware thingy or POS units.

[Littleshop]

Where  Word documents default encrypted or protected in any way?  Nope.  Could you export to common formats?  Yes.

It wasn't an open format and it wasn't documented correctly, making it impossible to make a text-program that could open and save word documents 100% correctly. There was always something that was broken... A bit of the same tactic they used in their implementation of CSS and HTML in IE. To the end user MS products always just seemed to work a little better than anything else, though of course we know that the real reason was of a different nature than just better quality.

And yes, you could save in other formats, but again, Word just magically seemed to be better at reading the other formats as well.

There are so many things wrong with what you said there. 

[1986]

I think apple will need bitcoin more than bitcoin needs them eventually. Maybe they realised this.

[bananaControl]

What would they be jealous of? I dont hate them exactly but I don't like them because of many of their business practices.

The people who call Apple-skeptics for "haters" might think that the negative vibes many people have towards Apple is a result of jealousy* of a "successful" company. This notion is only amplified when Apple-skeptics lash out against Apple and Apple users without giving any good valid reasons to why they do so.

edit

*jealousy

My wording might have been a bit off, what I'm really referring to is the Law of Jante made famous by a Norwegian writer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

[bananaControl]

Where  Word documents default encrypted or protected in any way?  Nope.  Could you export to common formats?  Yes.

It wasn't an open format and it wasn't documented correctly, making it impossible to make a text-program that could open and save word documents 100% correctly. There was always something that was broken... A bit of the same tactic they used in their implementation of CSS and HTML in IE. To the end user MS products always just seemed to work a little better than anything else, though of course we know that the real reason was of a different nature than just better quality.

And yes, you could save in other formats, but again, Word just magically seemed to be better at reading the other formats as well.

There are so many things wrong with what you said there. 

Then please enlighten me.

[bananaControl]

Apple is Microsoft from the 90's all over again.

Not even close.

Microsoft had 95% of the desktop market in the 1990s. There were no choices back then.

There are many, many choices now. Apple can't be a monopoly if Android has 70% of the market! I don't know what world you are living in.

Android is more of a monopoly, and more like Microsoft was in the 90s.

I should have been more clear. I was referring to the way that MS tried to kill competition in their markets in an effort to gain and keep their monopolies.

[BillyBobJoe]

That was a very constructive and convincing argument. Thank you for sharing.

You are very welcome!

I see plenty of Apple haters in here not supporting their position, while I also see Apple users trying to make a case that Apple products work fine for their needs.

A big difference between the two is Apple users don't seem to care if others use non-apple products or not.

[bananaControl]

That was a very constructive and convincing argument. Thank you for sharing.

You are very welcome!

I see plenty of Apple haters in here not supporting their position, while I also see Apple users trying to make a case that Apple products work fine for their needs.

A big difference between the two is Apple users don't seem to care if others use non-apple products or not.

To do that is very short sighted and is to completely miss the whole picture. A poor analogy could be: "I wouldn't have a problem with a new holocaust, because I'm not a Jew!". Many users of Word in the late 90's were probably also very happy users, because it worked just fine for them. Please go back and read the arguments already put on the table.