Years ago API’s and apps that used them were expected to do some work offline and on slow networks. Then, suddenly, everyone was expected to have stable Internet to do anything. The reason, I think, is the few apps that expected to be always online seemed better to users and easier to architect. So most architectures went that way.
Times is taking a risk. The costs of all this will fall on them, if they don’t get the judgement they sought at the end of the day.
Plus OpenAI controls those costs and could drive them up.
Plus any future litigation by OpenAI users suffering damages due to this could arguably be brought against Time years forward.
It’s an odd strategy on their part for evidence that could have just been adduced by a statistician (maybe).
Agree with you on the watch and AirPods. For other services no. They either do provide some API, like for payments, iCloud files or Auth, or can’t do so safely, AirDrop and iMessage. And for those alternatives do exist. Just not as system integrate.
There’s a difference. Microsoft competed unfairly because it sold software like Word that apparently internally used secret system calls only Microsoft devs knew about. They gave their other software divisions a big advantage, extending their dominance in OS to apps.
Apple software, like Pages, apparently only uses the same set of system calls available to everyone else.
Most posted job positions in the US, that I see, explicitly state they will not sponser candidates. But how receptive are they to TN visa candidates and do you see that attitude changing in the near future?
Absolutely correct, just making laws themselves have little effect over anything.
Enforcement is the key. For most laws that step is an afterthought. But there are creative ways to do it.
The compilers were fine, even if not producing maximally optimized code. Intel’s decision to add x86 compatibility circuitry to the die was probably the fatal one, it slowed everything down; made for terrible comparisons with existing x86 performance and generally signalled a lack of confidence. Something like Rosetta was out of the question, but they could have just had better transitioning tools for those code bases that couldn’t be recompiled easily.