• Users of those services will be steered toward the web
  • Searches indicate apps from Meta may also be unavailable

Bypass paywall: https://archive.ph/4kfYI

        • fhqwgads@possumpat.io
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          8 months ago

          Windows phone. Originally Microsoft put out a number of apps as web wrappers, but the mobile YouTube site kind of awful. So Microsoft wrote a YouTube app of their own that was actually kind of great and allowed you to download videos and play audio in the background and basically actually work right. Google threw a fit and basically made Microsoft delete the app.

          Windows central still has a bunch of articles from the time up.

          https://www.windowscentral.com/search?searchTerm=Phone+YouTube

          • dist0rt3d@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I still miss early Windows Phone. Looking at what Windows desktop has evolved into though, I’m not sure what kind of monster Windows Phone might have turned into if it were still around.

  • aluminium@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Thats a big oof. Imagine buying this thing, going into the Appstore and not even finding YouTube and Spotify! Would immediately dampen my mood.

    This feels a bit like Smartwatches (Android Wear and Apple Watch) all over again for me. Where already at launch the third party “App” selection was really underwhelming with Major Apps like Youtube, Spotify, … absent and it never getting much better.

    But I get it. Apple always talks a big game about how much they love developers and how awesome they are but in reality they treat them like shit. Now Apple needs them and they give Apple this middle finger. Rightfully so!

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is just businesses slowly shrinking back to their actual valuation. No one’s shelling out a thirty percent gratituity just to be involved with very expensive vr.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Pretty much every other platform charges 30% too. Steam? 30% Xbox? 30% PlayStation? 30% Google Play? 30% Samsung Galaxy Store? 30% YouTube Ad Revenue? 45%!

      The only one that doesn’t is Epic, which charges 12% and recently it came out that they were struggling to make the store profitable.

      So, not sure why Apple gets singled out here.

  • Fluid@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Why bother with making any apps these days when you can just build a web app and have it work across platforms.

    • 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Because they almost always universally suck across platforms. Only exception I’ve seen thus far is Figma.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Because once you add all the tracking and advertising, and try to prevent ad-blockers, they don’t work as well. You’re also limited in tracking by restrictions all browsers have to some extent

      • bitwolf@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Webassmely is still an option. Iirc Photoshop uses this for it’s web version and it seems to work very well

  • ombremad@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Nice of Google to let us know we can just use Safari with Adblock, SponsorBlock, DeArrow and Vinegar to have a better experience than with their app.

    • qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      To be fair, a lot of people were wondering the same thing when the iPad was announced. Now there’s like a billion of them out there.

      • ji17br@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        They were wondering that for the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, the Apple Watch, and AirPods. I’d bet that in 10 years a decent portion of the population will have some sort of headset, Apple or otherwise.

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          People understood what the iPhone was about immediately. Heck, they knew before it was even announced.

          Same for the Apple Watch…ish. People didn’t know exactly what area it would end up focusing on, but the idea of getting and responding briefly to notifications without getting your phone out has always been appealing.

          AirPods people have, again, always understood the appeal of. People are/were just angry at the option of using wired headphones being taken away.

          • ji17br@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I mean, yeah, you can find people who believed in them. But the general consensus around all those products was they are too expensive, don’t offer any meaningful upgrades over current tech, or are just useless and no one will want them.

            I’ve been reading MacRumours forums since before the iPhone launch and it’s always the same thing regarding new products. Without using them, people can have an hard time seeing the positives. I think that issue is even bigger now with the Vision Pro.

      • aluminium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        The iPad always made 100% sense to me. The first Smartphones were fun and just joyful to use for simple Tasks. A lot of stuff was managed at a system level and Apps and games at the time were genuinely made very well and were great to play / use. Also keep in mind that at the times phones were at best 4". So getting the same experience on a much bigger screen always made sense to me.

        Its only now that people try to use these things as a laptop replacement where they fall apart. But i.m.o. that was never the point and people got gaslit by marketing to believe that using a tablet as laptop replacement is viable.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        no, they werent. the ipad replaced the netbooks everyone wsa using until tablets became viable. again, an actual use case for a product.

        theyve been pushing these headsets for years now, and theyve gained little traction and not solved any of the common problems.

        anyone who thinks this is will some popular thing everyone will be doing is smokin the reefer, or just not paying attention

        • Pepsi@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          do you seriously think retail consumers are the demographic Apple is trying to capture right now?

          talk to some creative professionals & craftsmen. my company used to work with hololens on a regular basis but there way too much jank in how it performed in a live setting. If the Vision Pro provides even the same level of utility but manages to make live object rendering & tracking consistent and reliable, they’re going to sell truckloads. Hollywood alone has probably 100 different ways to use this tech on set to slim creative workflows and save time (and therefore money). a $5000 headset is practically a rounding error when your principals cost 10x that per hour.

    • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      From what randos on the net have said the next closest headset that doesn’t require a computer to operate costs $5k+ so from an enterprise standpoint they could more cost efficient there. So apparently it might appeal to the enterprise market.

      • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I have seen much dumber, much more expensive tech in the wild in offices.

        If it lives up to the hype, it could replace 2-3 desktop monitors (or convince some executives it can, anyway). It’s about the same price as two Apple Studio Displays. I’ve seen offices with very expensive standard equipment. $3500 per employee isn’t all that much to begin with if it’s legitimately useful.

        • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m just genuinely confused by the value proposition. $3500 seems to be about a 1000% Apple Tax over comparable tech. I’m sure the interface will be slightly nicer, but the Venn diagram of those who need the unique benefits of Apple’s product overlapping those who have this much money to spend has to be very small. For business or personal use.

            • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              To be clear, my value question and note about the Venn diagram is that there may be a specific configuration of features only on the Vision Pro, but “comparable tech” includes to me all of the standard VR/AR products out there that as I understand it (correct me if I’m wrong) can do 95% of what Vision Pro can do. So, the Quest line, the Vive line. Even the ultra high-end products I think are only $1500, aren’t they?

              • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                I’ve got a Vive, it’s nice but I wouldn’t say it’s comparable to the Apple headset. It’s VR only, like Meta’s but Apple are trying to do both AR and VR. The biggest difference though is in the displays. The Vive is great for gaming but that’s about it. Movies don’t look to great and working with text is a horrible experience due to the low resolution and the screen door effect.

                Apple’s is probably the first “affordable” headset that can be used as a replacement for a monitor.

    • pearable@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Admitably I have too much money, but I might buy one of these in a few years as a monitor replacement. Depends on how good it is and how good the alternatives are

      • excitingburp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Here’s the state of the art VR: https://www.bigscreenvr.com/. You’d need that plus Valve base stations and controllers, so about $1500 total. It’s miles ahead of anything anyone else is offering, especially Apple. You can’t demo it to others though, it really does only work for the person that it’s made for.

        • pearable@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’ve seen the LTT video on that. Trouble is I’d need a computer to power it since my work computer struggles as it is. I work from home and the office and being able to use it in both environments would be helpful. Base stations are a pain in the ass to setup when you want to switch location a couple times a week.

          One of the standalone headsets make a lot more sense for my use case. I’ve been thinking about getting a quest 3 but I need to use one to see if the fidelity is good enough. I wish there was a linux based headset I could tinker with but the VR market is still young. Hopefully Valve will pull a steam deck in VR.