So every single “open” standard seems to suck compared to the integrated solution.

What do you gain from it remaining closed? Why are you so defensive about the idea of Apple being forced to open it up? Are you an Apple employee or do you have Apple stocks or is there any other reason? You lose literally nothing and gain lots from them being opened up. I don't care about any "trouble" Apple has with it because I am not Apple. I am a person who thinks of his needs first, just as Apple is an entity that thinks of their needs first. They don't need your help for that. Just like Apple my needs come first, and my needs definitely think its more enjoyable to see Apple (and other hardware makers) opened up because it benefits me. I always advocate for and practice things that benefit me, I don't care if it benefits Apple, if it does, good for them, if it doesn't its not my problem either. And Apple thinks the same of you and me and all is customers.

Well, the first thing I gain is a non shitty way of using Bluetooth headphones without “some gotchas”.

You get that with or without Apple technology. There's not a single 'gotcha' you've named yet.

Furthermore, Apple's integrated solution quite literally depends on the Open standard of Bluetooth to operate. Whether or not you consider it a bad thing, quite obviously the integration and open solution both work fine alongside one another.

I didn’t say there were “some gotchas” the person defending the open standards did

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37733315

Yes and the phone also depends on standards when it comes to electricity. The fact is that Apple’s work on top of the standard provide a more robust more user friendly implementation.

Please answer the sibling question above, what is the difficulty in answering such a simple, clearly stated question? Why are you refusing to answer that and trying to change the topic each time?

Which question is that? Apple implemented things on top of the standard to make Apple headphones work better than standard BT devices with their own hardware. But they still implement the standards.

This shows the power of an integrated solution. Apple released a better way to pair Bluetooth headphones with their devices and at the same time got the better method implemented across their computers, phones, tablets, watches and set top boxes.

That’s something you couldn’t do with an open standard as quickly.

I pair my headphones to one device that I’m signed into and they automatically get recognized by all my devices.

Since you seem to have trouble with even simple English, I will ask again. What do you lose from Apple being forced to make the drivers etc open and devices compatible with other devices? I don't care if it causes apple more or less work, I care how it affects me. Why are you not answering if you think you have anything at all to lose from Apple being made to open stuff up?

I see you refused to answer this question. You are busy in other threads after this. Says a lot you repeatedly refuse to answer an extremely simple question stated multiple times, in many different ways.

> That’s something you couldn’t do with an open standard as quickly.

We have been saying this for days, across 30 fucking comments in this godforsaken chain, but you do not listen. Let me spell it out. If you ignore me this time, I won't bother responding.

You could do this with an Open Standard, just as quickly. This technology relies on Bluetooth MAC addresses and iCloud file sync, not fairy dust.*

Even if we ignore the fact that other manufacturers have it too, you won't lose this Apple product should Apple be forced to open it up. Its very telling you simply refused to answer that point blank question completely and tried to change the topic. I am asking you again, even more point blank: what exactly do you lose if Apple is forced to open up this product and release its driver sources, etc? How does it change anything at all with how the device is already working for you? Why are you unable to give a straight answer to such an extremely simple question?

This website is not a serious place. Intelligent people are not attracted to a platform calling itself "Hacker News" - roleplayers and onlookers get sucked in instead. Venture capitalists and entrepreneurs get tricked into thinking that this is problem-solving. DogTV™ gets funded and busts out, destitute shareholders and makers go looking for the next big thing. The cycle continues.

With some people, I have no idea where they fall on the spectrum of self-serious argumentation. I usually don't even care; pretty much all feedback is valuable on a forum like this. When people preclude good-faith discussion around Apple hardware with weaksauce rhetoric though, it's pretty obvious that they're putting their emotions first. I'll field any discussion around Apple and their altruism, but I won't accept petty greed or speculation as a defense. They're an opaque company that deserves the scrutiny they recieve, regardless of the unofficial rationale people roll out.

This problem isn't specific to Apple hardware, or really the tech industry as a whole. Every field has it's pundits; you can usually identify them when they use weak rhetoric and avoid directly addressing your argument. It's still especially bad with Apple technology though, since so little of it is documented well enough to definitively refute any claim. You can't corroborate behavior on your iPhone with source code, or visit the iCloud datacenters to ensure everything is being handled with white gloves. People who know the platform well usually know that there is no definitive answer, and inflammatory riff-raff discussions float to the top.