Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 369 posts

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#211

Post by ubermonkey »

julianozen wrote: post #174
ubermonkey wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>While this is certainly true, computers and especially mobile ones need to allow consumers to run whatever software they want period. GOOD LORD NO. Apple's curation of the iOS environment is a FEATURE for me, not a bug. It leads to drastically increased stability and security, and means I don't have to sysadmin my telephone. I'll fight whoever suggests this is a good model for the desktop, but on the phone it's EXAC…

Apple has lied to us to make us believe that in order to have a secure device, we have to allow them to hand review every app that goes into the store. This is a false dichotomy. We can have alternate App Stores run by other trusted/neutral entities or app side loading or certificates and tools like gatekeeper for iOS. We can have an App Store where Apple does not censor things that don’t meet its curation preference…

They haven't lied. They've said that this is HOW they're keeping the platform secure. Perhaps there are other ways, but this is the path they've chosen.

>We can have alternate App Stores run by other trusted/neutral entities or app side loading or certificates and tools like gatekeeper for iOS.

You could, if Apple wanted. Apple doesn't want to. If you want that, use another platform.

I'm 100% fine with the phone being curated by the vendor in this way, largely because I trust Apple and Apple's motivations here. (I wouldn't trust Google in a similar situation, since their revenue is dependent on advertising and monetizing data about their users.)

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#212

Post by scarface74 »

rickdeckard wrote: post #198
scarface74 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they allowed to be default no. Are they allowed on the App Store - yes.

Neither of those are actually available, because iOS browsers are not allowed to use other browser-engines than Safari and apps have no means to manage SMS on behalf of the iOS messaging app.

Allowing third parties to intercept your SMS messages has been a security nightmare for Android.

But yes you can install a third party app like Google Voice with its own phone number and send text messages through it.

You would really trust any third party to intercept your sms messages?

On top of that, the third party dialer integrates with the native dialer and call history.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#213

Post by cforrester »

braythwayt wrote: post #73
ksec wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree on most if not all points but the article didn't argue against any of that. It did point out two things. Companies don't have to literally be the only buyer in a marketplace to wield "monopsony power." If competition isn't perfect — like when there are only a few companies in a market and they aren't undercutting each other's prices — companies gain some ability to lower the price on the stuff they buy. Sellers…

Monopsony is a slippery concept. If I tilt my head just right, we could be discussing the way WalMart purchases products. They sell a product in their store, they decide they want a certain margin, and then they tell suppliers to meet a certain price target if they want their products in WalMart.

I can remember a time when there were serious complaints about Walmart's influence in the home video market. It used to be very expensive to produce a DVD, and smaller studios couldn't afford to produce both an original widescreen and a cropped ("pan-and-scan") version for 4:3 televisions. For the longest time, Walmart would refuse to carry a title that didn't have a cropped version. It ended up forcing some to choose between losing a significant source of sales and compromising the visual quality of a film's only home video release.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#214

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ubermonkey wrote: post #210
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple's curation of the iOS environment is a FEATURE for me, not a bug. It leads to drastically increased stability and security, and means I don't have to sysadmin my telephone. That's fine. So why shouldn't it be possible to install apps on iOS via Google Play or Amazon, and if you trust only Apple you could just not use those? > Uh, no. Android phones are generally CHEAPER, so why does it take "money" to leave i…

It could be possible, but I see no reason to compel it. If you want other stores, use a different platform.

> If you want other stores, use a different platform.

But that's the problem. They're forcing you to choose both together when it should be an independent variable.

App developers also don't get to choose which phone their customers have already bought.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#215

Post by zbyte64 »

ldoughty wrote: post #117
braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

Kinda miss the point of the article, which focused on monopsony -- sole buyer. If your want to sell on the east coast (Apple), you need to put your product in wooden boxes no larger than X and documentation must be written in French, and you must have 10 employees that speak French. If you want to sell to the West coast, you put your product in plastic bags, and everything is in Spanish, and your employees need to sp…

Bingo. All this talk about market shares is not about monopsony.

Arguably Android is also monopsony.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#216

Post by appleshore »

braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

I’d agree if iMessages was open platform. It’s beyond ridiculous that Android is limited to SMS (or their messaging app) but iPhone shuts out everyone for a basic utility function.

I wish the US Government and regulators were pushing for this as opposed to trying to break encryption or force backdoors.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#217

Post by innagadadavida »

hkhanna wrote: post #86
braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

> They aren’t Facebook. Nobody has to buy an iPhone to keep in touch with all their friends who have iPhones. I have a different perspective. Many of my different friend groups use the "group messaging" feature on their phones. If everyone is using an iPhone in that group, it defaults to using iMessage. I switched to Android about 18 months ago, and it broke all of the group text message chains I had because some of…

SMS group chats work fine on all platforms I know of. If your friends don’t like you for having an android phone and kick you off for forcing the Green bubble in group chats, the problem is not Apple’s phones or software. It’s something else entirely.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#218

Post by dilap »

braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

I guess I'm not such a devotee of the free market. Ignoring legal theories for a moment and thinking about what ought to be, it seems clear to me that society at large is not well-served by having the defining artistic medium of our age in control of a single company, and censored to Disney-like levels.

Come up with whatever theory under existing laws or come up with some new laws, but it seems to me like this is a ridiculous situation that should have a legal remedy.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#219

Post by rahimnathwani »

braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

"Nobody has to buy an iPhone to keep in touch with all their friends who have iPhones."

If an iPhone user has friends that all use Duo on Android, she can install Duo on her iPhone.

If an Android user has friends that all use iMessage or FaceTime, there is no way for her to participate in group chats or group calls.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#220

Post by Angostura »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #177
Angostura wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone else is facing the issue, here's how to deregister your number from iMessage: https://selfsolve.apple.com/deregister-imessage/ Should be Job Done.

I deregistered my number and I still have messages that are delivered to my iPad instead of my android phone. If it wasn’t for that iPad next to my bed, I would have lost contact with some people entirely. What Apple’s doing should be fucking prosecuted by the FCC or FTC. It’s outrageous.

I suspect those messages mighty be using e-mail rather than phone number as the identifier.
Post reply on HN