541–550 of 639 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The parent was complaining about Apple being a filter on the apps that users can install on their phones. But that type of restriction is basically the industry norm.
What industry? Because I don't see gaming consoles being part of the same industry as smartphones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not enslaved. No one is forcing anyone to buy a Mac or an iPhone. As long as you have another option, your whole point is irrelevant.
This false argument is done to death by Apple apologists. Apple sells the device, but somehow feels itself entitled to control what the user can and can't do to it even after sale. It shouldn't be their business which apps a user wants to run on the device.
Why don't you address it then? There is a world of more open software and hardware out there if you want that freedom. Why should everyone be subject to exactly the product you want?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If all those apps pulled their versions down at the same time, Facebook/Paypal/Whatapp could very well wind up in court over antitrust concerns as well.
No, Faceboook removing it's app from the appstore does not constitute an issue with anti-trust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From a comment by onion2k in another thread: > This is a quote from the letter that Apple sent to Epic; >> If your membership is terminated, you may no longer submit apps to the App Store, and your apps still available for distribution will be removed. You will also lose access to the following programs, technologies, and capabilities:" >> [...] >> - Engineering efforts to improve hardware and software performance of…
I think you're missing the largest part of that, though, and that's what makes your statement incorrect. Apple is not blocking anything that Epic can do with the Unreal Engine. What they're threatening is to revoke the assistance that Apple has always provided Epic as a partner. When WWDC and other presentations roll around, Apple always has presentations from Epic on new games that are coming out. That partnership h…
> You will also lose access to the following programs, technologies, and capabilities:
> All Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools
If Apple had carried out that threat (which this injunction prevents), it seems like Unreal's development would have come to a halt, as Epic employees would no longer be able to legally use XCode etc. I suppose they could have kept writing code in a text editor, but there would have been no practical way to test it.
Source: Exhibit I https://www.scribd.com/document/473210410/Email-exhibits-fro...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple never threatened the developmental licenses of anyone using the Unreal Engine. They said they would remove all Epic access to developer program tools (e.g. beta access to operating systems and Xcode) and to partner programs (presumably for advance hardware testing). This would have a second-hand effect on Epic's ability to provide timely updates to their engine and remain competitive to alternatives like Unreal…
They threatened the supply chain. Would they do that to a normal developer? If you're a developer and one of your apps is found to violate an app store rule does Apple remove not only that app but also all your developer credentials and licenses? I imagine Apple just removes that app do they not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have an iPhone because I don't want to be like an Android. But you don't have to have it be like Android.... All you have to do is not install other app sores.
The lack of ability to install other App Stores reduces fragmentation and potentially improves the overall user experience of the product. If I wanted choice in App Stores I would buy an Android phone. I don't care about choice of App Stores and I prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps. Therefore, I bought an iOS device.
And you can have that. By not installing other app stores.
> reduces fragmentation
You don't have to fragment anything. Just only use the Apple App store.
> If I wanted choice in App Stores
You are not forced into choosing anything. All you have to do is not install other app stores, and you don't have to worry about choice.
> improves the overall user experience of the product.
You can have this improvement! If the Apple app store provides this value, then just only use the Apple app store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point the platform has to be considered common infrastructure, similar to power transmission lines, the railroad or the Windows OS. Just because you happened to build a successful platform should not imply that you can hold everyone hostage - that is why antitrust is a thing.
I am on board with the internet being common infrastructure, since you cannot own your own fibre cable that goes to the ISP (at least not easily and cheaply). With hardware it is different. Nobody forced you to buy an iPhone. Nobody forced you to buy an Android, Windows, Nokia, whatever phone. Same with laptops. If you want an open platform, buy one. If you want an open OS, install one. Don't buy an iPhone, complain…
Imagine if Microsoft required a 30 percent cut for any transaction that is done on a windows PC.
The same exact arguments you are using could justify this. But, obviously, this is illegal, and similar behavior was proven as such, by the courts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the Court doubts that an expert would suggest a zero percent alternative It's unfortunate that the percentage cut ends up overshadowing the real antitrust issue, which is that Apple (and Google) essentially has the power to make or break any arbitrary business that relies on their platform. They base it on vague and loosely enforced rules, which means companies never know if tomorrow is the end. Having a locked pla…
I mean the Microsoft Store charges 30% for games, Google play is 30%, Steam is 30%, I'm sure there are app stores I'm not thinking of that charge 30%. It seems to be the industry standard App Store cut.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the Court doubts that an expert would suggest a zero percent alternative It's unfortunate that the percentage cut ends up overshadowing the real antitrust issue, which is that Apple (and Google) essentially has the power to make or break any arbitrary business that relies on their platform. They base it on vague and loosely enforced rules, which means companies never know if tomorrow is the end. Having a locked pla…
I mean the Microsoft Store charges 30% for games, Google play is 30%, Steam is 30%, I'm sure there are app stores I'm not thinking of that charge 30%. It seems to be the industry standard App Store cut.
It isn't the 30%! It's that there's only a single way into iOS. It's a literal monopoly, and they are large enough that this matters, now.