Live data from Hacker News

Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

protocol.com

291–300 of 375 posts

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple "All" that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is there's going to be competition in what is now a monopoly. To say that the only difference will be lower quality is, at best, naive.

I'm interested to see Steam on the iphone rather than anything Epic might do

> I'm interested to see Steam on the iphone rather than anything Epic might do

Steam isn't even an app store on Android.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#292
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I really haven't heard a good argument against it. Everyone is just complaining that 30% is too high, or it shouldn't apply to IAP for some reason. None of the questions the judged asked really get to the heart of the matter: why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? What makes app stores different than the xbox marketplace or ebay? If the app store was more specific with the type…

why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? Because Apple has a monopoly in that area. That's what antitrust law is all about - using monopoly power to raise prices.

They have a monopoly on what? Apps in the Apple App Store? I agree they shouldn’t be able to use their market dominance in the app marketplace space to stop other app marketplaces from competing with their App Store, but within their own ecosystem that is way too specific of a thing to apply anti-trust rules to. The reason the App Store is popular is because of the iron grip they keep on their apps. Telling them they can’t control their apps the way they want is like telling a chip maker they can’t use a certain architecture because it is too fast and other companies won’t be able to compete with them.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#293
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I really haven't heard a good argument against it. Everyone is just complaining that 30% is too high, or it shouldn't apply to IAP for some reason. None of the questions the judged asked really get to the heart of the matter: why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? What makes app stores different than the xbox marketplace or ebay? If the app store was more specific with the type…

Rather, the question is, how can Apple control access to a device they have sold to customers by forcing all app deployments through their App Store? They can run the App Store quite whimsically if they allow side loading apps and other app repositories.

It isn’t illegal to side load another OS with another App Store onto your phone. But Apple is also well within their rights to design their phones to brick if they detect something they deem a security risk being loaded onto a device they sold. They tell you up front, before you buy it, what the device is designed for and what it isn’t. Xbox doesn’t let you run Word and won’t support it if you somehow figure out a way to. Is that not the same thing?

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most phone users aren’t interested in developing software on their phone. They aren’t interested in developing a better systemd. They have no idea what malware actually is. All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple, and the user will get apps that are poorly designed, chew battery, and don’t conform to the UX standards that Apple has set (eg: accessi…

> All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple "All" that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is there's going to be competition in what is now a monopoly. To say that the only difference will be lower quality is, at best, naive.

Great I can't wait to sideload the Epic Game store on my PS5 and Xbox series X. I also look forward to the outlawing of buying exclusive rights and laws that force developers to release their games on every platform in existence. Anything less is AnTi CoNsUmEr..

Some of us prefer to sit down and use a device without having to worry about installing an app or game store just to use/play one app...

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible to trick grandpa into sending money to Nigeria, too, but we don't use that as an excuse for forcing him to do business with a particular bank.

Nobody sane would argue that our current approach to banking security is fine, though. There definitely is money to be made with more secure and convenient money transfer, as proved by the quite large number of start-ups in the field. Among these, quite a lot work only among users of the same app without anybody being outraged about it.

Startups, Banking, Secure?

Wirecard and Theranos called, they want their fraud back.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#297
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I really haven't heard a good argument against it. Everyone is just complaining that 30% is too high, or it shouldn't apply to IAP for some reason. None of the questions the judged asked really get to the heart of the matter: why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? What makes app stores different than the xbox marketplace or ebay? If the app store was more specific with the type…

> why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? Do you simply not believe in anti-trust law then? What if microsoft forced you to pay them a 30 percent cut, for installing other web browsers, or apps? You would be ok with that?

Microsoft should absolutely be able to do that if they wanted and in fact do that when you buy something from their Windows store. But not allowing side loading of apps would be bad for business. Linux would see a huge gain in marketshare.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#298
post #193
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US perhaps but not so in the EU.

Not knowing much about the EU, would a district judge responsible for, say, northern Italy be able to change EU-wide business rules? With no appeal to a broader authority?

They are not changing the rules, they are changing the status quo by ruling that a currently widespread practice is breaking the law.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple "All" that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is there's going to be competition in what is now a monopoly. To say that the only difference will be lower quality is, at best, naive.

Great I can't wait to sideload the Epic Game store on my PS5 and Xbox series X. I also look forward to the outlawing of buying exclusive rights and laws that force developers to release their games on every platform in existence. Anything less is AnTi CoNsUmEr.. Some of us prefer to sit down and use a device without having to worry about installing an app or game store just to use/play one app...

You still totally can! You can just not buy those things! The rest of us get to choose! Delightful.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#300
I believe this is the most important line here:

"The judge also hammered Cook over the App Store commission reduction last year, as part of its new small business program, saying it "seemed to be a result of the pressure that you're feeling from investigations, from lawsuits, not competition"

Post reply on HN