361–370 of 593 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then why doesn't Apple take a 30% cut of every Uber driver fee? 30% of every DoorDash delivered, etc? Why is a platform for monetizing artists any different than a platform for monetizing your car?
Apple draws a pretty clear line, it's the difference between buying a book and an ebook. An ebook is delivered and consumed on your iPhone or iPad, a book is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think 30% is absurd, but that would definitely change things for every user. I don't want to install Adobe's store because I need to use their PDF reader. I don't want to install Microsoft's store because I need to use Teams or Outlook for work. Other App Stores mean that companies get to make that decision--not end users. How could it be otherwise?
So don’t install it then. You can use other software. Why would you limit everyone else rather than make a choice for yourself?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So don’t install it then. You can use other software. Why would you limit everyone else rather than make a choice for yourself?
This seems like the same question anyone who's happy with the way Apple runs things could ask those that want the government to step in and change it? Why not just go use Android, where things are exactly how you want them to be? Why limit everyone else rather than make a choice for yourself?
The antitrust case against Apple is so overdue it's embarrassing. What I don't get is people who defend it. Imagine Microsoft taking 30% of every purchase you make online because you used their OS to get there. Then would the defenders admit it's an obvious abuse of a monopoly? What makes it different for Apple?
This a pretty unfair comparison. Apple doesn't take a cut of any online purchases made through Safari. They also don't take a cut of any in-app purchases for physical goods. They only take a cut of purchases for digital good purchases and used entirely within an iOS app. The proper comparison to Microsoft would be buying software or games for Windows through the Microsoft store. Which, by the way, Microsoft also take…
It's all the things at the start that are anti competitive, not the cut.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your stats show web traffic, not sales or market share. For a monopoly you want to show market dominance by dollars, not activity. By sales units, Android dominates [0] with 327k vs iOS’ 38k (most recent quarter was 2019-q3). [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_Wide_Smartphone_S...
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-sta... iOS has 60% of the market in the US. This is cited (repeatedly) by the exact same Wikipedia article you looked at. PS: web traffic is largely a function of market share at this granularity.
This also shows that web traffic isn’t a function of market share because iOS users generate more traffic than Android users.
In a banking analogy, market share isn’t based on the number of checks written but by assets under management or number of customers or revenue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who do you want to pay for building and supporting this functionality? No, I can assure you that other companies are perfectly willing to build and support other app stores. Instead, Apple is the one spending extra money and extra effort in order to prevent this stuff. Other companies would be more than happy to build these other app stores, if Apple would just get out of the way.
Apple would have to develop new APIs and poke new holes in their security to enable this. Then they’d have to test and maintain these APIs. That’s work they don’t want to do and a cost they don’t want to pay for.
Well when you are engaging in illegally anti-competitive behavior, you have to take some actions to correct that.
But also, I am sure that other companies would even be willing to put in the effort to jailbreak the phone, in some combined effort, if they knew that Apple wouldn't try to engage in illegal anti-competitive practices to stop it.
Apple can't just break the law like this. I am not sure why anything you are bringing up counters the fact that they are breaking the law, with seriously illegal and anti-competitive practices.
But the jailbreaking solution, where major companies work together, to provide an easy to install solution, that enables other app stores, without help from Apple, would work pretty well, if Apple was not allowed to stop this effort.
If a company like facebook got on board, I am sure that they might be able to convince at least half of all users, to install their solution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Well for that comparison to work, we'd also have to assume Microsoft disabled installing unsigned software as well. Look no further than Xbox Store and how well you can run unsigned code on it. Sure, you can buy a physical game copy, but there are two issues with that: 1. Diskless versions of consoles are becoming more commonplace, thus removing that option. 2. If you buy retail, it is still a cut to Microsoft, just…
You can actually run unsigned code on a retail Xbox One console officially. There are ports of RetroArch to it and all. I suspect this permissiveness was a major reason it was never hacked throughout its full 8 year lifespan - homebrewers didn't need to enable piracy to do what they wanted.
- xbox always charges you for the privilege while apple has a free developer tier. The free tier is limited (no distribution of apps you wrote, app will time out and have to be reinstalled).
- xbox requires you to put the console in developer mode, which eliminates your ability to play commercial games. Apple does not have this feature (although some commercial apps do attempt to detect things like jailbreaks themselves).
So while the xbox developer mode might give homebrewers more capabilities than a developer account by apple, it doesn't affect revenue sharing for companies who want to make a profit off of their work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is indeed alternative ways to get software on Apple mobile devices. Why is this such a common belief? Edit: your point seems to be revolving around the access to physical disks for playstation/xbox, which is 1. Limited to devices that have a disk drive, 2. Limited to software that would similarly be sold on the sony/xbox stores, and 3. Still gives sony/microsoft a cut of the sale. Edit 2: No, I'm not talking ab…
Jailbreaking doesn't count.
Edit: Can't reply further, but the way of doing this is much the same as installing unsigned apps on an xbox. Using a (free) developer account you can sideload things quite easy using something like https://github.com/ios-control/ios-deploy
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jailbreaking doesn't count.
No jailbreaking necessary. Edit: Can't reply further, but the way of doing this is much the same as installing unsigned apps on an xbox. Using a (free) developer account you can sideload things quite easy using something like https://github.com/ios-control/ios-deploy
Edit: So the only way to do it besides jailbreaking is for literally everyone who wants to do it to pay Apple an extra $100 on top of what they already paid for their iDevice. (Sharing will get your certificate revoked.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is indeed alternative ways to get software on Apple mobile devices. Why is this such a common belief? Edit: your point seems to be revolving around the access to physical disks for playstation/xbox, which is 1. Limited to devices that have a disk drive, 2. Limited to software that would similarly be sold on the sony/xbox stores, and 3. Still gives sony/microsoft a cut of the sale. Edit 2: No, I'm not talking ab…
Can my tech illiterate grammy do it all by herself using just her iphone? if no, then OP's point stands.