151–160 of 177 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
iTunes and Apple TV aren’t app stores. The Apple TV App Store is listed.
That explanation does not work. The DSA isn't a law restricted to App Stores. Also, podcasts and ebooks are not apps, but they listed their ebook store and podcast subscriptions platform in this disclosure. Why not the music store, the TV series and movie subscription service?
> ‘online platform’ means a provider of hosting service which, at the request of a recipient of the service, stores and disseminates to the public information."
For some content, particularly music, video, and some ebooks, Apple is the merchant of record. They are not acting as a platform for that content but as a traditional retailer. Compare this with the App Store, where Apple instead acts as a platform, intermediating the dissemination of information between non-Apple content providers and the public.
A service like Amazon would have this distinction as well. Some interactions are direct retail transactions between an Amazon entity and the public. At the same time, its Amazon Marketplace service provides a platform for non-Amazon sellers to disseminate information to the public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All those riches are taken back as taxes. So while it sounds like europeans are rich it’s just on paper. But they take comfort in projecting their own status on similarly poor people from parts of europe that are developing faster but are bit behind since you know they only recently became free. It’s hilarious to observe and funny in a sad way.
Far better to live in a low tax, failed state with extreme economic inequality. At least we’ve got Apple Watches, am I right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, sort of how Microsoft could argue that there exists two separate markets for Windows running on stationary compute devices and Windows for mobile devices. Except this is a sad joke and letting Apple get away with two devices running the same OS would be playing into their hand that they stacked years ago when they split them off. What is up with the enormous amount of people on this site who are inexplicably ap…
The Microsoft comparison would be more like the Microsoft Store on Windows (the PC client version) vs. Xbox.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I get the position here. Different device classes, different markets. I've gotten more than a few apps approved on tv, watch, Mac, iOS, iPad. They are distinctly different. As much as Apple is helping us leverage 'one code base to rule them all' there are so many gotchas and detail required to make great experiences on each.
The App Stores share user accounts, send a shared invoice at the end of the month, and many of the apps you buy are compatible with multiple platforms (eg. my calendar app comes with an iOS, a watchOS and an iPadOS version). And the store is called just "App Store" on every platform. Claiming that I somehow used 3 different stores to buy a single app is an accounting trick, nothing else.
It does not run on watchOS without extra work, correctly?
I think their position is kinda defensible here. Yeah maybe with iPad/iOS not so much, but for the other devices, definitely
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I get the position here. Different device classes, different markets. I've gotten more than a few apps approved on tv, watch, Mac, iOS, iPad. They are distinctly different. As much as Apple is helping us leverage 'one code base to rule them all' there are so many gotchas and detail required to make great experiences on each.
The App Stores share user accounts, send a shared invoice at the end of the month, and many of the apps you buy are compatible with multiple platforms (eg. my calendar app comes with an iOS, a watchOS and an iPadOS version). And the store is called just "App Store" on every platform. Claiming that I somehow used 3 different stores to buy a single app is an accounting trick, nothing else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The App Stores share user accounts, send a shared invoice at the end of the month, and many of the apps you buy are compatible with multiple platforms (eg. my calendar app comes with an iOS, a watchOS and an iPadOS version). And the store is called just "App Store" on every platform. Claiming that I somehow used 3 different stores to buy a single app is an accounting trick, nothing else.
But does the iOS app run directly on the iPad? (with a good user experience?) It does not run on watchOS without extra work, correctly? I think their position is kinda defensible here. Yeah maybe with iPad/iOS not so much, but for the other devices, definitely
I think there should be a hard rule, that if companies try to sell something as the same to consumers, they immediately loose if they try to argue they are separate things when it comes to regulations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that the definition of a VLOP is >45M MAU, and the iOS store is the only one that's even remotely close to being over that, what do you object with in this characterization? Also you left out the very next sentence , which completely reverses the interpretation you're trying to imply: > Nonetheless, Apple intends, on an entirely voluntary basis, to align each of the existing versions of the App Store (including…
I think the point is: App Stores for iPhone and iPads are in reality one and the same. Apple tries to artificially split them, so they can avoid regulations for at least one of them.
> iOS App Store: 101 million > iPadOS App Store: 23 million Asserting that the iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store - and totally isn't in scope for the regulations - is certainly a bold strategy. I wonder why iTunes and Apple TV+ aren't included, and why Podcasts is only counting paid subscribers. Is there some obvious reason why these kinds of services would be out of scope?
> iOS App Store: 101 million > iPadOS App Store: 23 million Asserting that the iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store - and totally isn't in scope for the regulations - is certainly a bold strategy. I wonder why iTunes and Apple TV+ aren't included, and why Podcasts is only counting paid subscribers. Is there some obvious reason why these kinds of services would be out of scope?
How is it then a "different store"?