181–190 of 1001 posts
> By tightly controlling the user experience on iPhones and other devices, Apple has created what critics call an uneven playing field, where it grants its own products and services access to core features that it denies rivals. I once worked on a large enterprise platform. We developed our own applications for the platform, and other third parties developed applications for the platform. We had to regularly scan our…
Finally. It was about time that this would happen. Google got one anti-trust lawsuit, Meta should get another one (by owning too many social networks with billions of users each) and after the failed anti-trust lawsuit that Epic tried to sue Apple under, this time the DOJ is finally going after Apple. Good. I'm really looking forward to the United States v. Apple Inc. anti-trust lawsuit that will actually make some c…
No. The change they should make is to allow sideloading. I don't care if the developer pays less than 30% when Apple can still censor what I run on my phone.
Perhaps a hardware engineer can help me out here, but I don't think Apple makes an unreasonable margin on the iPhone. Overall they make 26% [0]. Really quite reasonable considering highly-developed proprietary software is bundled with the device They make a lot of money because they sell * a lot * of iPhones. [0] https://valustox.com/AAPL
For practically any hardware startup if their margins aren't >33% they will fail to scale, wither on the vine, and die. My employer makes space hardware and our overhead R&D expenses are so high that if we made 26% margin we would be bankrupt in a year. So I think ~30% is probably a minimum floor to shoot for. Just looked it up and Samsung Electronics has a margin that has ranged from 30% to 46% over the last couple…
> The Justice Department, which began its investigation into Apple in 2019, chose to build a broader and more ambitious case than any other regulator has brought against the company. As I was reading the specific charges detailed in the article, I was thinking this case seems like a stretch and will be difficult to prove. Apple will argue that security and/or performance reasons drove their decisions related to brows…
They will make that argument, and the government will point out that Apple is trying to charge 27% everywhere those choice decisions were taken away, pretty conclusively proving... it's all about collecting the rent.
Which is not illegal.
Apple getting sued in the US and EU is really about finding an equilibrium between 3 stakeholders - Apple, Users & Developers. The status quo favors Apple and Users. Developers led by companies like Epic just want a bigger piece of the pie. That's it.
> The Justice Department, which began its investigation into Apple in 2019, chose to build a broader and more ambitious case than any other regulator has brought against the company. As I was reading the specific charges detailed in the article, I was thinking this case seems like a stretch and will be difficult to prove. Apple will argue that security and/or performance reasons drove their decisions related to brows…
How do you think they would spin Messages interoperability as security or performance?
There are too many quotes 'from Apple management' in the compliant that need context. Something doesn't add up. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24492020/doj-apple-an... Either that, or Apple's management has become truly rotten. That would be the saddest realization.
> The Justice Department, which began its investigation into Apple in 2019, chose to build a broader and more ambitious case than any other regulator has brought against the company. As I was reading the specific charges detailed in the article, I was thinking this case seems like a stretch and will be difficult to prove. Apple will argue that security and/or performance reasons drove their decisions related to brows…
How do you think they would spin Messages interoperability as security or performance?
One reason folks LIKE apple is because apple has the market power to do things that yes - hurt other businesses but that make the consumer experience better.
When I get my iphone it's not loaded with carrier crap. Seriously, android you might be getting tons of carrier junk on your phone.
When I go to cancel a subscription its super easy. Apple even REMINDS me to cancel if I delete an app with a subscription tied to it (ie, that renews annually). They also notify me in ADVANCE of renewals to let me cancel.
Trial offers with higher renewing rates, the renewal rate is at the same font size and right in the payment acknowledgement for any trials.
And the list goes on.
Look at this against the lack of enforcement against totally blatant scams (billions) from the elderly. Total ripoffs and dark patterns - unconcealable subscriptions etc etc. Of all the consumer harm - apple should be way way way down on the list.
The point the suit misses is that one can simply buy an Android phone if they like. Millions of people literally do every year. Choice already exists.
If you want to have a functional social circle in the US, choice doesn't really exist.
The rest of the world is on cross platform apps and couldn't care less what their friends type from.