Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#331

Post by crop_rotation »

throitallaway wrote: post #313
crop_rotation wrote: post #305

The comments here seem extremely emotional against Apple. If you want a free device then the android ecosystem has many great examples. The S23/S24 ultra are phones which are as good as the iPhone. I have always been an Android user because of the freedoms. But forcing iOS to become like android makes no sense. Android already exists and you can already use it. The onboarding app will even move all your data. iMessag…

> iMessage is even going to support the useless RCS standard What's useless about it? As I understand it, it will provide a massive upgrade over SMS/MMS. Exchanging videos via MMS (currently the only native OS option for Android iOS communication) is an exercise in futility.

It is extremely useless compared to Whatsapp/Signal. It is not even natively supported in android like SMS. Even in android the only app that supports it is Google Messages (unlike several for SMS). Nobody supports the protocol and everyone uses Google's implementation. Google's client, Google's servers, optional encryption. What is good about it. The only reason for it's existence is to make Google get a leg in the messaging clients after failures with their previous attempts (Gtalk, hangouts, allo). That is why nobody outside the USA would ever bother using it.

It doesn't do anything that Whatsapp/Signal don't. And there is nothing native about it in Android, other than Google Messages is force installed on all devices, and the rich vibrant ecosystem of android SMS clients was killed off to make way for it.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#332

Post by multimoon »

I don’t understand why Apple is the target and everyone - govts included - walk right past MS repeating what they’re best at. MS is currently pushing popup ads into windows that installs unsolicited extensions into google chrome and switches the search engine to bing - and will fear monger the user with vague security claims about switching back.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#333

Post by kmeisthax »

mudil wrote: post #114

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan

The problem is that private institutions can become their own mini-governments. Reagan denied this, but his quite could equally apply to Apple or Google as it did to, say, late-70s US government.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#334

Post by layer8 »

lokar wrote: post #18

As an iPhone user I am willing (and believe I am) paying Apple a premium for a well curated and reviewed App Store (vs android). I just wish they would stop “double dipping “ and charging far in excess of their costs (and in excess of reasonable profit) to the app sellers.

It isn’t that well-curated though: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39685272

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#335

Post by npteljes »

AlexandrB wrote: post #216
Workaccount2 wrote: post #173

iMessage is the most egregious monopolistic tool in Apple's garden. If the DOJ accomplishes nothing else besides forcing Apple to open up iMessage, it will be a victory. The lock-in of having functional communication with your friends and family is insane. Take that away and it becomes almost a no-brainier for people to consider competing devices. And no, nobody with an iPhone is interested in switching to whatever m…

I totally don't get this perspective. There are so many competing messaging platforms and they all work reasonably well on iOS. Because my various family and friend groups use different messaging apps I use all the following: WhatsApp, Signal, SMS, iMessage, Viber, and once in a while Facebook Messenger. I would say iMessage is kind of middle of the pack here. If I had to pick a favourite it's probably WhatsApp, but…

> There are so many competing messaging platforms and they all work reasonably well on iOS

And I'd love to have all of them opened up.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#336

Post by dgellow »

endisneigh wrote: post #129

I assert it is trivial to not buy Apple products, easy to make alternatives to Apple products and easy to buy feature equivalent devices to Apple products. In lieu of this what is the problem? If the government has a problem why not say any code should be able to be run on any device? Honestly I’m curious - what’s the problem? There are android phones that are superior to iPhones and let you run anything you want. Wh…

You could read the linked document and see for yourself what they think the problem is

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#337

Post by Fripplebubby »

theshrike79 wrote: post #306
Fripplebubby wrote: post #287

For folks who don't have time to read a 90 page document, the case rests on specific claims, not just the general claim that iPhone is a monopoly because it's so big. Here are those claims: 1. "Super Apps" Apple has restrictions on what they allow on the App Store as far as "Super Apps", which are apps that might offer a wide variety of different services (specifically, an app which has several "mini programs" within…

All of these are pretty sane, except for: > Also, the Apple Watch itself does not offer compatibility with Android Will they force Samsung and Google to have their watches interoperate with iOS too, or are they exempt because they are bit players in the field?

Here's a quote from the complaint:

> Apple’s smartwatch—Apple Watch—is only compatible with the iPhone. So, if Apple can steer a user towards buying an Apple Watch, it becomes more costly for that user to purchase a different kind of smartphone because doing so requires the user to abandon their costly Apple Watch and purchase a new, Android-compatible smartwatch.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#338

Post by visarga »

__Joker wrote: post #223
endisneigh wrote: post #129

I assert it is trivial to not buy Apple products, easy to make alternatives to Apple products and easy to buy feature equivalent devices to Apple products. In lieu of this what is the problem? If the government has a problem why not say any code should be able to be run on any device? Honestly I’m curious - what’s the problem? There are android phones that are superior to iPhones and let you run anything you want. Wh…

Can a argument be made that by not supporting other software on their platform, essentially platform is inhibiting competition, which hinders true price discovery and customer loses ? Like if cars don't allow other FSD on their platform, what choice does the customer has.

Yeah, cars should totally allow third party FSD integrations, provided they are certified to be safe. We can't risk pedestrians getting hurt just so we can have more app choices.

But side-loading apps or having an alternative App Store only exposes you to liability, not other people. So it's not the same thing. We should be free on our own risk.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#339

Post by darkwizard42 »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #290
abhayhegde wrote: post #209

I understand the evil practices of Apple to lock you up in their walled garden such as iMessage, easy sync between the devices etc. But, ultimately, wouldn't the choice of buying those products in the consumer's hand?

Generally in the US, if you want to participate in friends and family group messages, it's either iPhone or be left out.

Perhaps societal customs should change instead of infringing on the business practices (which don't violate a law).

The anticompetitive preference for internal apps though is pretty bad and I think Apple should be nailed on that, but they shouldn't be punished for creating a "better" (in quotes because I think Android is on the better standard for messaging) messaging experience.

Re: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

#340

Post by baq »

segasaturn wrote: post #293
Fripplebubby wrote: post #287

For folks who don't have time to read a 90 page document, the case rests on specific claims, not just the general claim that iPhone is a monopoly because it's so big. Here are those claims: 1. "Super Apps" Apple has restrictions on what they allow on the App Store as far as "Super Apps", which are apps that might offer a wide variety of different services (specifically, an app which has several "mini programs" within…

The messaging interop point is probably DOA since Apple has stated that they will be adding RCS support to iMessage. The smartwatch point is interesting and not an argument I've seen made before, but it's a very good example of Apple's vendor lock-in.

Quote from the article:

> The company “undermines” the ability of iPhone users to message with owners of other types of smartphones, like those running the Android operating system, the government said. That divide — epitomized by the green bubbles that show an Android owner’s messages — sent a signal that other smartphones were lower quality than the iPhone, according to the lawsuit.

I read that as 'interop' is a secondary issue, if an issue at all; the actual case is the green/blue segregation. If Apple embedded a fingerprint in every interoperable message and shown blue messages for iMessage-sent content, green background for others, it'd still be a problem even if messages are otherwise identical - unless all the features truly work on both, in which case the color split is purely status signaling.

Post reply on HN