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

421–430 of 1001 posts

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

#421

Post by sneak »

mariodiana wrote: post #410
gnicholas wrote: post #13

> 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…

Perhaps this is essentially more lawfare against a party antagonistic to the political aims of Washington players. We know that our national (as well as state) law enforcement entities have been alleging for more than a decade now that Apple's encryption practices stymie their efforts to catch "bad guys." What better way to put back room pressure on a company.

This is a false narrative. iPhones back up full message history and all photos by default in a non-e2ee fashion that is easily readable by both Apple and the government unless the user and everyone they message with specifically opts into e2ee (which approximately nobody has, even in tech circles).

There is no “going dark” issue on iOS platforms. Apple has played ball in full with the USG on that front. In fact, Android backups are e2ee so the government can get more data from Apple on iPhone users than they can get from Google for Android users.

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

#422

Post by Apocryphon »

vessenes wrote: post #346
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #288

It's wild to me to see people defending Apple in the comments here. 60% of Americans own a phone they're not allowed to install third party apps on, and the ONLY way to get apps is to pay a 30% fee to Apple on every purchase. Imagine if Windows allowed you to only install apps acquired through their store, and with the same 30% fee. Microsoft literally had a huge anti trust case against them for simply setting a defa…

It's nothing like a slam dunk case. In fact, it's an attempt by DOJ to stretch and redefine the edges of their rights under anti-trust rules. It's also nothing like Microsoft -- Microsoft was a monopoly, full stop, in the 1990s. They were well over 90% of desktop market share in business, and likely close in consumer. And as 1990s era Microsoft employees will remind you if you ask them -- "there's nothing wrong with…

> In fact, it's an attempt by DOJ to stretch and redefine the edges of their rights under anti-trust rules.

Given the incredibly attenuated state of antitrust enforcement in this country, maybe that's not such a bad thing. Going after the most profitable company in human history would make quite a statement, producing a chilling effect to the corporations.

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

#423

Post by nomercy400 »

nox101 wrote: post #294
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…

Your mobile device is a gateway to much of the world. You seem to think it would be okay for a car manufacture to make it impossible to use your car except to drive to business that pay the car maker 30% of every purchase. I'm guessing you'll say people should be able to opt into such a car if they want but if that car has 60% of the market now it's effectively influencing the entire economy. Prices of groceries are…

The question is, can you buy a car from a different manufacturer? When it comes to cars, yes you can.

Is apple a monopoly? Probably not, because you can also switch to android. Does Apple have a large enough share of the market to influence the market? Likely, which is why the EU has DSA and DMA now.

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

#424

Post by sneak »

RNAlfons wrote: post #310
gnicholas wrote: post #13

> 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…

People waved the EU case away with the same argument. Actually it is a kind of iArgument. However nobody buys it besides their most loyal customers.

Nah, users really are dumb and really will follow steps that will result in malware getting on their devices. This happens all of the time in Android-land. Burying the setting won’t change this, people will follow tutorials to disable the security protections if they think it will get them the content they want (and, in some cases, it will, wrt pirate apps etc).

There’s no real way to square the circle: either Apple (and the state) has realtime app censorship control (nominally for malware, as well as any other thing the state or Apple’s business model feels existentially threatened by), or the user can install any app they want, with all of the associated risks. Even with notarization and self-distribution you’re still in the first category because the state can compel Apple to treat protest apps or non-backdoored e2ee messaging apps the exact same as they do malware, and prevent them from launching.

Users mostly want the former, because most users aren’t worried about government censorship or oppression. Tech people and cypherpunks and pirates and protesters usually want the latter. Tech people usually want the former for their parents/grandparents for whom they serve as device sysadmin.

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

#425

Post by Wowfunhappy »

ben7799 wrote: post #384
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…

Interesting, I've had 2 Garmin Smart Watches and never felt like Apple was restricting them. I am curious what things the iPhone does that others aren't allowed to do. Most of the differences between Garmin and Apple Watch seem like they were conscious decisions where they each decided to take a different direction. It's one of those weird things where it seems like the case has a bunch of holes. You can use an iPhon…

The Pebble was very obviously hampered by iOS limitations. In order to offload any code to the phone, you either had to write the code in Javascript (so it was basically a web app) or direct the user to manually download a separate companion app from the App Store. If iOS killed the companion app because it hadn't been opened on the iPhone recently (because, y'know, you were using it on your watch and not your phone), you had to manually relaunch the app on your phone.

This is all before even getting into things like ecosystem integration.

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

#426

Post by deegles »

ryandrake wrote: post #420
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…

I just don’t understand the appeal of “Super Apps”. Do users really want to hire a taxi with the same application they use to message their friends, and have that be the same application they use to buy household goods, and have that be the same application they use to control their garage door? It doesn’t make sense to me. These are totally different tasks. Why would a user want to use the same app to do them? Imagi…

> Do users really want ...

The answer is clearly yes in a lot of markets, even if purpose-built apps might be better at a specific tasks, a single app that does dozens of things "well enough" is more convenient than having to juggle dozens of login infos and para-relationships with app developers (managing graymail etc).

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

#428

Post by samatman »

padthai wrote: post #357
davidham wrote: post #318

Regarding the Apple Wallet: what about it is uncompetitive? I can add credit cards from many providers to it, and as far as I can tell Apple doesn't get anything if I add my Chase card and use it with Apple Pay. I don't think banks have to pay Apple anything for their cards to be used in the Apple wallet. Nor do non-financial cards like memberships.

They get 0.15% of the transaction from the card issuer. And they do not allow card issuers to use the hardware on their own.

Visa and Mastercard both charge a fee for operating a payment network. Apple does as well.

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

#429

Post by Foxhuls »

fifticon wrote: post #106
boringg wrote: post #22

It looked surprisingly pretty weak to my non lawyer eyes. I mean I fully understand that apple business practices are building a moat through highly integrated software but its almost a feature for their system and you buy it knowing that. It feels like it goes back to Android vs Apple approach to their ecosystem.

Though the average hackernews reader knows all this, it is not my impression that the average apple consumer is aware of it. Anecdotally, many of the people in my social vicinity choosing apple, are the same people who make their choices based on what they presume the 'cool kids' believe is the 'in' choice. I don't experience iphone users as tech-savvy, as much as I seem them be 'anxious to be cool'.

I think most people just like how simple the products are overall. I prefer that my family, who tends to need a lot of basic tech support, have iPhones because they’re able to figure most things out and there’s no real risk of them messing anything important up. I’ve also noticed this strange phenomenon that the majority of people who complain about iPhones and the apple ecosystem don’t even use them. If someone doesn’t like what the company offers, they’re not forced to buy any of their products. I hate the idea of needing to deal with multiple app stores in the future because people who don’t even use the products have some sort of issue with it.

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

#430

Post by dublinben »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #98
bigtones wrote: post #23

Here is the non-paywall link to the full NYT article I shared: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/technology/apple-doj-laws...

Direct link https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24492020/doj-apple-an...

Here it is from Justice.gov as well: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1344546/dl?inline
Post reply on HN