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

711–720 of 1001 posts

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

#711

Post by munchler »

skeaker wrote: post #687
amadeuspagel wrote: post #611

> In 2010, a top Apple executive emailed Apple’s then-CEO about an ad for the new Kindle e-reader. The ad began with a woman who was using her iPhone to buy and read books on the Kindle app. She then switches to an Android smartphone and continues to read her books using the same Kindle app. The executive wrote to Jobs: one “message that can’t be missed is that it is easy to switch from iPhone to Android. Not fun to…

This behavior is so overt that I am constantly baffled that otherwise rational people continue to make up excuses for Apple. See also this article where they overtly state that the green bubble thing is deliberately intended to cause lock-in: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/9/22375128/apple-imessage-an... I have been called a "violent criminal" on this very site because I criticized Apple's decision to remotely brick…

“Locking people in for cash” is a common business practice in tech and other industries. Try mounting a Nikon lens on a Canon camera, for example. You might not like it, but I’m not sure why Apple deserves special condemnation in this regard.

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

#712

Post by ken47 »

empath-nirvana wrote: post #556
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 like the app store, I like the restrictions, I don't want apple to change anything about it. I sort of think apple shouldn't try to comply with these sorts of potential lawsuits by making their app store worse, they should just let people jail break the phone and offer zero support for it. If people want to buy an iphone and shit it up, let them do it.

> I sort of think apple shouldn't try to comply

I know some of us like to think of Apple as some kind of corporate diety, but even Apple has to answer to the US government.

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

#714

Post by throwaway14356 »

my mental analogy is this.

Say someone produces a reading chair. Now say the company desires to restrict, shape or dictate which books one is allowed to read while sitting in the chair.

One could argue they should have such rights but historically it is quite unusual.

Similarly, if you pay for the chair and put it in your home it is tempting to think you've purchased it and that you own and control it.

The tos could state that the company may at nay time introduce a monthly fee, render the chair unusable or force you to return it without providing a reason.

They may revoke the unisex version and force the user to choose a sex or limit the license to a single user.

It could introduce tools to measure the weight of the user and use that to determine a violation of the single user agreement.

A popular book vendor might require you own one of their competing reading chairs and disallow reading in other chairs.

The company building the house can also grant it self all kinds of privileges. You must buy compatible appliances. They can put some weird connectors on them with some drm logic. np

The only reason not to have such possibly wonderful eco systems imho is that we already have hundreds of thousands of laws and regulations.

If we are to use and make products it should be as simple as possible. Using your weight to check if you are the registered user is not the point to start fixing it. The law should simply state that chair and subscription are separate products.

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

#715

Post by KorematsuFredt »

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…

None of these arguments are very satisfactory to me as a consumer and this appears to be more Mafia like behaviour than a genuine concern for market based competition.

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

#716

Post by danaris »

aabajian wrote: post #358

The blue background on messages sent between two iMessage users has to be one of the most brilliant vendor lock-in strategies. It is an artificial form of discrimination. I feel a slight annoyance whenever a non-Apple user forms a group chat as I know that person will limit the messaging functionality. In my opinion, the "monopolistic" aspect of it comes down to the fact that they tied it into an otherwise open messa…

> The blue background on messages sent between two iMessage users has to be one of the most brilliant vendor lock-in strategies. It is an artificial form of discrimination.

This is, always has been, and will always remain bullshit.

The problem isn't the blue vs green background. It would be the same if the backgrounds were purple and gold, red and gray, or just both blue.

The problem is the different capabilities between SMS and iMessage. And because those capabilities are different, it is useful and productive to communicate that in a clear, but unobtrusive way—like making their message bubbles different colors.

Apple doesn't control the featureset of SMS.

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

#717

Post by synergy20 »

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…

Apple is the old Microsoft but much worse. WinTel PC was so much more open comparing to Apple.

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

#718

Post by shmerl »

Good. It's hilarious how Apple complains that it "threatens our core practices". If their core practices are based on anti-competitive behavior (and they are), they should be totally threatened.

I want to see ban on competing browsers being mentioned in this case.

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

#719

Post by ineedaj0b »

throwaway14356 wrote: post #714

my mental analogy is this. Say someone produces a reading chair. Now say the company desires to restrict, shape or dictate which books one is allowed to read while sitting in the chair. One could argue they should have such rights but historically it is quite unusual. Similarly, if you pay for the chair and put it in your home it is tempting to think you've purchased it and that you own and control it. The tos could…

I don’t think this analogy works because you could have bought the competing chair - which proponents of loudly claim is better than the Apple chair - and gotten similar service. As a matter of fact I’m told the competing chair is much better, and not only that it’s cheaper! And I’m an idiot for buying the Apple chair

Buy the competing chair. This is not a monopoly.

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

#720

Post by harkinian »

aabajian wrote: post #358

The blue background on messages sent between two iMessage users has to be one of the most brilliant vendor lock-in strategies. It is an artificial form of discrimination. I feel a slight annoyance whenever a non-Apple user forms a group chat as I know that person will limit the messaging functionality. In my opinion, the "monopolistic" aspect of it comes down to the fact that they tied it into an otherwise open messa…

It's not artificial. SMS is terrible on its own, and that's none of Apple's fault. It's not like Android users are getting together and happily having SMS/RCS group chats.
Post reply on HN