841–850 of 1001 posts
The way Apple purposefully aims to ostracize young people who don't own/can't afford an iPhone by defaulting to a proprietary, non-interoperable messaging system has been enough to turn me entirely against the company.
I hear people gripe about green versus blue and all I can think is: are we all suddenly grade schoolers who think the color of your clothes makes you cool?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
With non-Apple Watches, you can't 1) reply to texts, 2) answer phone calls (or place calls), 3) interact with other native iPhone applications (like Apple Health). You'll pry my Garmin from my cold, dead hands but there's no mistaking it for an actual "smart"-watch. I value it entirely for health & fitness, and the very few "smart" things it can do are just nice-to-have icing on the cake.
Thought experiment: how would the world respond if Apple decided to go full Atlas Shrugged and just closed their business? Turned off all their servers, closed all the Apple stores, fired everyone, etc.
> Google, Meta and Amazon are all facing similar suits, and companies from Kroger to JetBlue Airways have faced greater scrutiny of potential acquisitions and expansion.
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…
> 60% of Americans own a phone they're not allowed to install third party apps on
One could reasonably conclude that 60% of users have little or no interest in installing apps outside App Store. Nothing "wild" about that.
Stuff like Apple Vision Pro where you need an iPhone to scan your face is annoying. If you want a Apple Watch but have Android phone it's pretty much pointless. How does Apple get away with that? Worse than that from hardware to browsers over the years it all seems to be less open or to work with other systems, apps, OS. Linux being the exception of course.
You think of the Apple Watch or AVP as independent pieces of hardware, but the Apple model is that they're all one integrated system, of which you can choose what components to buy or not.
My biggest problem with this suit is that it attacks the core premise of interoperability that is one of the reasons people like the Apple ecosystem to begin with.
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…
> that person will limit the messaging functionality Don't have an iPhone -- what functionality do they limit?
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…
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…
Suing Apple(or any other company over stuff like this) when the fines will be a tiny slap on the wrist at worst will not incentivize proper behaviour, so there is literally zero reason for doing this except for the govt to feel good about itself, see!! we got a few hundred million from that evil corp for doing bad things. LOL. Apple could plead guilty tomorrow, pay the fine and continue doing business and not even notice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
With non-Apple Watches, you can't 1) reply to texts, 2) answer phone calls (or place calls), 3) interact with other native iPhone applications (like Apple Health). You'll pry my Garmin from my cold, dead hands but there's no mistaking it for an actual "smart"-watch. I value it entirely for health & fitness, and the very few "smart" things it can do are just nice-to-have icing on the cake.