So if Apple loses what does that mean for the stores for the PlayStation, XBox, and Nintendo.....
U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
131–140 of 258 posts
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#132So if Apple loses what does that mean for the stores for the PlayStation, XBox, and Nintendo.....
I don't think that's a fair comparison, since I can buy hard copy games from a variety of stores in addition to buying digital games. I can't buy hard copy iPhone apps.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#133Unfortunately for Apple, I do think the App Store being an exclusive and default way to purchase and load apps on iOS is in fact causing prices of Apps, in many cases, to be higher than they should be. The perfect example of this is the subscription services, right now you can get a cheaper subscription to a service such as Spotify if you buy it off the App Store. That is a prime example of how much the 30% payment t…
How long have you been using the iOS app store for? IMO App prices now are lower than they were when the app store first opened in iPhoneOS 2, and way lower than they were before the iPhone. I remember simple games for Palm OS costing at about $20 [0] . Nowadays that game would either be [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20040418012411/http://astraware....
This provides no basis for comparison because the App Store has been the only way to install apps on iOS that whole time, so that changing can't have been the difference.
Moreover, the market they're monopolizing isn't the market for apps, it's the market for app distribution. So the relevant price isn't the price of apps, it's Apple's 30%. Which is obviously higher than in markets where there isn't a single-party distribution monopoly, e.g. payment processing is typically ~3%, various packaging systems like apt are free (or user can download binary from website as on Windows), and the binary hosting cost per user is negligible.
There is also a tying argument. App Store ties payment processing, distribution and curation together when the buyer might want different providers for each.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a fair comparison, since I can buy hard copy games from a variety of stores in addition to buying digital games. I can't buy hard copy iPhone apps.
Yes you can but hard copy games, but guess what? Those games still have to be approved by the console maker and won’t run unless they have a digital signature from the console manufacturer. It’s been that way since the 80s.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#135online presence requires app
to have an app my business "has to be approved by Apple"
That's a freaking monopoly.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#136In today's world successful business often requires online presence online presence requires app to have an app my business "has to be approved by Apple" That's a freaking monopoly.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#137Unfortunately for Apple, I do think the App Store being an exclusive and default way to purchase and load apps on iOS is in fact causing prices of Apps, in many cases, to be higher than they should be. The perfect example of this is the subscription services, right now you can get a cheaper subscription to a service such as Spotify if you buy it off the App Store. That is a prime example of how much the 30% payment t…
This is really only an issue with low-margin licensing subscriptions like Spotify and Netflix, where they would lose money on every purchase if 30% of their margins went to Apple. While I definitely think there are some problems with the App Store, the fact is that it is so easy and streamlined for people buying apps that it’s worth the 30% for the vast majority of developers.
If people would still choose it even if there were competitors, then why is competition prohibited?
The answer is that the App Store would still exist, but might have to charge less or lose business to lower cost competitors. So you would get everything you want and with lower costs.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's true that iOS has a smaller share of the market globally, including many parts of Europe, but this overshadows the fact that iOS is almost on par with Android in the United States (44.3% to Android's 54.5% as of May 2018), probably higher among affluent users, and the leading mobile operating system in other countries such as Britain: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266572/market-share-held... I feel this is…
> (44.3% to Android's 54.5% as of May 2018)... ??? Doesn't that mean iOS has the minority market share?
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes you can but hard copy games, but guess what? Those games still have to be approved by the console maker and won’t run unless they have a digital signature from the console manufacturer. It’s been that way since the 80s.
I've developed homebrew games on multiple platforms. I know that NES, GBA, PSP, and DS have little to no restrictions. The Wii has a few restrictions, but not many.
You definitely didn’t get games distributed on unmodifurd PlayStations, Nintendos, or XBoxes.
Nintendo has had a lockout system since the SNES days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games_Corp._v._Nintendo_....
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple provides a service for that 30% though. They handle the payment processing, they build, moderate and curate the App Store apps and they provide a lucrative channel to market for app developers. So allowing Spotify et al to get all the benefits of the channel without paying for it is actually unfair to Apple.
> Apple provides a service for that 30% though. Money is universally reviled, and rightfully so: it is a dark, vile, evil thing. It brings out the very worst in the very best of us. It brings entire countries to their knees. Money corrupts. Money is awful. But there is one thing that money does better than anything else, bar nothing. No contest. No competitor on the horizon. Many have tried, all have failed. Money qu…
Insofar as Apple is a US Company, the US Government also gets a say.
Profit is a privilege. The US has a mixed economy, not a 'free market'.