151–160 of 258 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But definitely an iOS monopoly.
And Nintendo, Somy, and MS have monopoles on their stores. Just like if you don’t like what one console offers you are free to buy another one, if you don’t like what’s available for iOS, you are free to buy an Android.
Unfortunately while I personally think Apple should allow other app stores I don't think this particular suit will succeed.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/20/17479480/supreme-court-ap...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i wouldn’t pin that all on anti competitive behaviour though... the end to end control of the platform is kind of Apples MO, and is a fairly distinguishing feature between the Android ecosystem and the Apple ecosystem. it’d be nice to have another distribution option, but not at the expense of a simple UX, security, or any other very valid reason to only allow a tightly controlled experience
Oh okay, so as long as it's their MO to have a monopoly then it's fine. I'm sure plenty of iPhone users, for example, would like to have a PornHub app on their iPhone, but that's currently impossible because of Apple's guidelines. You could build a very high quality app and be denied for a reason strictly outside of the "UX, security 'or any other very valid reason'" that Apple arbitrarily decides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Nintendo, Somy, and MS have monopoles on their stores. Just like if you don’t like what one console offers you are free to buy another one, if you don’t like what’s available for iOS, you are free to buy an Android.
4 wrongs don't make right. Nintendo, Sony, and MS should also not be allowed to have monopolies on their stores.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So let’s see, you downloaded the files from their server, now they have a unique id for each user and they can track you more. Which you can verify they aren't doing if they provide the source code. Or the non-Apple app distributor could verify that they aren't or otherwise sandbox the apps they distribute to prevent that from happening -- another advantage to competition. > Most commercial apps aren’t going to giv…
Which you can verify they aren't doing if they provide the source code. Or the non-Apple app distributor could verify that they aren't or otherwise sandbox the apps they distribute to prevent that from happening -- another advantage to competition So what sandbox is available for apps that don’t allow a native app to ascertain individually identifiable device information? You also now have to trust the non Apple App…
That's the point. Currently nobody can build that because Apple doesn't allow it.
> You also now have to trust the non Apple App Store to check the source code. The entire open source community let the HeartBleed bug stay in open source software for a year and a half...
"Many eyes" results in fewer bugs over time, not zero bugs instantaneously. It doesn't have to be perfect to be better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But definitely an iOS monopoly.
And Nintendo, Somy, and MS have monopoles on their stores. Just like if you don’t like what one console offers you are free to buy another one, if you don’t like what’s available for iOS, you are free to buy an Android.
You don't need to purchase games directly from Nintendo, nor music or games or video directly from Sony, nor are Sony Videos only playable on Sony devices, nor do you have to only install Microsoft "blessed" executable for Windows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Not a lawyer, so no idea if this is still controlling case law) The full reasoning chain seems to be that Hanover Shoe v United Shoe Machinery Corp (1968), in which the issue was USMC's leasing but refusal to sell machinery on which they had a monopoly, decided that being able to "pass along costs" was not a valid defense by a monopoly when sued by its direct customers. Consequently, in Illinois Brick v Illinois (19…
the important part against that line of reasoning though is at the very bottom of the article: “The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year revived the lawsuit, deciding that Apple was a distributor that sold iPhone apps directly to consumers.” if they decide that apple sells apps directly (after all, you go through apples distribution, payment, and “editorial” channels and have only a tenuous…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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....
> IMO App prices now are lower than they were when the app store first opened in iPhoneOS 2 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'…
This has never been the case. You’ve always been able to side load apps that are either signed by an Enterprise code signing cert (used to be $300/yr), or your own developer code signing certificate ($99/yr). The former allowed for redistribution outside of the App Store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Back in the NES era with licensing restrictions, yes. I believe it was Tengen vs Nintendo? Also Atari vs Activision? But the Switch, PS4, and XBox One ALL have closed app stores exactly the way Apple does. If Apple loses a lot of people will have to find a new business model.
I would love game consoles to have third party stores. As it stands I almost never buy console games through the PSN store/xbox store/whatever because (at least with AAA titles) games remain at initial launch price way too long, and are usually more expensive than retail stores.
(Activision, you there? I still want to buy it but I can't justify that price for an 8 year old game, or even the half off sale price right now...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> IMO App prices now are lower than they were when the app store first opened in iPhoneOS 2 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'…
> This provides no basis for comparison because the App Store has been the only way to install apps on iOS This has never been the case. You’ve always been able to side load apps that are either signed by an Enterprise code signing cert (used to be $300/yr), or your own developer code signing certificate ($99/yr). The former allowed for redistribution outside of the App Store.