211–220 of 411 posts
I find headlines like this much more appropriate when placed in terms of days of revenue: "Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near 2 days of revenue!" For somebody that makes the median income, of about $50k, this is a fine of $273 for years of largescale systematic abusive behavior, done for profit.
I find headlines like this much more appropriate when placed in terms of days of revenue: "Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near 2 days of revenue!" For somebody that makes the median income, of about $50k, this is a fine of $273 for years of largescale systematic abusive behavior, done for profit.
That's not really a meaningful comparison, either. If you assume every engineer makes ~300K at Apple, perhaps a more meaningful comparison is "Apple loses ~7K engineers for 1 year", which seems a bit more than a slap on the wrist as you are suggesting.
I find headlines like this much more appropriate when placed in terms of days of revenue: "Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near 2 days of revenue!" For somebody that makes the median income, of about $50k, this is a fine of $273 for years of largescale systematic abusive behavior, done for profit.
I think profit is more appropriate. Still only comes at 4 days.
If not, you’re comparing apples to oranges.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So in this scenario would Epic then need to develop and maintain their own toolchain and SDK for their app store? The development tools and education are also worth something, Epic shouldn’t get that for free.
Dystopian story plot: Apple completely opens up the iOS platform. Do whatever you like. Also, an XCode license is now $20,000/year. Don’t like it? Build your own.
That's what people literally did, multiple times, for multiple systems, and did a much better job than encumbents
> “The CAT also ruled that app developers passed on 50% of the overcharge to consumers.”
And that's why I stopped buying Apple products - ultimately it is the end user that pays for everything. Apple exploits both developers and its consumers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dystopian story plot: Apple completely opens up the iOS platform. Do whatever you like. Also, an XCode license is now $20,000/year. Don’t like it? Build your own.
Why stop at xcode? Add a licensing fee for UIKit, Core Data, Core Text, Core Audio, Core Graphics, Metal, Network, SwiftUI, Quartz and all the other libraries apps use constantly. Heck, why not for the OS itself? If you don't want to pay, they could conceivably dump you into an isolated VM and force you to write your own OS and userspace device drivers.
We used to pay for OSes and OS upgrades. Heck, you still have to pay for Windows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sideloading, AKA "installing software on your device", is something PCs have been handling just fine for decades. It's fine to warn the user when they're going off the beaten trail, but do not lock them in a cage to prevent them from doing so. If they ignore the warnings and get scammed because they are unable to identify reputable software from disreputable software, they learn a life lesson. Life goes on. There sho…
There are entire classes of people who have simply given up on PCs and only use a phone, so I would call that substantial evidence that PCs have NOT "been handling [it] just fine." For these folks, PCs are a total failure; a dead end. A danger zone to be avoided at all costs.
Which actually makes the case for "Apple cannot control what people install on their devices or demand that apps pay them and can't even use other payment providers"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think profit is more appropriate. Still only comes at 4 days.
Is that the profit for the App Store specifically, in the UK specifically? If not, you’re comparing apples to oranges.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No shit. That's completely different from what you claimed, though, which was specifically that people were giving up PCs to become smartphone users because they appreciated the lack of choice that smartphones gave them. The phenomenon you're talking about now is so completely in another universe that it's insane you would conflate the two. I actually can't finish typing this response properly because it's hurting my…
Do you think smartphones would be ubiquitous today if they had the malware situation that plagued Windows XP?
Edit: It's also telling that you need to go back to XP to make your case. It's 2025. Security practices have improved a ton to give people more protection from themselves without outright taking away their freedom to make choices.
Also, let's again re-iterate that Android usage outnumbers iOS by three-to-one, so it is clear in practice that people are in fact willing to adopt a phone that allows them to make mistakes (if they try very hard to).