Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 631 posts

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#261

Post by JumpCrisscross »

thealexliang wrote: post #44

"Apple willfully chose not to comply with this Court’s Injunction. It did so with the express intent to create new anti-competitive barriers which would, by design and in effect, maintain a valued revenue stream; a revenue stream previously found to be anti-competitive. That it thought this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation. As always, the cover-up made it worse. For this Court, the…

John Gruber picks out the juiciest parts [1].

[1] https://daringfireball.net/2025/04/gonzales_rogers_apple_app...

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#262

Post by rk06 »

cyberax wrote: post #46
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get ready to answer why an iPhone is different than an xbox

Consoles are sold at-cost to consumers, or sometimes even at a loss: https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-loses-up-to-200-on-ever... iPhones are sold at a _premium_. If iPhones were sold at-cost to consumers, then Apple would have been right to ask developers to pay 30% fees.

If consoles are sold at loss to gain "monopoly power", then that is anti competitive and should not be allowed. This would lead (or maybe already resulted) to pathetic printer and ink cartridge situation

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#264

Post by pasc1878 »

rafaelcosta wrote: post #251

There's a whole class of sh*t-software that only exists (and is profitable) because users subscribe to them and then forget – primarily because the subscription fee is charged as "Apple" on their Credit Card. I wonder what's gonna happen with this type of scam.

If through Apple it is easy to cancel and all subs are listed in one place.

If done through third parties directly the scammers will not make unsubscribing easy and it will not be as easy to find out where you are subscribing.

Thus I expect the scamming to increase.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#265

Post by rafaelcosta »

redleather wrote: post #260
rafaelcosta wrote: post #251

There's a whole class of sh*t-software that only exists (and is profitable) because users subscribe to them and then forget – primarily because the subscription fee is charged as "Apple" on their Credit Card. I wonder what's gonna happen with this type of scam.

Nothing? The ruling is that app developers get to choose how they communicate to users, or how they charge in-app fees. The kind of shady developers you describe would simply continue to use Apple, as it benefits them to do so.

Right now, yes, but there's a potential to:

- Most legit services move to a web based Apple Pay (note to the unaware reader: this is NOT In-App Purchases and has never had 30% fees) due to the ease of implementing and lower fee (easier to do cross platform + web) - Non-legit developers keep the In-App flow

Over time this would skew In-App Purchases to be scammy-only (and therefore, easier to spot). I'm sure people at Apple consider this possibility too – and therefore, now that there's actual competition, IAP flows will probably have to change to prevent this and compete for actual developer preference (and keep it a viable legit-developer choice)

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#267

Post by rafaelcosta »

pasc1878 wrote: post #264
rafaelcosta wrote: post #251

There's a whole class of sh*t-software that only exists (and is profitable) because users subscribe to them and then forget – primarily because the subscription fee is charged as "Apple" on their Credit Card. I wonder what's gonna happen with this type of scam.

If through Apple it is easy to cancel and all subs are listed in one place. If done through third parties directly the scammers will not make unsubscribing easy and it will not be as easy to find out where you are subscribing. Thus I expect the scamming to increase.

Easy from your point of view... This is the argument I mostly hear from Apple folks, but my experience (especially with less tech savvy folks) is that they have no idea where or how to cancel a subscription on IAP and they think that the multiple "Apple" charges are just some iCloud thing or something along those lines. With Credit Card flows the alarm bells go off waaaay earlier: when a website asks for their CC data, they immediately scrutinize more (and thus, conversion rates are lower)

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#269

Post by zamadatix »

abtinf wrote: post #38
medhir wrote: post #15

once again will ask why iPhones are treated any differently from other computing devices — we need legislative solutions that allow consumers to load software (or even other operating systems) on any computing device they own. restricting software distribution on any platform under the guise of needing to be kept “secure” always seemed anticompetitive to me - that should apply regardless of Apple’s particular behavio…

> once again will ask why iPhones are treated any differently from other computing devices And then you immediately state a way they should be treated differently (worse).

Their stated way applies to all computing devices, not just iPhones.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#270

Post by Tarq0n »

xpe wrote: post #257
satvikpendem wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't trust that Apple is honest about their privacy commitments This is a funny comment for me to read. Did anyone honestly think that Apple was touting privacy as anything other than a competitive advantage for revenue maximization? They've had things like iAd, their services revenue has grown massively as hardware sales plateau, and they are nowhere near as "private" in certain countries either.

I agree, but I might phrase it a little bit differently. I recommend thinking about corporate stances as actions and interests, not moral intentions. Don’t expect a corporation to do things for moral reasons. Trust them only to the extent that their actions are in their self interest. To be fair, some organizations do have charters and interests that make them more palatable than others. One takeaway to startups that…

Sadly the openAI debacle has undermined faith in those kinds of structures as well.
Post reply on HN