The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple • Hacker News Board

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#291

Post by moralsupply » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

orwin wrote: post #260

moralsupply wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that you're fine to use the government's force against a company that is not causing harm to anyone just so that you benefit from that intervention (and in complete disregard to all users who are happy to pay for Apple's products and services exactly the way they are)? There's a name for this: Crony Capitalism.

Are you saying you are not fine to use the governement's force against a company that is removing podcast apps from their store because they talk about what's happening in China? I mean, i thought everyone agreed across the political spectrum that what China is doing in Hong-kong is bad. Reading this thread, i stand corrected.

Users accept the app store EULA, which serves as a contract, and in which Apple states it can shut down content according to any standards they desire. That means users are fine with Apple removing podcast apps that talk about whatever Apple doesn't like. If you believe otherwise, you believe that users don't understand the nature of contracts and can't decide on what's better for themselves.

On the other hand, are you saying that because of your ideas on how the world should run that contract is invalid and that Apple should be forced to change it retroactively, despite the fact they are not causing harm to anyone?

China invading Hong Kong is an aggression, for sure, but so is the EU interference in the free market and private contracts under whatever justification.

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#292

Post by jasonv » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

krzyk wrote: post #226

chrisseaton wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like complaining that it's unfair that only McDonald's are allowed to sell inside a McDonald's.

More appropriate analogy: Let say Apple is BMW, and when you buy BMW your gas tank has a proprietary connector that will work only on BP gas stations. You can choose different gas there (different octane number, etc.), but you can't tank at e.g. Statoil.

Like.. Tesla?

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#293

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:48 PM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #268

spullara wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can get a developer license and run whatever stupid apps they want. That seems like sufficient opt-in that you are likely competent to assess the risk of the apps you're installing.

So you are suggesting users in China apply for a developer license and build their own build of Signal and Protonmail apps? Really? And how would said users receive push notifications for their apps from Signal? UPD: oh boy, and I forgot to mention that such users would also have to buy Macs - you can't build a 'stupid app' for iOS without XCode, which runs only on Macs that support the latest version of macOS.

So now are you suggesting that the government force Apple to release XCode for Windows? Linux?

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#294

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #77

wvenable wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't how they run their store -- the problem is that they are the only store.

They also favor their own apps or downright remove the competition.

Can you name one category of app that Apple sells where there aren’t competitors on the App Store?

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#295

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

krzyk wrote: post #226

chrisseaton wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like complaining that it's unfair that only McDonald's are allowed to sell inside a McDonald's.

More appropriate analogy: Let say Apple is BMW, and when you buy BMW your gas tank has a proprietary connector that will work only on BP gas stations. You can choose different gas there (different octane number, etc.), but you can't tank at e.g. Statoil.

[deleted]

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#296

Post by jlnthws » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:50 PM UTC

Apple sells an experience, it's hard to find a common ground to those single store monopoly issues without compromising this experience and tarnishing Apple's precious image.

Suppose Apple standardizes jailbreaking: say they allow you to turn on a switch that creates a sandbox on your device for you to do whatever you want. Your device would then be running freestyle without warranty, fair enough for me as a first mockup. What's going to happen next is a handful of illiterate or unaccountable users will deface Apple's reputation by bombarding news sites with their misfortune. Apple would be cancelled overnight. I'm barely exaggerating.

Now I guess some EU negotiations could help to have some in-app purchases without fees (like buying a book in the Kindle app), avoid getting their app rejected for a shady reason (because rules can be changed whenever Apple sees fit) and, above all, allow me to set my morning alarm to some radio app (this one is ridiculous). The tragedy is that no "developers union" could ever succeed at this.

The last issue, about supporting authoritarian regimes, is probably the most difficult to solve. This is politics, there are no companies or governments that can have it all every time. China is a huge market: you cannot hope staying in business if you try to impose all your rules everywhere. That's the exact same idea behind having the EU make a stand on the single store issues. Also, the most intolerant wins [1].

[1] https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#297

Post by 627467 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

nodamage wrote: post #237

I am not sure why people continue to redefine the word "monopoly" to the point where it becomes meaningless. Claiming that Apple has a "monopoly" on app sales on its own devices might be technically true but is not a meaningful statement when there are plenty of alternatives to Apple devices on the market. It is about as meaningful as claiming a gas station has a "monopoly" on gas sales in a three block radius , or t…

Another poster already mentioned that legal definition varies. And not only that. It's not that it's "wrong" or illegal to be a monopoly. It's what you do with those powers.

Natural (and legal) monopolies exist and are regulated so that there's a perceived net benefit to society for having them. The EU will investigate is (to Europeans) Apple's monopoly is net beneficial to them.

And I imply to agree with labeling Apple a monopoly precisely because, unlike the gas station on your example, a iPhone user cannot drive 3 miles to buy Spotify without having to pay Apple's 30% fee.

Is Apple obliged to make their phones available to other app stores? No. But not doing so AND profiting from 30% AND having a large marketshare is precisely why the EU is investigating them for abusive monopolistic behaviour.

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#298

Post by throwaway34241 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #110

MereInterest wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's my phone, and I can do whatever I want with it. If Apple doesn't like that, they can easily maintain ownership by not selling the device. I don't force Apple to sell iPhones instead of leaving them in a warehouse. Once I've bought it, it is mine. The entire idea that Apple can do whatever they want on a device that they have already sold is ludicrous.

I'm curious, if you didn't like the way it is, why did you buy one? None of these things are new. They've basically been the same since they came out. You largely had a choice of two products. It sounds like one did what you wanted, and one didn't. You bought the one that didn't and now you're unhappy about it. I don't quite understand that.

> It sounds like one did what you wanted, and one didn't

Two products is not a huge number. It seems likely that neither product was exactly what they want, and this is just a particular thing they don't like about iPhones.

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#299

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

bhupy wrote: post #281

chrisseaton wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And doesn't one of them allow your own apps? So why don't you use that one if that's what you prefer?

I understand that, but your original argument was disingenuous. The central question at hand is the App Store monopoly, and your argument was: > There are thousands of powerful smartphones on the market, from many different companies and even countries. But that number willfully misrepresents the current state of the market as it pertains to the current discussion because all but one of those powerful smartphones onl…

You know what the “mono” in “monopoly” means right?

Re: The App Store is a monopoly: Here's why the EU is correct to investigate Apple

#300

Post by savaki » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #214

chrisseaton wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like complaining that it's unfair that only McDonald's are allowed to sell inside a McDonald's.

There are thousands of different restaurants to choose from. There are only two pocket computers. And they're both beating people up over protection money. Moreover, computing used to be free like water. These companies locked it down so you have to go through them. Imagine if you had to pay McDonald's to open your own restaurant. Imagine if every restaurant in the US had to do so. Imagine if McDonald's gathered data…

I'm not sure what the laws are in Europe, but in the US, there's nothing inherently illegal about being a monopoly. The illegality begins when one tries using the monopoly to gain an edge in other markets. Arguably, Apple has monopoly power in the market they built so nothing wrong there.

If you're trying to make the argument that maybe we should change the laws to make monopolies illegal, it would be easier to discuss if you define what the guiding principle is. Are you saying companies shouldn't own more than X% of a market? Companies should comply with a set of practices? etc

Here's why it's difficult when you just use anecdotes. Consider your example, restaurants. Restaurants are a local industry with lower barriers to entry so naturally you have thousands to choose from. Online marketplaces tend to be global marketplaces with very high barriers to entry. So comparing restaurants to the App Store is a stretch at best.

A better example might be a national every day low price store like Walmart. So let's try your examples with them.

Imagine if you had to pay Walmart to open your own store INSIDE Walmart ... sounds reasonable.

Imagine if every store that wanted to open a store in Walmart had to do so ... again, reasonable. Starbucks pays to be inside target, Wells Fargo inside Safeway, etc.

Imagine if Walmart gathered data about your customers. They do, and again reasonable.

Imagine if Walmart saw what worked at your store and copied it and hid yours from your consumers. This happens as well. Consider Equate, Walmart's private brand. Or Safeway select. Basically the same thing.