291–300 of 411 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple
> Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple This right here is why they need to be broken up. Are we supposed to have a company more powerful than a country?
> “developers were overcharged by the difference between a 17.5% commission for app purchases and the commission Apple charged, which Kent’s lawyers said was usually 30%.” > “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.
Do you feel that Google is less bad in this, enough so that you would rather use their products?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as Apple requires they make use of those services for me to install software on the computer I bought, and they prevent others from producing equivalent competing devices via patents (i.e. government granted monopolies), zero. It's not that it's not worth something, it's that they're abusing their patents and monopoly to extract further compensation after I already bought the device.
Mobile apps mobile app fraud empties life savings accounts. I agree there should be personal accountability, but that clearly hasn't been working. Installing an app shouldn't eliminate 30 years of life savings.
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.
It's entirely possible to build apps to run on OSX without touching Apple tools .. except for notarization, which they force you to use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This question is valid only if Apple lets apps host their own apps, bring their own payment system. Apple bans all such activities, has held the entire app ecosystem and seeks rent. If they think their offering is superior, then they should be OK competing. The fact that they have not opened it up says that they are happy to overcharge. Remember, competition is always good. Let Stripe and Apple duke it out on payment…
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.
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!" I feel like fines aren't even an appropriate remedy for this. They're both inherently arbitrary and not something that actually fixes it. And that combination gives governments a perverse incentive, because they get $2B to put in their own pockets…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple This right here is why they need to be broken up. Are we supposed to have a company more powerful than a country?
Yes? In feudalism, kings control everything. In capitalism, investors control everything. It's what the system is named after - kinda hard to miss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google-approved Android, at least for now until some judge hopefully shuts down the idiotic "verified developers" programme, has a range of app stores with different options. In order for such a competitor to be viable for use by developers, it has to be installed on the devices of customers, which Google has acted to prevent. Google Play has over 90% market share on Android and has constrained OEMs from shipping d…
> has constrained OEMs from shipping devices with other stores installed Every Samsung phone comes with the Samsung Store. My Xiaomi phone came with a Xiaomi store. I don't know about any vendors that even wanted to ship app stores outside of their own, but I don't recall Google preventing them from doing that. > If alternative stores are a viable alternative, why do they have ~0% market share? Because people like Go…
Google got caught withholding search revenue from vendors who installed third party stores and punishing them in various other ways.
The phone vendor stores are all useless specifically because they're from the phone vendors, which means they'll be terrible because hardware vendors are notoriously bad at software, and on top of that they'll only be installed for people with that brand of phone, which again destroys the network effect.
> All I ever read about the app store alternatives that do exist is that people wished they could get rid of them.
Those are the phone vendor stores. Nobody wants those.
Actual competitors would be the likes of Amazon or Epic or F-Droid, but Google's shenanigans have meant they all have negligible market share to the extent that Amazon even gave up.
> Because people like Google Play?
That wouldn't explain it. If they like Google Play and ten other things then they would each have ~10% market share. If they only like Google Play, that implies something fishy is going on, because you'd otherwise expect there to be a thousand bad ones and at least a dozen good ones since it's not that hard to set up an app store. Unless it is that hard, and then why is that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple This right here is why they need to be broken up. Are we supposed to have a company more powerful than a country?
Yes? In feudalism, kings control everything. In capitalism, investors control everything. It's what the system is named after - kinda hard to miss.
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.
2 days of global revenue is not a good baseline for breaking a single country. Comparing against their UK revenue is probably a better metric ?