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

41–50 of 631 posts

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#41

Post by andrewmcwatters »

stillatit wrote: post #6
mil22 wrote: post #4

About time. I'm tired of apologizing to customers who purchase subscriptions in my app only to discover they could have purchased the exact the same thing from my website for 15% less. "Why didn't you tell me?" Excerpt from the filing: "In stark contrast to Apple’s initial in-court testimony, contemporaneous business documents reveal that Apple knew exactly what it was doing and at every turn chose the most anticompe…

So what is the punishment for outright lying under oath?

Clearly nothing, since we've decided to be a nation that doesn't enforce laws.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#44

Post by thealexliang »

"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, there is no second bite at the apple."

I'd recommend skimming through the whole thing because Judge Rogers just eviscerates Apple over and over.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#46

Post by cyberax »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #21
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…

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.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#47

Post by paxys »

elpool2 wrote: post #28
mrcwinn wrote: post #13

The heart of Apple's hypocrisy is this: they claim their 30% is necessary to support the developer ecosystem and fund its operations. But of course if that were true, they could easily charge a high enough platform membership fee directly to developers. Instead they opt for a structural tax to cover what are mostly completely opaque and secret operational costs. They're opaque and secret for obvious reasons: those ex…

As described in the ruling, Apple hired a consulting group to estimate how much value developers get from the iphone platform, which found that (1) Apple’s platform technology is worth up to 30% of a developer’s revenue. (2) Apple’s developer tools and services are worth approximately 3%–16%. (3) Apple’s distribution services are worth approximately 4%–14%. (4) Apple’s discovery services are worth approximately 5%–14…

Hire a consulting firm to tell you exactly what you want to hear, then say "see the experts said it, not us". Classic.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#49

Post by yieldcrv »

> iPhone users are accustomed to using the App Store to make digital purchases, and changing their behavior could prove difficult

Apple Pay on websites works flawlessly and is great for impulse purchases. Its the same as the inapp experience.

I think this user experience will be fine.

Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds

#50

Post by [deleted] »

cyberax wrote: post #25
ivanmontillam wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were they transparent, what would inhibit developers from bargaining against the costs and benefits shown? Sometimes that also outweighs the benefits of transparency. You just can't show anything to anyone without kicking a wasp's nest. I am not defending Apple, if anything, I am pro-Android here, but I understand the pickle they'd be in, were they be transparent with the cost structure.

Well, yeah. It would have shown that their commissions are nothing but rent-seeking.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN