Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#401

Post by echelon » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 4:49 PM UTC

nandomrumber wrote: post #185

echelon wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being on the side of the consumer means being on the side of the free market. An unregulated market leads to monopoly and anti-competitive practices. Capitalism is one of the best models we've discovered, but its markets must be appropriately regulated. Capitalism should be difficult. An eternal treadmill. You shouldn't be able to wedge yourself into a market as a quarter-century long hegemon. You shouldn't be able…

I’m not convinced the solution to anything is government picking winners, nor telling other people what they, the government themselves, are going to do with their, the people / companies, money. And how to I get support for the products I just bought when your government regulators terminate the existing of the product developer / manufacturer.

> government picking winners

Government trimming the weeds using prescribed rules and tests.

Get rid of monoclonal overgrowth to increase ecosystem diversity and health. Make the ecology better at exploring all the nooks and crannies.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#402

Post by freedomben » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 5:21 PM UTC

theshrike79 wrote: post #372

freedomben wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple (and subsequently many other copy-cats in the tech industry) have done a phenomenal job convincing people to think of their fully capable mobile computers as "appliances", and this really shows.

A modern smart phone is more like a gaming console and less like a personal computer

Only because it's limited by software. Hardwise I would say both gaming consoles and smart phones are a lot like a personal computer, in fact I think they pretty much are personal computers.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#403

Post by pertymcpert » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 6:20 PM UTC

kataklasm wrote: post #255

laughing_man wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a big enough number that the likely result is Apple would pull out of the UK altogether.

Does it matter? Apple paid around 300 million pounds of corporation tax in 2024. If the UK poses a landmark penalty of say 50 or 100 billion pounds, thats 167x or 333x the annual corporation tax paid by Apple in the UK.

What on earth makes you think that Apple would pay if they leave the UK?

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#404

Post by pertymcpert » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 6:21 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #350

laughing_man wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a big enough number that the likely result is Apple would pull out of the UK altogether.

That would be an amazing opportunity for competitors who chose to continue operating in the UK.

That's not what would happen. People will just import the iPhones from abroad.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#405

Post by pqtyw » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 7:31 PM UTC

immibis wrote: post #324

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You believe that breaking them up is geopolitically infeasible but a fine larger than the GDP of Finland would fly? On top of that, giant bureaucracies are great at "compliance". That isn't the same as doing the thing you actually wanted though.

The UK could give Apple a choice: Either pay a fine exceeding the GDP of Finland, or stop being a monopoly, or every Apple senior executive will have an arrest warrant and the products will be seized on import. To achieve the thing you wanted, word the law vaguely and have a judge interpret it. You know, the same way the law is applied to poors like you and me. Nobody gets off a murder by saying "Your Honour, when I…

> pay a fine exceeding the GDP of Finland, or stop being a monopoly

Reaction from the US government would be swift and extreme, especially with this administration. 1000% tariffs on British exports or something like that...

But even under a normal/sane administration, doing something like this to an US tech megacorp would be unfeasible without a backlash that would outweigh any benefits.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#406

Post by immibis » Sun, Oct 26, 2025, 2:19 AM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #382

immibis wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The investors with effective voting rights are not usually people with retirement funds, but rather the administrators of those retirement fund pools.

So another case of it not being the investors then.

You invested in Vanguard, and Vanguard invested in the company and promises to give you the same amount of money they get from the company, but doesn't pass through other rights and responsibilities.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#407

Post by orasis » Sun, Oct 26, 2025, 3:44 PM UTC

nandomrumber wrote: post #275

orasis wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a professional iOS app publisher, I feel 15% is fair.

Genuine question, is the App Store fee a tax deductible business expense in your country?

Of course. Apple removes their cut first before paying out. I’m in the US.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#408

Post by kvemkon » Sun, Oct 26, 2025, 8:48 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #399

kvemkon wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you excluding phone-like devices? Actually not, for me *smart*phones are PC-like devices. Smartphone, especially modern one, is obviously a miniature personal computer. > It's discriminating against the poor people of any country that also happens to have rich people in it. I think, poor people are discriminated in every country generally if they need to buy products designed by an international company. Wh…

> I mean that countries with lower median income deserves cheaper products. So if you make $20,000 and live in a country with a median income of $40,000 then you should pay higher prices than someone who makes $200,000 and lives in a country with a median income of $10,000? Why? Also, that's not really how prices work for non-monopolies. If everyone can profitably produce something and sell it for $100 in e.g. South…

> Why?

Just because of statistic.

But actually, of course, it would be fair to make individual prices. E.g. there is a photo-camera for 7000, it makes very very good photos. Someone makes every day money with photos and buys it. Someone else wants also very good photos for non-professional private use, family and even for posts in WEB (without a fee, only donations). But this someone else must pay the same 7000.

Needless to say that in case of individual prices, additional rules and locks will apply.

BTW, some electronic devices are sold cheaper for academics (universities, students).

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#409

Post by com2kid » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 3:44 AM UTC

anonymous908213 wrote: post #156

com2kid wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The PC app ecosystem is a tiny fraction of the App Store's, outside of, notably, Steam's locked down closed ecosystem. Having a single way to pay, subscribe, cancel, browse apps, beta test versions, and update apps, proved to be a huge game changer for making software accessible while also minting millionaires around the world in terms of small development teams.

In 2024, computer software generated around $373b in revenue while mobile apps generated around $522b. Given that smartphone usage is significantly higher worldwide than computer usage (around 2 to 1 ratio), the stats do not really support your thesis that locking down software access to the whims of a monopoly hegemon results in a massive financial boon to application developers. Even if it did, it still would not j…

> computer software generated around $373b in revenue while mobile apps generated around $522b.

What percentage is consumer vs corporate spend in each category? How much of that 373b is SaaS revenue vs local installed apps?

> And here somebody was trying to mock Windows for being adware friendly circa 2005.

The adware in 2005 was actively hostile and infested entire systems. It replaced browsers, search engines, and even injected itself onto every webpage you viewed. In contrast mobile ads are interstitials during game play.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#410

Post by theshrike79 » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 11:51 AM UTC

freedomben wrote: post #402

theshrike79 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A modern smart phone is more like a gaming console and less like a personal computer

Only because it's limited by software. Hardwise I would say both gaming consoles and smart phones are a lot like a personal computer, in fact I think they pretty much are personal computers.

Gaming consoles are even more limited by software. They're literally running normal gaming PC hardware.

I'm always baffled when people are up in arms wanting to run _everything_ on their phones, which have very specific and niche hardware, but at the satime time are just fine with their consoles being 100% locked down without even a chance of side-loading. Nevermind an open 3rd party store.