421–430 of 627 posts
I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…
I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…
I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…
No, if regulators do their job, nobody gets to ask that question because there is continuous competition. Getting to that monopoly or oligopoly requires sustained effort from would be monopolists, it's a strategy they have been executing for more than a decade. And if you do that, you must expect there is a moment where society says: ok, it's time to regulate it and not let company X extract economic rent solely based on market dominance.
I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…
I'd presume that would be when they became a monopoly, which may be seen as something that comes with new responsibilities. "With great [market] power, comes great responsibility" would probably make a lot of sense to a lot of people. We wouldn't hold tiny entrants to the same standards as those who can set prices, sue into dust or buy almost all of the competition.
The Mac App Store gives a hint at what would happen if there was any choice. The amount of software actually available for the Mac is far, far greater than what’s listed in the store. Furthermore, while some quality and notable apps are still in the Mac App Store, many well-known apps are not there. The number of lousy apps is also extremely high every time I go to search or just look at the front page, to the point…
All of these policies coming about are for the benefit of already monied interests and do not help small devs, or consumers. I also take huge umbrage that the framing of this is just as horrible as the framing of paying taxes in the US. People think, wrongly, that they make $100k, and have to pay 35% of that to the gov. Wrong. You always only made $65k. There are studies that show wages have always tracked with taxes…
Interestingly, the sweet spot seems to be in the mid-30s for the population in aggregate (which lines up with Apple's fees almost exactly), but is someplace around 70% for the highest earners. This implies you could jack up the top marginal tax rates to > 60%, and while most billionaires may grumble a bit, they will not ragequit from the economy.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve#Income_tax_rate_a...
I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…
Didn't they become a monopoly when they stopped allowing other app stores. From that point they were a monopoly on iPhone. But being a monopoly is not enough to warrant action, it's abusing the monopoly position that is market abuse, i would have thought?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not necessary to break Apple up to implement a policy that requires Apple to apply the same process to their own apps. There are other standalone arguments calling for a breakup, but agreeing with the parent doesn't automatically lead to the conclusion that a breakup is required.
> It's not necessary to break Apple up to implement a policy that requires Apple to apply the same process to their own apps. It works in theory, but when the application team and review team both report to the same CEO, the review team will be pressured to bend the review policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not that they don’t need more money, it’s that, in my opinion, they also shouldn’t be forced to operate on razor-thin margins. What is an acceptable profit margin? There’s no clear answer so you’d be reliant on a judge or congress to determine that.
An acceptable profit margin would be based on actual costs, not a static 30% which means paid apps are subsidizing free apps or apps like Netflix and Amazon that do not take payment on iOS. Charge based on bandwidth/downloads, not on who is using their payment processor.
This obviously doesn't tell the whole story either. Some apps provide utility to the end user but don't monetize well. Those apps are valuable to have as a way to drive people to use app store, and keep developers educated.