Does this mean Apple will have to give up their % fees or that they have to allow third party app stores in the US? And when does that go into effect?
[deleted]
Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
51–60 of 631 posts
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#52Does this mean Apple will have to give up their % fees or that they have to allow third party app stores in the US? And when does that go into effect?
> Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ordered the iPhone-maker to allow developers to steer users to alternative methods of paying for services or subscriptions offered in the App Store. The company also can no longer impose fees in such scenarios or restrict the ability of software-makers to offer links or otherwise communicate alternate payment options with consumers.
The ruling means this starts immediately it seems, as I cannot see a date listed anywhere.
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#53Finally. The AppStore rules are ridiculous. Apple has zero moral justification for them. They are quadruple-dipping: 1. Consumers pay premium prices for Apple devices. 2. Developers have to pay $100 a year to be able to publish an app. 3. Developers need to buy expensive Apple hardware to develop for iOS. XCode doesn't work on Linux or Windows. 4. And on top of it, Apple also wants 30% of all the gross app sales. All…
also, you can't install software on your own device. Even when you can, you have to ask apple permission.
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get ready to answer why an iPhone is different than an xbox
One is a general computing device and one is for a specific task (gaming).
That seems rather arbitrary. I'm not doing any general computing on my iPhone, I'm just browsing Hacker News and watching YouTube. If your contention is that the phone is capable of doing more than those two things, well, isn't the Xbox capable of doing more than just gaming?
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#55The 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…
It made me laugh, if you pretend to be worth 30% of revenue (an insane markup), you better really invest in those developer tools to show it off because the sad state of xcode really isn't showing that.
I don't know where this money is going but certainly not in the developer tooling because it's absolutely terrible
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#56all these big companies being hypocrites. congress should just pass a law that you can't be big and end the charades.
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what is the punishment for outright lying under oath?
Generally none, the DA must choose to pursue perjury charges, which basically never happens. In reality, nearly everyone commits perjury. Thomas More would not approve. Both versions (1966 and 1988) of A Man For All Seasons are highly worth watching several times and practically memorizing. "Would you benefit England by populating her with liars ?" [edit] in retrospect, there is one inescapable consequence of lying u…
I've not seen the one from 1988; I'll have to check that out. I've long enjoyed the one from '66.
I also heartily recommend both seasons of Wolf Hall. About Cromwell rather than More, but still fascinating.
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#58Is there any hope of a non-joke fine here? Or are we just looking at another kiss of the wrists as them and Google and all the other big tech cos fuck literally everyone over?
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#59Does this mean Apple will have to give up their % fees or that they have to allow third party app stores in the US? And when does that go into effect?
Neither!
Re: Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds
#60once 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
One has billions of users, the other has millions. One has 100s of thousands of companies trying to to do business with that platform's users, the other has 100s of companies trying to do business with that platform's users.
scale and usage matters. Apple has > 50% market share in the USA (the place relevant to USA law). So, being a monopoly they get treated differently than a non-monopoly.
Even if they had less than 50%, people bank, invest, shop, talk, communicate, book hotels, flights, and effectively live their lives on smartphones. On XBox they play games and same small percent play music or watch movies there (I suspect most switch over to their Smart TV/Apple TV/.. for that).