Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 174 posts

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#61

Post by threatofrain »

015a wrote: post #22
geenew wrote: post #15

It's hard to argue with the claim - if you have an iOS phone or tablet, for example, it is a monopoly, since it's the only place you can buy a program for your computer. The walled garden has real benefits in security and privacy, but seems to require centralized control, and comes at the expense of user freedom. A solution to the monopoly pricing problem could be to treat app store controllers (currently A & G) to t…

I don't even buy the "security" argument; MacOS is a highly secure operating system, produced by the same company, which has no forced walled-garden App Store. There certainly are exploits and scams which happen; just like on iOS. The argument sounds great in theory, but in practice, it simply doesn't hold water; security & privacy can (and should) (and does) happen at the OS layer, not application distribution.

But I don't think it's very controversial to argue that iOS is more secure than MacOS (to the point of inconvenience), and that this is a reason why integration with the health data on the iPhone will pose a challenge.

The iPhone is also much higher stakes than MacOS in terms of total number of users affected by any exploit.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#62

Post by _kbh_ »

geenew wrote: post #15

It's hard to argue with the claim - if you have an iOS phone or tablet, for example, it is a monopoly, since it's the only place you can buy a program for your computer. The walled garden has real benefits in security and privacy, but seems to require centralized control, and comes at the expense of user freedom. A solution to the monopoly pricing problem could be to treat app store controllers (currently A & G) to t…

AltStore allows you to run any app you want on your iPhone without a jailbreak. How does the App Store have a monopoly when there are literally alternatives too it. This ignores Cydia and the other app stores that require you to jailbreak your phone.

Apple has no more of a monopoly on iOS app sales then Google has on android apps, Microsoft has on the Xbox store, Sony has on the Sony store, or Nintendo has on the Nintendo store.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#63

Post by singularity2001 »

_kbh_ wrote: post #62
geenew wrote: post #15

It's hard to argue with the claim - if you have an iOS phone or tablet, for example, it is a monopoly, since it's the only place you can buy a program for your computer. The walled garden has real benefits in security and privacy, but seems to require centralized control, and comes at the expense of user freedom. A solution to the monopoly pricing problem could be to treat app store controllers (currently A & G) to t…

AltStore allows you to run any app you want on your iPhone without a jailbreak. How does the App Store have a monopoly when there are literally alternatives too it. This ignores Cydia and the other app stores that require you to jailbreak your phone. Apple has no more of a monopoly on iOS app sales then Google has on android apps, Microsoft has on the Xbox store, Sony has on the Sony store, or Nintendo has on the Nin…

Can't find AltStore on the appstore and can't even bundle my apps for usage outside of the app store any more (I honestly tried for three hours last year. maybe the stack overflow was outdated)

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#64

Post by hayst4ck »

rektide wrote: post #57
hayst4ck wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this argument. You are using car and store but apple isn't selling a phone and an app store, it's selling you the Apple experience (and my understanding is that is literally how apple thinks about it), and if you don't like it, you can easily buy one of the many android phones. > Banning other stores does zero for Apple and their customers. I don't think this is true at all. Apple gets to retain al…

> With multiple app stores, the apps might vote on a different store, and all of a sudden as a comsumer, I have to install 20 different app stores to get the full set of apps I want. Fear of freedom here is just remarkable. Oh no! What if I had choices! What if there wasn't a monopolist protecting me!

Look at you! What an intellectual you are. You sure got my number. That's me, afraid of freedom. Freedom is good, there are clearly no bounds to freedom. There are clearly no counter forces to freedom.

You know what the cost of freedom is? Education. When you are educated freedom is good, but when you are not, it is dangerous.

Being able to directly install a virus is a freedom, and for a security researcher or human rights abuser that might be great, but I don’t want my mom to have the freedom to install a virus. Should virus creators be able to load their software into a store and market it as they wish? No? But what about their freedom?! What about my freedom to download viruses?!

Not getting a vaccine is a form of freedom, but what does that do for herd immunity if too much of the population isn’t smart enough to handle the freedom not to vax?

Do you like nutrition labels? Seems like it limits the freedom that food companies have to market their products.

I think all fishermen should have the right to fish as many fish as they can. What right do we have to limit peoples livelihood?!

Why can't kids take heroin if they want? Why are we limiting their freedom to conduct their lives the way they wish?

You use the word freedom like you understand it, but then fail to understand the cost of freedom.

For you and me freedom is great, we're probably educated and well read. For mom and dad, they need a bit more of a curated experience because they don't have the knowledge or experience which would allow them to protect themselves or understand their own choices.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#65

Post by chomp »

threeseed wrote: post #47
Someone1234 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

iOS App Stores is not an industry though any more than Tesla car operating systems or Ikea screws are. They are intrinsic parts of the objects and have never existed independently of them.

There is no market in those two examples. No one buys Tesla operating systems, and no one buys IKEA screws. In both cases, those are building blocks of the whole.

You must have a market before you can abuse it. In addition, you must have a firm and durable market power. If IKEA had a strong screw market across multiple segments, and then abused that position through exclusionary practices, you could argue a potential illegal monopoly. Likewise, if Tesla operating systems were closer to 90’s Microsoft, you could have an argument there.

Notice no one is arguing an iOS monopoly. The App Store fits the legal definition of a market. Apple has a firm and durable market power (over 50% in multiple countries, including the US, which is their highest revenue). Apple excludes some from this app market. Apple can and does prevent certain firms from succeeding in their marketplace. It is not unheard of to have Apple reject or pull apps once they decide that they want to add that app’s feature to iOS. Once the app is pulled into iOS, it gains functionality not available to other apps. Their monopoly was gained not by innovation, but by the fact that they set the rules of this market - you simply cannot make a competing App Store.

These are red flags and should be investigated.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#66

Post by RestlessMind »

I think governments should go after cartels rather than monopolies. Google and Apple combined have a >99% market share for mobile OS/app store market share. They also impose a synchronized 30% fee cut. There is a case to be made for an antitrust behavior from this cartel.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#67

Post by gnicholas »

Someone1234 wrote: post #45
c3534l wrote: post #16

I feel like the entire world has forgotten what a monopoly is. Apparently both Apple and Google are monopolies despite being competitors of one another. Programmers clearly talk about developing apps for one platform or another and sometimes give up on developing for one because the approval process was annoying or arbitrary. Consumers have a choice in the phones they buy and whether to even use a phone app for that…

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

> Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices.

I spent a summer interning for the CA DOJ's antitrust division. The first thing I learned is that the determination of the relevant market is extremely important, and often outcome-determinative. If the relevant market is drawn broadly, then it's much less likely that a company will be considered to have a monopoly; if the the relevant market is drawn narrowly, it will be much more likely.

The question for Apple/Google is: is the 'relevant market' the market for distributing apps on their own platform, or for smartphones in general? There's no way to know in advance how a court would come down on this question, and it would have a huge impact on the outcome of the trial.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#68

Post by boris1 »

Do yourselves a favor, and read Ayn Rand. Monopolies are created by governments, and are impossible in laissez-faire. Apple has created the App store when MS was seen as a "monopoly" that no one could move. Innovations beats anyone who dominates the market. Google did the same to a Alta Vista and Lycos, just by being better.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#70

Post by _kbh_ »

singularity2001 wrote: post #63
_kbh_ wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AltStore allows you to run any app you want on your iPhone without a jailbreak. How does the App Store have a monopoly when there are literally alternatives too it. This ignores Cydia and the other app stores that require you to jailbreak your phone. Apple has no more of a monopoly on iOS app sales then Google has on android apps, Microsoft has on the Xbox store, Sony has on the Sony store, or Nintendo has on the Nin…

Can't find AltStore on the appstore and can't even bundle my apps for usage outside of the app store any more (I honestly tried for three hours last year. maybe the stack overflow was outdated)

The fact you couldn’t find AltStore on the App Store just proves the point more. The app doesn’t have to be in the app store to be installable on the phone.
Post reply on HN