Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Zargot

macrumors member
Jun 17, 2004
71
3
Texas
Good grief; this world is full of frickin' pansies!!! :rolleyes:

No one forces you to buy an Apple iOS device, nor do they force you to keep it. Unwad your panties, sell the iOS device and go buy something else. Simple...
 

bawbac

macrumors 65816
Mar 2, 2012
1,232
48
Seattle, WA
This pretty much sums the issue up, and Apple's decision was brutal because this company invested significant resources into its App. The app was on the store since 2008, the company has 45 employees, and over 20 million people downloaded the app.

It is not like the devolper can just take his iOs app and go else place.

Moreover, Apple's rules aren't always clear, are subject to change, and enforced arbitrarily.

Further, as a person who has bought iPhones and iPads I dislike being told what I can download.

This.
I find it interesting that people who use an Apple product adhere and accept Apple's totalitarian ways of business practices and product limits and defend them at all cost. :confused:
 

bawbac

macrumors 65816
Mar 2, 2012
1,232
48
Seattle, WA
Good grief; this world is full of frickin' pansies!!! :rolleyes:

No one forces you to buy an Apple iOS device, nor do they force you to keep it. Unwad your panties, sell the iOS device and go buy something else. Simple...

Next you're going to tell people to leave this country if they don't like it. :eek:

So, someone buys an iPhone to use as a phone and discover this neat app store.

They download some apps that are helpful and entertaining.
A friend with an iPhone tells you about this app that may interest you.
You go search the store and it's gone.
Your friend has it but you can't because Apple had a wild hair and decided for its consumer base that this app was not good for you.

Yes Mr.Apple, may I have anonther lashing please...
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
Also, AppGratis is produced by a French company... hence it makes sense the company seeks for help at all levels and well... there are many, France and EU...

Maybe you would like to know that Apple operates under EU law when selling anything in the EU ;)

On the other hand, I find it highly inappropriate if a French minister starts mouthing off about a business conflict without having heard both side, talking about things that she doesn't have a clue about and taking the word of one company at face value. The makers of AppGratis do _also_ operate under EU law, and a big part of EU law is that when you enter a contract as a business, that's it, you are bound by that contract.

----------

and why is this a problem? MS isn't the only OS vendor and was punished and forced to open up more by the EU.

Microsoft had a market share of more than 90% in the desktop/laptop OS market and still has. Their latest fine wasn't related to any market share, but happened because years ago they got their fine reduced for agreeing to do certain things, and then were caught not doing them. Apple, on the other hand, is as good as going bankrupt because nobody is buying iOS devices anymore, or at least we are told so all the time when it fits someone's agenda.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
But they hold 100 percent of the iphone market. Im glad the EU will stop Apples terrible behaviour.

It is a widely recognized legal principle that "natural" monopolies, like Apple being the only maker of Apple products, Ford being the only maker of Ford cars, Disney's monopoly on Mickey Mouse, don't count as monopolies as far as anti-competition laws are concerned. What counts is Apple's market share for example in the phone market, and just a week or two ago we were told that Apple is losing out in France because French people are too tight to buy expensive phones.


The EU rules the EU and Apple does not. If they want to sell their product in the EU, they have to comply with local laws and rules.

On the other hand, French junior ministers who spout off their unfounded opinions after a visit to some company about evil American companies, without even trying to find out what the other side says, don't rule the EU either. I'd be interested to know if any money passed hands, or if someone is a relative of someone, or whether she was just clueless and stupid.

Let's just make that clear: The headline of the article is nonsense. France does _not_ ask the EU to examine Apple's removal of AppGratis. At least there is no trace of that in the Reuters article.
 
Last edited:

blabliblu

macrumors member
Apr 3, 2013
63
0
The more I hear about Fleur Pellerin the more I think she's the only and first minister in a long time, doing her job.

But people on this forum are obviously way too stupid and ignorant, typical of fanboys to even understand the stakes and regulations of business.
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,607
716
Cork, Ireland.
It is a widely recognized legal principle that "natural" monopolies, like Apple being the only maker of Apple products, Ford being the only maker of Ford cars, Disney's monopoly on Mickey Mouse, don't count as monopolies as far as anti-competition laws are concerned. What counts is Apple's market share for example in the phone market, and just a week or two ago we were told that Apple is losing out in France because French people are too tight to buy expensive phones.

I wonder how loosely the EU interpret anti-monopoly law.

For instance, what if iOS, Android and Windows Mobile were all closed markets requiring approval for app distribution? In that case, none of them would have a clear monopoly, and yet the entire mobile market is virtually locked down. 3 companies would have total control of the mobile development market, with pretty sweeping powers to eliminate competition with virtually no recourse in the law. That situation would never be tolerated in the desktop/laptop software market, it's too important to be locked-down like that.

So even though Apple has nothing like a majority marketshare yet (and Android is still quite open), the warning bells are going off.

IMO, the reason it's a big issue is because the mobile/laptop/desktop software segments are too crucial for one company to hold too much power. Monopolies in console platforms etc. just don't have the same impact outside that segment, which is why they're more tolerated.
 

the8thark

macrumors 601
Apr 18, 2011
4,628
1,735
This should be interesting

97pbN.gif

Where's the downvote button when you need it?
 

gotluck

macrumors 603
Dec 8, 2011
5,712
1,204
East Central Florida
I wonder how loosely the EU interpret anti-monopoly law.

(snip)

IMO, the reason it's a big issue is because the mobile/laptop/desktop software segments are too crucial for one company to hold too much power. Monopolies in console platforms etc. just don't have the same impact outside that segment, which is why they're more tolerated.

Yay, someone gets it!
 

macingman

macrumors 68020
Jan 2, 2011
2,147
3
It harms the public by pushing up prices - for example Apple's charges for in-app purchases are completely unjustifiable in many cases and undercut by 9/10ths by their competitors, the savings from which could be passed on to consumers.

But Apple bans those competing payment platforms.
Prices of in app purchases would never have any competition though. Because it's the only developer.
 

macman34

macrumors regular
Apr 13, 2013
174
0
Last time I checked, it was Apples' App Store. They own it, they curate it. What is there to examine?

Well since it's their own app store they have the right to publish whatever they want such as pedophilia content and extreme violence? What a lovely argument. They have the right to manage it as they see fit unless they are breaking a law. And fair competition laws are very important, and often end up having those who do not respect them pay up hefty fines for it. Just ask microsoft who decided to run their operating system as they saw fit, albeit breaking a few monopoly laws along the way.

Another example is apple pulling that click volume for a photo app (if I remember correctly) only to have it as their own "feature" later on. If that's not downright unjust I don't know what is.
 

mirequag

macrumors newbie
Apr 13, 2013
1
0
AppGratis agreed to the APP store TOS and went and violated the agreement.Stores don't have to put up with you "hawking your wares" while in their store.
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
Omg Europe.

Do those French fries even understand why apple pulled the app? Clearly they do not of these socialist jokers in France would not have said anything.

----------

Whenever I see the EU and Apple in a story I feel compelled to see if the source is The Onion.

Haha

----------

Americans may be fine with corporations doing what they like, but in the rest of the world there are meaningful laws and anybody living or doing business in that country must abide by them.

I'm not saying Apple did break the law; in fact I largely agree with how Apple police the AppStore and wish they would be even more active. That said, even while doing so Apple must make sure they are on the right side of the law and if any affected party believes otherwise they absolutely have the right to a review; how dare you suggest otherwise!

Yes. This is why France is the leader for technology in the world.

Hopefully apple gets France to surrender.

----------

This. AppGratis supposedly just closed a multi-million dollar seed funding round. Now the company has effectively been shut down by Apple.

It is not in the public interest for Apple to have that amount of power over other businesses. Only the law should have that power.

Apple did not make new rules to ban them. They enforced existing rules. Choosing to raise all that mine and not having any lawyers read the contract with apple seems dumb.

The idea that a retail store can't choose what products they sell is insane.

----------

Read the developers account of what happened and why it was pulled. I would hope you don't feel Apple is justified for their actions after you read it.

Small portion of his post.

"Friday, April 5th was the day Apple decided to pull AppGratis out of the App Store, leaving our 12 million iOS users wondering where one of their favorite apps had gone, my 45 employees wondering if they’d still have a job next week, my partners and investors in shock, and myself with an absolutely crazy situation to deal with, thousands of miles away from our headquarters."

Simon Dawlat, CEO at AppGratis

http://appgratis.com/blog/2013/04/09/appgratis-pulled-from-the-app-store-heres-the-full-story/

Yeah dummy who never read his contract with apple. His employees and customers only have him to blame. The app was removed for violation of rules that have always been there

He either did not know that, which means he is incompetent or he did know it and took a risk and lost.

----------

Then a better analogy might be a train operator that has control over all the tracks. This is frequently the case in many locations around the world. If that train operator decides that it will no longer purchase a particular type of railcar, engine, etc then it has shut that company out of the market, just as Apple has done with AppGratis. What would the consequence be for the train operator? The railcar(or whatever) manufacturer built its business model around being able to operate on the tracks owned by the operator.

I realize that this analogy is not perfect either. Here the train operator is buying the goods; whereas, Apple is not buying the apps.

Any business owner worth a nickle knows diversification is important. You may find yourself with your eggs in one basket but you better be hunting for more baskets as quickly as possible. There are a myriad of reasons why app gratis could have had issues with apples platform. They needed to diversify with more apps and/or platforms.

----------

I'm pro-Apple but threads like these are embarrassing when I see unabashed fanboys that'll defend anything Apple does or defend it from *any* criticism even when it's legit. I saw this back when iFixit criticized them for the low reparability of their products... oh, the amount of venom that was thrown at iFixit such as being evil and profiteering just made me cringe. :rolleyes: Kinda reminds me of gun fanatics for some reason in gun threads.

And can someone care to explain the rule about apps not being allowed to advertise other apps? I see it all the time in tons of apps so I don't understand why it's being enforced here.

In any case, this was wrong on Apple's part. Their desire for control goes too far sometimes and the negative backlash will hurt them in the eyes of consumers.

Most of us want smaller and less expensive devices. Most of us will never have a need for ifixit or anything they do. Your comparison is silly.

People were against ifixit because they did not want apple sacrificing the build of their products just to make some third party company most of their customers never heard of happy. I suspect most feel the same today

Your post is entirely illogical.

----------

Yes, I agree, with how things are now - the rejections and removals from the App store are low enough in number and reasonable enough in nature (with the odd weird exception) that it's worth the risk - but it's still something that Apple needs to be aware of. I'm sure they are.

The other part of the risk from over-zealous crackdowns on rules etc is that apps that require larger investment will taper off and we'll just be left with lower risk apps that have lower development budgets, even if they are still on iOS for the sales.
In this case the developer was in violation from day 1.
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
iOS devices are computers, not game consoles IMO

----------



So then why was MS subject to persecution? If we're playing in MS' sandbox, why shouldn't we be forced into Internet Explorer? Anyone that had a problem with IE could have just bought a Mac.

Game consoles are computers. You can't try and pretend what Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft do is not the exact same thing apple does.

----------

The best analogy is the EU case vs MS.

Not even in the same galaxy. Almost no relevance at all.

----------

And Sony doesn't have 100% of the video game disk distorbution, nor Microsoft, nor Nintendo. App distribution is not a market.

I will point out that Amazon tried to have 100% control of App distorbution on the Kindle Fire. If they had locked down side loading better they may have gotten away with it too. Apple's just better a fighting Jailbreaks/Rooting then Amazon.

If you want to go after Apple over something it really should be Jailbreaking and the devices owners choice of what they can do with the hardware they own, especially if they chose to void any warrantee or liability of the manufacturer.

=====

Here is another one. The "Ring tone" market. Before the iPhone who controlled that. Was it an 'open' market or was it curated and locked down by device/service providers. Apps are the same deal today, only it's not the carriers, it's the device and the device OS makers. Google has just been 'free' with how people can put 'ringtones' (Apps) on devices using their OS, and many devices makers have gone along with that... with some exceptions (see Amazon). If side loading 'ringtones' is a feature you want or you are 'ringtone' maker who doesn't want to have to deal with the rules of a particular 'carrier', you find a different 'carrier' to work with.

You do know that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have to authorize EVERY game designed for their consoles. In fact they get paid for them. That there are different retailers does not change the fact NOBODY can make a wii game without nintendos consent. Regardless of where or how they choose to sell it.

The generation after next consoles will be all downloaded games and Sony Et all will be the only retailers.

----------

But Sony don't actively monitor every game or piece of software made for the device and restrict it to one store. Locking down the hardware is different, lots of people do this (I am not saying if this is right or wrong).

I think the issue is thus: If I am buying a game for a PC for example and one store does not stock a game because they don't think its suitable its ok I just go to another store. On iOS I can't do that as there is only one store. Its whether people believe this is right and does a company like Apple have the right to basically make a company go bust and restrict customer choice just because they don't like it? On the other hand the customer buys into the ecosystem when they buy an iOS device so you could argue that they know this already.

The only reason they don't do it is because it has never been practical. Once they are capable of doing it they will.

Right now they need the retailers because there is not a superior way to get the games.

Apple does not need additional retailers because it is incredibly easy to buy and install apps now. Having retailers would make the process more cumbersome and more expensive.

All the console makers want to be where apple is and one day will be.

Sony has rules for their games. If after launch they found a game violated those rules they would aggressively go after the company and halt the dustribution of the game.

----------

The socialists who believe a 75% tax rate is fair are telling Apple that they're too brutal towards their developers.

I noted this earlier but I suspect the irony of France coming out against this is lost on most people.

----------

This thread is full of coffee spill traps and you're one of them.

Congratulations, you missed the key aspects of international business operations and antitrust laws. :)

Glassed Silver:mac

But at least he knows how the vbulletin signature function works, so he has that on you. Also people claiming this is anti trust might want to brush up on their Anti-trust Law for Dummies.

----------

You can be as insular as you want, but just remember the fact that as Apple markets to and profits handsomely from EU nations, it has to follow EU rules. Either that or don't trade in that nation/area. Considering the size of the EU market, most companies would try to accomodate or compromise rather than lose billions in potential revenue don't you think?

France is just protecting one of it's own companies and therefore it's own interests from what it sees as an unacceptable decision. Apple isn't a stupid company so I'm pretty sure we will see something worked out on this issue soon enough.
It is amazing France's biggest contribution to the mobile era is apps gratis. Given the world changing experience we have seen in the last six plus years and an app spammer is its biggest accomplishment? Maybe France shouid be banned from all software stores and ecosystems because they actively support spam?

----------

I wonder how loosely the EU interpret anti-monopoly law.

For instance, what if iOS, Android and Windows Mobile were all closed markets requiring approval for app distribution? In that case, none of them would have a clear monopoly, and yet the entire mobile market is virtually locked down. 3 companies would have total control of the mobile development market, with pretty sweeping powers to eliminate competition with virtually no recourse in the law. That situation would never be tolerated in the desktop/laptop software market, it's too important to be locked-down like that.

So even though Apple has nothing like a majority marketshare yet (and Android is still quite open), the warning bells are going off.

IMO, the reason it's a big issue is because the mobile/laptop/desktop software segments are too crucial for one company to hold too much power. Monopolies in console platforms etc. just don't have the same impact outside that segment, which is why they're more tolerated.

Like three companies have total control of what can be put on gaming consoles?
 

gotluck

macrumors 603
Dec 8, 2011
5,712
1,204
East Central Florida
So your analogy is that iOS should be treated like a game console?

IMO iOS has more similarities with Windows and general computing OS's than game consoles and should be treated as such...

The lockdown Apple has over iOS is unprecedented (again, non-game console, general consumer computing device).
 
Last edited:

xsmspiffx

macrumors newbie
Apr 11, 2013
27
0
So your analogy is that iOS should be treated like a game console?

IMO iOS has more similarities with Windows and general computing OS's than game consoles and should be treated as such...

The lockdown Apple has over iOS is unprecedented (again, non-game console, general consumer computing device).

The point of bringing up consoles is to show that this sort of thing exists already. People keep bringing up non-software related examples, that have no similarity to the App store (you can typically sell physical goods in another store if one retailer doesn't want to sell it). The logical thing to do is to look for a similar examples in the software world.

The lockdown that Apple has on iOS has been there since day one. Are you suggesting that a company should not be free to choose what business model it wants to use?
 

sir1963nz

macrumors 6502a
Feb 9, 2012
735
1,216
If you were locked in to only being able to use one of them for years, then that might be a reasonable analogy, but it's not. Last time I checked you didn't routinely sign a two year exclusivity contract with physical stores to be able to use their products and nobody else's.

Irrelevant, what you were demanding is that a company be effectively acting as a store for someone else at their own expense.

----------

consoles don't change dev rules and disallow games after they've been released and then say NO.

Irrelevant, they still have their rules, break them and you can not sell. Console games are regularly removed from sale for what ever reason, mostly whim of the manufacturers who no longer wish to have it out there. Multiplayer games regularly get "updates" which changes rules and game play and users who are deemed to have "cheated" get removed from these games.

----------

Next you're going to tell people to leave this country if they don't like it. :eek:

So, someone buys an iPhone to use as a phone and discover this neat app store.

They download some apps that are helpful and entertaining.
A friend with an iPhone tells you about this app that may interest you.
You go search the store and it's gone.
Your friend has it but you can't because Apple had a wild hair and decided for its consumer base that this app was not good for you.

Yes Mr.Apple, may I have anonther lashing please...

This happens in brick and mortar stores too, your friend buys something, you like it and damn that model has been discontinued, or the company has gone bust, or it was a limited run, etc etc etc.

Its sad I know, but here it is, you are NOT entitled to everything you want.
 

thewitt

macrumors 68020
Sep 13, 2011
2,102
1,523
If you were locked in to only being able to use one of them for years, then that might be a reasonable analogy, but it's not. Last time I checked you didn't routinely sign a two year exclusivity contract with physical stores to be able to use their products and nobody else's.

You CHOSE to sign a two year contract with your carrier - not with Apple - so they would finance your phone purchase.

You cold have purchased a full price phone with no contract.

----------

The more I hear about Fleur Pellerin the more I think she's the only and first minister in a long time, doing her job.

But people on this forum are obviously way too stupid and ignorant, typical of fanboys to even understand the stakes and regulations of business.

Any capitalist listening to a socialist about how to run a successful business is out of their mind.

There is a reason the French have fallen into a state of mediocrity and lack technical or innovative leadership. They need to look hard at their internal policies, not waste their energy in a challenge of one of the most successful technology companies on the planet - demanding that they "play fair."
 

gotluck

macrumors 603
Dec 8, 2011
5,712
1,204
East Central Florida
The point of bringing up consoles is to show that this sort of thing exists already. People keep bringing up non-software related examples, that have no similarity to the App store (you can typically sell physical goods in another store if one retailer doesn't want to sell it). The logical thing to do is to look for a similar examples in the software world.

The lockdown that Apple has on iOS has been there since day one. Are you suggesting that a company should not be free to choose what business model it wants to use?

Yes, I am saying that there are and should be limitations on their business models... just like the Microsoft/IE EU scenario. I understand that Apple does not have the same degree of monopoly, but Apple's lockdown is much more rigid and totalitarian than any attempts Microsoft made to control the user/device.

On a consumer grade computer, iOS' lockdown is unprecedented.
 
Last edited:

xsmspiffx

macrumors newbie
Apr 11, 2013
27
0
Yes, I am saying that there are and should be limitations on their business models... just like the Microsoft/IE EU scenario. I understand that Apple does not have the same degree of monopoly, but Apple's lockdown is much more rigid and totalitarian than any attempts Microsoft made to control the user/device.

On a consumer grade computer, iOS' lockdown is unprecedented.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly, period.

Microsoft wasn't taken to task/court over locking things down. They were taken to task/court for not sharing specs for protocols which meant that the other 10% of the market could not integrate with them, and using their dominant market position in PC operating systems as leverage in the Web Browser market. Because Microsoft is a monopoly they are held to a different standard than other companies.

Comparing Microsoft for having limitations because they are a monopoly and trying to apply the same thing to Apple, or any other company that does not have a monopoly is not a valid thing to be trying to do, because, as I pointed out earlier, companies with monopolies are held to a different standard that companies that are not monopolies.

So, given that Apple is not a monopoly (which I am putting in just so you don't try to mention Microsoft again), what restrictions do you think that Apple should have on their business model and why. Also, if you don't feel console makers should be held to the same standard that you suggest for Apple why not?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.