Is the App store a monopoly?

Ay_Zimmy said:

When you have Apple software the only way to download and purchase apps is through their app store.. Do you think that it is a monopoly?

Click to expand...

It's not a monopoly- you can get the apps at other places too, like for Android. It's part of the Apple SYSTEM of devices, software, hardware, media and the way they all work together so smoothly.

I think it's more similar to complaining that you can only buy Sams Choice cola at Walmart. That's not a monopoly, it's their version of offering you a coke alternative. You can buy coke anywhere (like a CD or DVD) or if you want the store brand you can buy Sams Choice or Thunder (Walmart Brand or Kmart brand, as Apple or Android apps).

You can buy DVDs, CDs, or watch the movies in theaters and the shows on TV- it's not a monopoly. It's Apples system to make and sell products, and the way they keep it (what seems like) a closed system, is really just how they keep it working so smoothly, and can charge a premium for the smoothness of the operation of it all.

Turnpike said:

It's not a monopoly- you can get the apps at other places too, like for Android. It's part of the Apple SYSTEM of devices, software, hardware, media and the way they all work together so smoothly.

I think it's more similar to complaining that you can only buy Sams Choice cola at Walmart. That's not a monopoly, it's their version of offering you a coke alternative. You can buy coke anywhere (like a CD or DVD) or if you want the store brand you can buy Sams Choice or Thunder (Walmart Brand or Kmart brand, as Apple or Android apps).

You can buy DVDs, CDs, or watch the movies in theaters and the shows on TV- it's not a monopoly. It's Apples system to make and sell products, and the way they keep it (what seems like) a closed system, is really just how they keep it working so smoothly, and can charge a premium for the smoothness of the operation of it all.

Click to expand...

Then, very similarly (if not almost exactly the same), why was Microsoft actually legally ordered to make sure that they not only offer but actually "advertise" alternatives to their Internet Explorer in their own Windows OS?

kdarling said:

.
Android's different because you can check a box under Settings that allows you to install software from other web stores or source.

Click to expand...

Where is this setting? I have a S2 with ICS.

stroked said:

Where is this setting? I have a S2 with ICS.

Click to expand...

Usually it's under Settings - Security. "Allow installation of apps from Unknown Sources" or something similar.

Then you can download apps from the web etc (and install them from the downloaded notification).

One of the first apps most people get is the Amazon App Store. They usually have a free app each day. Pretty cool.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android/ref=mas_mshop_mbl_ldg/

kdarling said:

Usually it's under Settings - Security. "Allow installation of apps from Unknown Sources" or something similar.

Then you can download apps from the web etc (and install them from the downloaded notification).

One of the first apps most people get is the Amazon App Store. They usually have a free app each day. Pretty cool.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android/ref=mas_mshop_mbl_ldg/

Click to expand...

Thanks for the help. I was looking in the app settings.

The app store is not a monopoly. Apple are not supplying most of the apps in the app store, they just host them. As long as there are app alternatives to all apple made apps, which there are, apple can't possibly be accused of holding a monopoly.

I don't think App store will count as a monopoly because Apple has not sued and shut down the JailBreak stores.

It's a monopoly within iOS. You cannot compare Cydia with the App store, as Apple basically removes Cydia for an unspecified amount of time with each release.

The question is can you have a monopoly on a specific portion of a device when the device is not forced upon you.

I believe that the answer is no, you cannot. However, this doesn't leave Apple out of hot water yet, as they are aware that many employers pay cellphone plans, and (given their distribution method, are 100% aware that companies use iOS for specific software) essentially force users to use their product.

So I think, at the end of the day, yes it's a monopoly, but it's a monopoly that's brought about because of employers, not Apple. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if that's enough of a distinction to keep Apple out of hot water, but it is a subtle difference.

And re: Microsoft v Netscape, they were found guilty of being anti-competitive, not having a monopoly. It's completely different, and not related to the question the OP asked at all.

Since Cydia is doing so well, no. But it is probably a topic Apple wish to avoid. There is still potential for them to get into a lot of trouble over it if people began caring.

Microsoft got sued for simply bundling a irremovable web browser with their OS, even though you weren't forced to use it. Everybody does that nowadays anyway. It might be an issue Apple might have to tread carefully over as people have been sued over lesser issues.

If Apple was the only company offering apps in the App Store, I'd call it a monopoly. But since there are tens of thousands of companies offering apps in the App store, it's not a monopoly at all.

Mark

mo·nop·o·ly noun \mə-ˈnä-p(ə-)lē\
plural mo·nop·o·lies

Definition of MONOPOLY

1
: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2
: exclusive possession or control
3
: a commodity controlled by one party
4
: one that has a monopoly

It's a violation of the ios end user agreement to jailbreak.

It is also important to note that unauthorized modification of iOS is a violation of the iOS end-user software license agreement

Click to expand...

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3743

So since you have to violate the software agreement to install apps the app store is a monopoly, period.

Toltepeceno said:

mo·nop·o·ly noun \mə-ˈnä-p(ə-)lē\
plural mo·nop·o·lies

Definition of MONOPOLY

1
: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2
: exclusive possession or control
3
: a commodity controlled by one party
4
: one that has a monopoly

It's a violation of the ios end user agreement to jailbreak.



http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3743

So since you have to violate the software agreement to install apps the app store is a monopoly, period.

Click to expand...

Well you can run web-apps on the iPhone, quite easily. That statement depends heavily on your definition of commodity. There is no requirement that you run an application coded in Objective-C and sold via the app store. I could make an App in HTML5/javascript and deploy it just as easily.

Kashsystems said:

I don't think App store will count as a monopoly because Apple has not sued and shut down the JailBreak stores.

Click to expand...

Nope. That has nothing to do with it.

Legally the App Store is most likely a monopoly. HOWEVER monopolies are not legal in and of themselves. At least not in the US. It's how they got to that state and what the company does with it that is illegal.

The App Store is only applicable to Apple hardware and as part of 'vertical integration' it's likely fine since companies are allowed to have such software/hardware integration. This was born out with the whole 'Apple can't tell us what hardware we can us Mac OS on' claims (legally yes they can)

The issue would only become illegal if they did something abusive, like tried to tell app developers they can't make versions for other operation systems. Then they would be trying to use their strength to mess with another market. Similar to how MS tried to stop others web browsers from functioning under
Windows so they could hype their own. The courts didn't buy that an OS and browser can't function separately etc.

Now in regards to the App Store the one potential abuse might be that you there is no SDK that runs on Windows but they get around that due to iOS being based on the same Kernel as Mac OS and it is incompatible with Windows but I'm still shocked no one has tried the claim in court, attempting to claim that Apple is abusing the power if iOS to push their computer sales

Brian Y said:

Well you can run web-apps on the iPhone, quite easily. That statement depends heavily on your definition of commodity. There is no requirement that you run an application coded in Objective-C and sold via the app store. I could make an App in HTML5/javascript and deploy it just as easily.

Click to expand...

They are a monopoly of the apps they sell, are you saying they sell web apps?

Having a single option as an electrical company makes them a monopoly. Running a generator to make lights makes them no less of one. By your definition there would be no such thing as a monopoly. What monopoly are there no ways to get around in some form or another? It makes them no less of one, otherwise there are no monopolies.

You could rationalize yourself into believing there's no such thing as a monopoly.

roadbloc said:

Microsoft got sued for simply bundling a irremovable web browser with their OS, even though you weren't forced to use it.

Click to expand...

Not totally true. It was not simply about bundling in IE. they also

1. Told OEMs if they wanted a license they couldn't put any other browser on the machines.
2. Denied other companies access to details of how to build other browsers
3. Tried to sue said companies for copyright violation for reverse engineering in their own to get the details.

charlituna said:

Not totally true. It was not simply about bundling in IE. they also

1. Told OEMs if they wanted a license they couldn't put any other browser on the machines.
2. Denied other companies access to details of how to build other browsers
3. Tried to sue said companies for copyright violation for reverse engineering in their own to get the details.

Click to expand...

Still doesn't avoid the matter that IE was and still is optional. Plenty of other web browsers have existed throughout time. Nothing stopped me from using Netscape or Mozilla or Opera or Amaya. Just like nothing stops me from using Chrome today.

The App Store, isn't optional unless you choose to jailbreak.

Toltepeceno said:

They are a monopoly of the apps they sell, are you saying they sell web apps?

Having a single option as an electrical company makes them a monopoly. Running a generator to make lights makes them no less of one. By your definition there would be no such thing as a monopoly. What monopoly are there no ways to get around in some form or another? It makes them no less of one, otherwise there are no monopolies.

You could rationalize yourself into believing there's no such thing as a monopoly.

Click to expand...

So what exactly is stopping you setting up a store which sells web-based apps?

Brian Y said:

So what exactly is stopping you setting up a store which sells web-based apps?

Click to expand...

Even if I did they would still be a monopoly.

not at all, and how much cheaper can apps get?

For iDevice owners, it is (not counting Cydia).

For smartphone owners as a whole (Android, Windows Phone), it isn't.

But, I get what you mean. For example, Google Play isn't a monopoly when it comes to Android. Android users have other app stores, such as the Amazon App Store, and they can even download apps from the www.

yep, if you dont JB your iphone then it's a complete monopoly.
apple should allow other manufacturers to make iOS apps.

beaniemyman said:

yep, if you dont JB your iphone then it's a complete monopoly.
apple should allow other manufacturers to make iOS apps.

Click to expand...

Anyone CAN make iOS apps, even the stock ones.