The Case Against Apple (AAPL)

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Aug 9, 2009.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors 6502a

    cohibadad

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    #2
    Worthless article. He either needs a law lesson or a business lesson. His gripes come down to Apple not doing the work for competitors and blaming it on Steve Jobs. Apple is not Steve Jobs and if someone wants their MP3 player to sync with a Mac they can code their own software.
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    Silencio

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #3
    If it's from TechCrunch, it's crap. More of the same old "Apple has a monopoly on its own products!", "Apple should help their competitors compete against them" claptrap.

    More twits that think Microsoft's business model is the only valid business model in the entire free market. :rolleyes:
     
  4. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Location:
    Ohio
    #4
    Did anyone else find this interesting?

    What would having 2 SIM slots do? Some how I don't see many people going out and buying an iPhone then getting two separate contracts with different providers for 1 device? The last part just shows a serious misunderstanding of how phones work. Just having 2 SIM cards wont improve your bandwidth. You would need 2 entirely separate sets of phone hardware as well.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    munkees

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    #5
    Apple has zero monopoly on anything, and seeing Apple compared to other smart phones, has a very small market share, this guy needs to do his homework.
     
  6. macrumors regular

    akutad

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    London, Ontario, Canada
    #6
    I don't know how you guys feel.... But my gut doesn't feel good about AT&T exclusive rights on the iphone. How is that not heading towards monopolistic action? I've never heard a logical explanation about this?
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    gilkisson

    #7
    Only GM has the Corvette. Do they have a monopoly on sports cars?

    Only Proctor & Gamble has Irish Spring - do they enjoy a monopoly on soap?

    Only Chef Boyardee has canned Mini-Raviollis - have they cornered the pasta market?

    Only Coca-Cola has Dasani -- do they own the bottled water market?

    Must I go on?
     
  8. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    No, the point is that Apple have chosen their device to be exclusive to one carrier.
     
  9. macrumors regular

    akutad

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    London, Ontario, Canada
    #9
    I see the point your driving at.

    This is how I feel. I really enjoy the iPhone period. I dislike the carrier as an example. My only option is too bad. Yes, yes I can unlock the iPhone. But I don't want to because it's like BS windows again.

    I like the TV market. I can choose which tv I would like to buy and then I can choose which network I would like to use.

    I would like the same example above with cell phones. Any one else feel the same way without getting their back up because their so incredibly loyal to the apple brand?

    Perhaps I'm a free spirit and it's unrealistic in the western world.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    gilkisson

    #10
    Yes, they have.

    That comes nowhere near to a monopoly, however. Or being "unfair".
     
  11. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #11
    So, go buy something else...
     
  12. macrumors regular

    akutad

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    London, Ontario, Canada
    #12
    Unfair to who?

    It feels unfair to me.
     
  13. macrumors 65816

    gilkisson

    #13
    It's also unfair that you cannot buy a Whopper at McDonalds, then. You really enjoy the Whopper, best hamburger ever made, but their fries, their service, and their tableware are just horrid. You love McDonalds service, they make you feel happy, but cannot stand the Big Mac.

    You tried sneaking in a Whopper, but they frown on that, make a big hassle out of it. So you decide the right and proper thing is to force McDonalds to sell you Whoppers. Then you can have it all.

    Under that scenario, what are your choices? A) Eat the whopper, which you love, and tolerate the service, or B) Eat the Big Mac, which you find unpalatable, and love the service.

    Don't see another option open, to you or anyone else.
     
  14. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #14
    And?

    You can choose to buy one or not.

    Why do people seem to feel they have a right to an iPhone under their terms?
     
  15. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #15
    Well it started poorly, it trailed off a little in the middle, and the less said about the end the better.

    Firstly he claims that everything on the Mac costs twice as much. Even if that were true, if a computer allows you to be more productive (paramount if you are professional) then how can it cost twice as much?

    He then rabbits on about how Apple are being anti competitive by not allowing other players to work with iTunes. I can't understand the logic of why any company would do that, or why it would be considered anti competitive. Why should Apple help their competitors to compete against them? If they want a piece of the pie then they can create their own software that is as good as iTunes. Which leads me onto my next point:

    He assumes that the iPod is dominant because of iTunes not allowing other MP3 players to sync with it. The truth is that none of them can come up with a piece of software like iTunes. They can create the hardware, but they can't back it up with decent software on the computer and on the device itself.

    Complete nonsense.
     
  16. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #16
    Here's the funny part :

    "Think for a moment about what your reaction would be if Microsoft made the Zune the only MP3 player compatible with Windows."

    I may be wrong but the Zune is the only MP3 player that can sync with the Zune store is it not ?
     
  17. Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #17
  18. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #18

    I think Jason's point is that it goes again the spirit of openness and the idea of comparing open and closed systems and the idea is that open systems will always succeed. Jason believes that Apple can make more money from iTunes by opening it up to other players and making iTunes the standard player for anybody. Jason argues that since iTunes is popular, Apple has some sort of an obligation to open it up and play fair

    I agree though that it doesn't make sense from Apple's perspective. iTunes is Apple's player and iTunes is hardly monoplistic or anti-competitive. I think that Jason is more pre-occupied with the popularity of iTunes and the entitlement that everything out there should be as simple as the iPod and iTunes integration is for everybody. The flaw in that logic is that not everything works that way and it's not Apple's fault to make up for the deficiencies of its competitors.
     
  19. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #19
    Yes, but it isn't the only MP3 player on the market that syncs with Windows. Of course the same can be said on the Mac - support does exist just not as widespread.

    As much as Jason wishes it were so, the world does not operate on open standards for everything and probably wont when you have a model of selling physical items to people that has a business model attached to it.
     
  20. macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #20
    I'm confused as to why anyone would listen to this guy. His reasoning is beyond stupid.
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    Silencio

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #21
    I don't know what's worse: the fact that the author of the article would write such lunacy or that someone would quote it without questioning it. SIM cards for Verizon or Sprint!? You don't realize that CMDA phones DON'T USE SIM CARDS?

    Do Nokia's $800 unlocked phones have two SIM slots? No. So why should they get a pass and not Apple?

    I don't know who at Microsoft started this whole "Apple is a monopoly" meme, but they sure did a great job of getting the clueless to believe it and keep parroting it.
     
  22. macrumors 68000

    Demosthenes X

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    #22
    You can't have a monopoly on a particular, individual product. By definition, then, all companies have a monopoly on their own products: only Sony sells Sony, only Aston Martin sells Aston Martin. But Sony does not have a monopoly on TVs, and Aston does not have a monopoly on cars, and only an idiot would argue otherwise.

    That said, I would like to see the iPhone on other carriers, but it is not a monopoly - there are substitute devices available on other carriers today.

    The writer's comments on innovation in the MP3 market are insane. Two headphone jacks is a bigger innovation than 50 000 apps?
     
  23. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #23
    I think he makes a number of fair points, though:

    • Years and years after Microsoft's antitrust headlines, Apple is now the anti-competitive monster that Jobs rallied us against in the infamous 1984 commercial. Steve Jobs is the oppressive man on the jumbotron and the Olympian carrying the hammer is the open-source movement
    • We over-paid for your phone--which you render obsolete every 13 months, like clockwork--and then signed our lives away to AT&T. The way you pay us back is by becoming the thought police, deciding what applications we can consume on the device we over-paid for!
    • [Opera] started an iPhone browser project but gave up when faced with Apple's absurd and unclear mandate to developers: Don't create services which duplicate the functionality of Apple's own software. In other words:
      "Don't compete with us or we will not let you in the game."
     
  24. macrumors G3

    Kilamite

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #24
    "Think for a moment about what your reaction would be if Microsoft made the Zune the only MP3 player compatible with Windows."

    That is so stupid. Any MP3 player is compatible with the Mac if the manufacture making that MP3 player bothered their arse to write some software for it to sync.

    Say the same about Windows: name an MP3 player other than the Zune that syncs with Zune Software..
     
  25. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    #25
    Just what does he DO that requires so much "new and newest" hardware? 20k . Are you kidding me?
    I make a pretty good living and mostly from and on my macs and have yet to even feel the pinch to buy a INTEL machine yet!
     

Share This Page