Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Asks Judge to Dismiss App Store Monopoly Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Kind of sums it up for me. There doesn't appear to be anyone who wants to set up an appstore, or at least they're not complaining if they are. The majority of end users wouldn't buy from another appstore. Those that do might shout loud but they are in a very small minority. Haven't heard of any developers asking for another appstore either. Some have complained about the 30% but again, they're in the minority.
So no one actually has a problem with the current arrangement and if they did and really thought it was uncompetitive the logical place to pursue it would be the EU (more chance of winning) rather than the US. This is basically a bunch of lawyers buying a lottery ticket and hoping to win the jackpot.
Even if it did happen Apple would still control the platform in the same way Microsoft and Sony do. They would still be able approve / deny all the apps, require developers to buy licenses to develop and they would still be able to take a cut as that is exactly what happens with PS3/Xbox. Nothing would really change.
I did some digging and could only find one article that gave any information on sales and profits from iTunes. It wasn't very clear but looked like their current profit margin is around 12.5% give or take a percent or two, with it being a lot lower in previous years.
Think the one major cost people ignore is the gift card market. It's a must have nowadays and retailers take something like a 12% cut, though I reckon Apple must be selling some in bulk even cheaper based on some of the deals you can get on them. This is actually good for developers, customers buying cheap credit for iTunes means they buy more.
That is not the same thing. try reading the article. It says they want to buy IOS games that are licensed from sources other than Apple. All the people who up voted your post obviously cant read either.
----------
They set the price knowing Apple is taking 30%. If another store offered to sell them for 15% commission then the devs would be able to lower the prices by 15%.
You people defend Apple at all cost and its amazing.
If Sony said you can only buy PS3 games from Sony stores the retailers and customers would flip out! This president has to be in place before consoles go digital download only.
I hear you and it seems most people indeed don't have a problem with the content arrangement with apple/developers (well, at least the ones that aren't denied entry into the store).
Users should get a say too, not just developers. Why are we refused the ability to get certain apps like f.lux and ifile? People that want more freedom on their computing devices have a gripe IMO. This is more about the apps that get denied into the app store have no place to go, for me (without hacks).
There's a whole catalog of titles only available through Sony via direct download, Journey comes to mind (beautiful game), where the only option when we purchased it was to buy directly from Sony Online, directly through the PS3 (I believe some "download only" titles eventually come to disc as well).
Yes. But that's not the same as EVERY title ONLY being available at the Sony Store.
Just sayin'
Is there a reason we have to pretend that web apps and Cydia don't exist in this thread?
yes, because why shouldn't it work that way out of the box IF the user wants it to?
instead were forced to rely on the goodwill / enterprise of hackers.
well, except for web apps - but they usually aren't too special
yes, because why shouldn't it work that way out of the box IF the user wants it to?
Because you can't always get what you want...
Well, digital only titles are only available through Sony, you can't download them through any other mechanism.
Titles that are available though other outlets are physical media, which was a differentiator I mentioned in a previous post, and why this is an interesting conundrum.
What happens when MS, Sony, Nintendo go digital only (like iOS). I doubt they'll offer any 3rd party channels for download since game consoles manufactures are so locked into DRM/copy protection.
Content like music or movies doesn't work as a model either since, it's not platform specific.
Even comparing Android is a little off since that's a platform, not single vendor solutions from OS to hardware (like iOS/iPhone/Apple, XMB/PS3/Sony).
I think it's a unique situation, and it will be interesting to see what precedence this sets for single vendor, single channel, digital distribution models.
Because you can't always get what you want...
that's why this suit exists!
however I believe it should focus more on apps that are denied entry into the store having nowhere else to go.
and honestly why shouldn't apple allow you to sign a waiver of all rights/guarantees/servicing to get some sort of factory 'jailbreak', the worst that could happen is that they would sell more devices and encourage innovation (yes, of course piracy is a problem with freedom). enterprise users could disable these devices from accessing their networks at the domain level, just like how they can force a passcode
.
Last edited:
There is not tons of malware for android. People need to stop saying that. I don't know a single person who has gotten an android virus.
They do. It's called enrolling in the iOS developers program. Install any iOS app where another developer will sell you source code. Or write your own apps for yourself or other developers. Or, if you run a large company, open your own Enterprise App Store for your employees. Going completely around Apple's App Store, with their approval. For only $99/annum (more for Enterprises).
can you install f.lux or other apps/tweaks that require root access with a developer account?
Doesn't sound like a legally sound case then.
Even though they have somewhere else to go.
and honestly why shouldn't apple allow you to sign a waiver of all rights/guarantees/servicing to get some sort of factory 'jailbreak', the worst that could happen is that they would sell more devices and encourage innovation (yes, of course piracy is a problem with freedom). enterprise users could disable these devices from accessing their networks at the domain level, just like how they can force a passcode
Because they don't want to.
Doesn't sound like a legally sound case then.
Even though they have somewhere else to go.
Because they don't want to.
I'll answer. Although I'm not sure if you (or even I) buy into it.
Cydia is akin to black market apps. They are not certified by Apple. They require intervention with the OS to get them to work.
If you want to run a PS3 game that was bought at Target or Walmart - they are still certified by Sony. They don't require tinkering or breaking into the OS.
And here's another difference.
Say I have a problem now with my iPhone. I can't bring it into an Apple store and have it looked at/fixed if it's jailbroken really. However - that's not the case with if something goes wrong with my (for example) PS3.
Unless I've borked the PS3 operating system for some reason
Black market? Otherwise legal apps distributed through Cyda are legal. I have no idea why an app would have to be certified by Apple to be legal.
So? Not everybody has to be like Sony.
I have no idea what that has to do with what I said. Maybe you are responding to someone else's arguments?
Nevermind. I was responding to the whole Apple vs other vendors (Google, Sony, Etc) who sell their software in more than one place.
I thought that was pretty clear to most. Apparently not.
That would be like the Linux Argument MS used and that was unsuccessful.
I hope Apple looses this one..
This discussion thread is about App Store apps. Whether the government will allow DMCA violations is a completely separate topic from monopoly misuse law.
I hope you realize that competition only works when applied to the same market. An Android app market is separate from an iOS app market. There is no competition in the iOS app store market, hence a monopoly.
edit: You keep asserting that hardware and software is one entity because Apple is both the hardware manufacturer and the OS Creator. But they are separate. There is nothing technical that keeps one OS on one hardware and off another. And on the software side, Apple has to much control. If you look at Apple as being two companies, one controlling hardware (not a monopoly), and another controlling software, then yes, its a monopoly.
Last edited:
Because you can't always get what you want...
I think that is the entire basis of this lawsuit though; should we be able to get what we want in this case?
In any case, the arguments here are a bit silly. I am willing to bet the vast majority of people talking as if they were lawyers are the farthest thing from it. I am interested in the outcome. It doesn't seem as cut and dry as you, and others, are making it, else it wouldn't have even made it this far, I would think.
----------
This is an interesting viewpoint, one that I can certainly follow. Certainly a better argument than this "but if Sony/Microsoft/nintendo" garbage. I think I read some nonsense about KCups a few pages back too. LOL!
----------
Would you want to sell in another store? I don't know. Would you? That's something only you can answer.
As far as other developers selling on other stores, there is already evidence that this happens, even right here on iOS. This other iOS store is called Cydia, and while it is the minority, it is still a presence. This lawsuit seems to be about allowing me to get these apps off of Cydia (or perhaps a store that doesn't even exist yet) without having to rely on a third party circumventing restrictions Apple has put in place to get it done.
I fully believe that a lot of the issue here is that these are intangible goods, meaning we don't buy/trade a physical product when money exchanges hands. As such we are entering somewhat uncharted waters.
I wouldn't call either entity awful, but I would call their practices questionable (and that is why lawsuits exist in the first place, is it not?)
We need only to look back at our recent history as human beings to realize that just because the masses applaud and support something, that doesn't make that thing right (and I am not limiting my reach to big business here).
I know this dead horse has been beaten to a pulp, but when Microsoft got hammered for monopolistic practices, their products wer flying off of shelves too. If the argument "but look! Our products are selling like hotcakes! Everybody loves us!" was enough then, today's playing field may have been very different. And that is why these laws are in place to begin with.