This is literally protecting consumers and actually giving them choice. If they did nothing, we wouldn’t have any choices and Apple would rule everything.
I feel like that’s not Apple’s fault. No one HAS to use those programs. If they cave to societal pressure, isn’t that kind of their own problem?
This is the only response in this entire thread that is both correct and that matters. Everything else is just noise.
Unbridled neoliberal capitalism doesn’t work. Communism doesn’t work. But why focus on two extremes. There’s a middle ground to be found here.
Thats a good example to show that not every product Apple sells is locking consumers into some ecosystem. Mac owners don't need to buy software only from the App Store, they can readily use the web for that.
Standard market charges. Ask Epic what they charge. So it's ok to use my Walmart credit card at Target?
Regulation from the USJD is never about any one company. They exist to regulate the market. That means you only go after the big violators or the easiest wins or both. If they were to win this against Apple, it would put the fear of god in every other tech company. We would see less mergers, acquisitions, proprietary solutions and less lock-in overall until things cooled off in a few years. I don't think anyone, including USDJ wants to litigate every company in existence. They just want self-regulated capitalism which can get out of hand and needs an occasional kick to keep it in line.
Every company (big or small) wants as much profit as the market will bear. If Apple acquiesced a little, that difference would immediately go right back to the developers. There is never a win in capitalism for the consumer unless more competition is introduced. And the App Store has introduced more competition among developers than just about any single technology in history.
Except Apple only makes a handful of fudge. They own all the fudge stores (the only means of distributing fudge), and every other fudge maker needs their permission to sell fudge in them. Apple make up the rules about who can sell what fudge and why. Apple can remove someone’s fudge from sale at any time if they are displeased. Also if someone starts selling a new kind of fudge and it becomes really popular Apple can make their own version of that fudge and give it away for free as a means of attracting sales of its other fudge.
It's exactly the opposite though. The App Store leveled the playing field for developers both large and small. Everyone got the same deal. Microsoft couldn't get better terms for their apps than the developers of a fart app. Note that Epic's original complaint per the App Store is that Apple refused to give them a special deal relative to other game developers.
Android has a 70.29% global market share. You meant to say Android instead Apple didn't you?
On the other hand, Spotify is notorious for saying that they were going to support Airplay 2 and then not doing it.
www.techhive.com
No. Because people in the US are whiny entitled jerks who whine if people are on green bubbles and “screw up” group chats because they chose to use an Android. If Apple wasn’t afraid of choice and had confidence in their products, theyd have imessage and FaceTime available for every platform.
