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

Apple Facing Antitrust Inquiry Over Flash-to-iPhone Compiler Ban?

I don't need Flash!

Who cares about flash? Unfortunately Google and other companies still use it. It's like IE6. It holds the web back, but is still used by lots of people. (And I mean lots.) GO HTML5! BYE FLASH!
 
Eraserhead said:
The EU and many other bodies thought differently with regards to Microsoft, and similar arguments could have been made then.[/QUOTE]



You fail to show any sign of understanding for the underlying case. You apparently haven't even read the EU court statements, which VERY CLEARLY delineate how MS has violated antitrust laws. You also seem to have forgotten about the US case.

Instead you hold on to this meaningless pie chart and don't even know what it means and what its implications are.
Click to expand...
 
cryonic49 said:
You can't really got out and buy a Flash App(or Silverlight, or JavaVM for that matter) in the app store.
Click to expand...

Of course not. You go and buy an Android phone. What is this nonsense of grouping ALL apps from every mobile platform and call it an 'Apple Monopoly'?

cryonic49 said:
Or in this article's case, the tools they like to develop with is now in a limbo state (Unity3D, monotouch). There is no choice and that's why some people are in discontent.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked the Unity website said they believe they're not affected. Personally I don't like these "Fill in with your 3D models and you have a finished game" engines, a la Unreal. I do appreciate a lot the work of the Cocos2d/SIO2 community. That's the difference between "middleware" and "library".

And to those that say that "Apple banning the Flash Packager is different from Apple banning the Flash runtime on the iPhone/websites", I call BS. Go check what the Packager outputs. So much for cross-compiling.
 
History

Those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.

Could Apple not learn anything from the Book of Microsoft - not the UI Design chapters perhaps but the monopolistic practice ones?

It's not as if Apple is not hugely successful already - they have enjoyed a good mind share overall and good market share in the smart phone space. They could just not get greedy, let people have their well deserved freedoms in choosing what they want and not actively block other corporation's progress and all would be good.

What they stand to lose from the Antitrust case if it is ever brought on - but I cannot imagine they not losing mind share with what they are doing.

Oh well.
 
Speedy2 said:
You fail to show any sign of understanding for the underlying case. You apparently haven't even read the EU court statements, which VERY CLEARLY delineate how MS has violated antirust laws. You also seem to have forgotten about the US case.

Instead you hold on to this meaningless pie chart and don't even know what it means and what its implications are.
Click to expand...

So why not explain how there is meaningful opportunity to sell and make a profit on mobile applications without the AppStore.
 
macrumorsMaster said:
Then what about the Internet Explorer case a few years back? If you didn't want to run it, you could simply install another browser, or use another OS, Windows wasn't the only OS where browser could run.

I think Apple users look at Apple's Actions behind Apple colored Glasses :D
Click to expand...

IE + IIS + monopoly position = vendor lock in = antitrust violations.

That isn't the case here. These situations are entirely different. Anyone is free to develop for the iPhone OS platform, you can even use a cross compiler if you want to compile your code. Hell, you can even write a Flash application if you want, but don't expect Apple to sanction it in their marketplace. You are free, however, to sell it (or give it away) via other means, that's entirely up to you.
 
firewood said:
Exactly how does their "lock down" on apps hurt Nokia, RIM and Android smartphone owners (the majority of customers the market)?

It looks like their "lock down" on iPhone app specifications helps differentiate their product, which actually could increase competition in the worldwide smartphone app market.
Click to expand...

Well, if small developers spend all their time and limited resources learning xcode and coding only for iphone, that means they won't be coding for android, nokia, etc. As a result, if you buy non apple phones, you don't get access to several apps that could have been available if the devs could have used cross-platform tools and porters...

So, yes, other manufacturers are affected by an artificial handicap that has nothing to do with the competitor's product being better.

And before you say that if devs choose to code for iphone instead of the other platforms it is because it is better, consider that iphone reached critical mass with a different EULA that did allow cross-platform compilers. So now devs find themselves in a position where the majority of their income comes from the Apple app store sales, so they are now locked in.
 
Eraserhead said:
All the crap about their being competition against Windows/IE etc.
Click to expand...

What crap? Be specific if you want to call in Microsoft as a precedent.

Microsoft at the time had full domination of the PC world. Apple has a small slice of the mobile market.

It's not the government's job to level the playing field.
 
Eraserhead said:
And Microsoft can't have had a monopoly on their own OS.

Yet the EU thought differently.
Click to expand...

You are compairing apples to oranges. MS had control of 95% of the computer market, Apple does not have 95% of the smart phone market...
 
ericmooreart said:
That may be but when my company met with the Apple iPhone Dev and iAd teams they told us something completely different. A very grey area
Click to expand...

From what I have heard the iAd is a completely closed system right now. Also, the iPhone Dev team may not have all the information on the policy and how it will be carried out at this point in time. To get around it all Apple has to do is let Microsoft have a way to port over from Visual Studio.

Anyway, I'm not sure that this is an anti-trust issue since developers are free to develop for multiple platforms. What this does do is protect Apple's brand by ensuring that developers are working with tools that take full advantage of the capabilities of the platform, and gives Apple the freedom to bring new technologies and API's to the platform without having to wait for a competitor to update their tools to take advantage of them.

It also ensures that the development platform used is up to date and not hamstrung because another company does not put the effort into the iPhone porting as they do for another competing platform. This could hurt the iPhone brand image, since to the average consumer they will not know or care what the app was developed on only that it runs better on another platform than the iPhone OS.

Don't get me wrong, I would like to be able to port flash applications but I do see some very good reasons why Apple would want to prohibit it. I also see this as a move that protects the current developers from being inundated by flood of competition from Flash programers who suddenly find a new quick, large, and easy market for their applications.
 
ThePowerOfTheMac said:
Who cares about flash? Unfortunately Google and other companies still use it. It's like IE6. It holds the web back, but is still used by lots of people. (And I mean lots.) GO HTML5! BYE FLASH!
Click to expand...

Well, not exactly. Let's say "IE7": Google officially dropped support for IE6 a few days ago. It was a symbolic victory, though. :)
 
Eraserhead said:
And Microsoft can't have had a monopoly on their own OS.

Yet the EU thought differently.
Click to expand...

You are so clueless and continue making false claims.
MS had and still has a monopoly on ALL COMPUTER OSs SOLD. You still don't have a choice when you walk into a random store and buy a regular odd PC. You could buy a Mac but then you'd have to buy the accompanying high-end hardware, too. No choice. Antirust laws apply. There are no such restrictions in the smartphone market.
 
Eraserhead said:
They have a 95% share of the mobile app sales market...
Click to expand...

This is meaningless. You don't have to buy an iPhone. You can buy any smartphone you want. And didn't Google just announce that there now 100,000 apps, it is not Apples fualt people buy more apps from them then other systems.

Edit: I guess its 40,000, but still to say Apple has a monopoly is just stupid...
 
Whether you agree with Apple or not, there isn't really any case for them to answer. There are plenty of other closed development environments around that no one cares too much about - all games consoles are locked down in pretty similar ways (they might allow you to develop how you want but they have the final say as to whether you can develop and release).

If they find against Apple and force them to allow Flash apps in to the App Store then they will surely have to go after Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony to open up their environments in a similar way. I can't see that happening.

The biggest problem though is Adobe getting involved in a war of words with Apple. They've come out and pretty much said they're not bothered as other platforms will over take Apple in the medium to long term, so if they don't think there is a monopoly to regulate who does?
 
ranReloaded said:
Last time I checked the Unity website said they believe they're not affected.
Click to expand...

Read the blog. More info there. They are still negotiating with Apple. Until then, nothing is clear and of course they would say they BELIEVE they are not affected. Otherwise they could as well stop selling Unity iPhone right now.
 
babyj said:
They've come out and pretty much said they're not bothered as other platforms will over take Apple in the medium to long term, so if they don't think there is a monopoly to regulate who does?
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
Speedy2 said:
Read the blog. More info there. They are still negotiating with Apple. Until then, nothing is clear and of course they would say they BELIEVE they are not affected. Otherwise they could as well stop selling Unity iPhone right now.
Click to expand...

which they haven't.
 
Wait a minute. It's the Post.

Note on American journalism: in the interest of news literacy, I'll tell you it just occurred to me that this story appears in the Post. While it is not impossible that something true has appeared in the Post, it seems to be largely coincidental if it does. It is, after all, a Murdoch publication. It could be true, but the percentages went down about 50%.

A tip to the wise.
 
OMG! Lot of you people need to stop drinking that Apple KOOLAID!

First off, Anti-compeitive and monopoly are two separate things. Apple does indeed have a monopoly in several areas.

- Digital Music Players (iPods)
- They have the largest share in Mobile Web Surfing (iPod, iPhone & now iPad)
- Largest online music retailer (iTunes)

And all three of these I see clearly how Apple is extremely anti-compeitive and tries to limit consumer choice.

I'm happy to see regulators are now focusing attention. Apple is super evil when it comes to anti-compeitive practices. .

This inquiry doesn't just target the iPhone, if you all forgot iPod also! which BTW DOES HAVE A MONOPOLY!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back