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

Apple Says Blix's Twice-Tossed Anti-Competitive Lawsuit Alleged 'False Conspiracy Theories' [Updated]

Cosmosent said:
How-best to circumvent Apple's Stranglehold on App Discovery is the #1 challenge most App Devs have !

That's at the core of the problem.

Apple's cut is secondary, except to the companies who are already a Household Name !

"App Discovery" App Stores would go a long ways towards Fixing the Problem !

Apple would NO longer be able to Control the Narrative.
Click to expand...
We already have "3rd-party app discovery." It's called the Internet. Every app has a direct link. Most developers put a button on their sites with a link to the app in the store.

How to get your app discovered:
  1. Put in on the App Store and it will be searchable
  2. If the app is good or becomes popular, more search hits.
  3. MARKET your app. The App Store is one avenue but if you as a developer are not doing your own marketing and advertising, why not?
  4. Feed your app to the aggregators and reviewers (like CNet). Provide the link your app in the App Store.
Third-party app stores will not help discovery. They WILL hurt delivery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdriftmeyer, mhnd and cmaier
cicalinarrot said:
Sounds a lot like what Microsoft said when they needed to destroy Netscape and used their clearly superior power to do so.
Apple’s closed ecosystem is mostly good and it also is because they can force people into it. They may be good at what they do but they shouldn’t have too much power because of it.
Click to expand...
No one is forcing anybody into anything. If you like Apple products great. If you don’t or don’t want to be tied to their ecosystem you are free to choose from any number of android phones. Any number of Windows PC makers. See how that works. You open your eyes and you see you have all kinds of choices. My wife tried a Samsung galaxy a very long time ago. Us personally, will never have an android device ever again. That is because we have a choice.
 
  • Love
Reactions: One2Grift and SFjohn
It’s so hilarious to see people talking about Apple’s monopoly power in the smartphone realm, Apple owns only ~15% of the smartphone market, right around the brink of to-extinguish threshold. Other than it’s fame of being the first to the market, it holds NO power at all. It’s Google who holds the ABSOLUTE power in the realm.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: mdriftmeyer and SFjohn
"Blix, a member of the Coalition for App Fairness and frequent complainer to press and regulators
Click to expand...
I am starting to see a trend, and this is why I think these lawsuits, and the so-called coalition, are ultimately destined to fail.

The companies comprising this coalition (from Epic to Tile to now Blix) are all scum. They are not doing themselves, or the movement, any favours.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: Nütztjanix and SFjohn
I fail to see how this isn’t anticompetitive. Apple’s forcing you to include Sign In with Apple if you wanted to have SSO at all. This is equivalent to Intel forcing Apple to exclusively sell Intel macs because Apple uses an Intel machine at their office.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Nütztjanix and SFjohn
Lemon Olive said:
I'm not a platform. I'm the player. My job is to compete. Not enable competition. The platform's responsibility is to enable competition. Apple creates issues by being both platform and #1 player on their own platform.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute. Is it your job to compete, or is it Apple’s job to enable you to compete?

Sounds like you’re blaming Apple for your failure to compete.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: One2Grift, Abazigal, Nütztjanix and 1 other person
I use Apple services because I want their walled garden and the security that goes along with it. I’m pretty sure there are millions like me. I particularly want to use Sign In with Apple and not feed a developers desire to make money from their app, by monetising my identity.
 
  • Love
Reactions: dominiongamma and SFjohn
Apple already admitted that it manipules search results e.g. Dropbox app. Old news.
 
AwesomestOwl said:
I fail to see how this isn’t anticompetitive. Apple’s forcing you to include Sign In with Apple if you wanted to have SSO at all. This is equivalent to Intel forcing Apple to exclusively sell Intel macs because Apple uses an Intel machine at their office.
Click to expand...

If by “equivalent” you mean the opposite.

See, the flaw in your logic is your use of “exclusively.” As the judge pointed out, apple is not requiring anyone to use SIWA exclusively.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Nütztjanix, mdriftmeyer, SFjohn and 1 other person
Lerxt said:
I use Apple services because I want their walled garden and the security that goes along with it. I’m pretty sure there are millions like me. I particularly want to use Sign In with Apple and not feed a developers desire to make money from their app, by monetising my identity.
Click to expand...
You speak my language and you get it. Someone Apple protecting the users on their own iPhones is anticompetitive somehow which makes no sense
 
I dont get why people want 3rd party app stores. Apple can barely police even their own and scams show up quite frequently. With 3rd party, you can bet every other app is a scam/malware/virus.

Whenever 3rd party comes in, it goes to hell. Check out Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy and every other retailer that allows 3rd party sellers - it’s a toxic hell stew of knockoffs, counterfeit items, and cheap stuff designed to break the next day. If you’re lucky, you might end up overpaying a scalper.

On windows, i see a whole bunch of people that are running with all kind of toolbars/adware that are bundled with “free apps”. While people on macrumors are smart enough to differentiate scams from legit stuff, the general population is incredibly stupid. (Remember that apple twitter scam and how many people fell for it?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: PinkyMacGodess
Art Mark said:
Companies could try and make great products that people want or they can continue to pretend there is a monopoly at play. Pick which you direction you support.
Click to expand...
If your app removed from app store for 8 months for vague violation of guidelines, then you don't have much choice of direction. But my favorite pick is demonization of real devs, because they do nothing and just wanna sue Apple everyday.
 
Lemon Olive said:
Well that would be because they are undermining your ability as a developer to provide the sign in experience and method that you want.
Click to expand...
And would be giving the users of the platform a single sign-in interface, which trumps the developer's need to provide the sign-in experience they want.

And as the judge said, adding options is anything but anti-competition. Your reasoning doesn't even explain how competition is being hampered here. Developer choice is, sure, but user choice is helped here. I'd understand if, like the IAP/subscriptions thing, Apple was preventing other sign-in options after SIWA was introduced, but they're not. So I simply can't see how it's anti-competitive.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: One2Grift
Abazigal said:
I am starting to see a trend, and this is why I think these lawsuits, and the so-called coalition, are ultimately destined to fail.

The companies comprising this coalition (from Epic to Tile to now Blix) are all scum. They are not doing themselves, or the movement, any favours.
Click to expand...

I believe Spotify is in this coalition too. If this group has individual or Corp. donors, i bet it would be a fun list to see.
I get that a much much smaller than Apple company (Spotify for example)feels squeezed by the mega company. The mega companies have deeper pockets to pressure pricing (Apple, it is suggested, has partly caused streamed music to be a VERY small profit margin business. I’m not sure Spotify can now make money on just music). But that’s not going to change. A company with money to seed it’s business is not and should not be illegal unless it’s legally defined predatory behavior. And it ultimately is often good for consumers with downward pricing pressure while racing to deliver differentiator qualities.

Spotify has called out the EU hounds. That’ll make media happy to see proceedings but it’s a dog and pony show. If they had the predatory or anticompetitive goods on Apple, it’d already be in motion.
 
Moka Akashiya said:
If your app removed from app store for 8 months for vague violation of guidelines, then you don't have much choice of direction. But my favorite pick is demonization of real devs, because they do nothing and just wanna sue Apple everyday.
Click to expand...

what company was that and what was their vague violation?

I’m not sure who you’re directing the demonization of devs as do nothing’s who just want to sue. When did Apple say that?
 
thenewperson said:
And would be giving the users of the platform a single sign-in interface, which trumps the developer's need to provide the sign-in experience they want.

And as the judge said, adding options is anything but anti-competition. Your reasoning doesn't even explain how competition is being hampered here. Developer choice is, sure, but user choice is helped here. I'd understand if, like the IAP/subscriptions thing, Apple was preventing other sign-in options after SIWA was introduced, but they're not. So I simply can't see how it's anti-competitive.
Click to expand...
I don't want my users to use sign in with Apple for some reason, i want them to use something else, and Apple says NO CHOICE they have to be allowed to use this. Nothing about that is "competitive".
 
LonestarOne said:
Wait a minute. Is it your job to compete, or is it Apple’s job to enable you to compete?

Sounds like you’re blaming Apple for your failure to compete.
Click to expand...
You sound pretty confused. It is literally Apple's job as the platform to enable competition, and not engage in any behavior that affects it. Apple is horribly guilty at doing just that in a thousand different ways, and they get away with it because they are also a player on their platform and often times the best one.
 
gene731 said:
No one is forcing anybody into anything. If you like Apple products great. If you don’t or don’t want to be tied to their ecosystem you are free to choose from any number of android phones. Any number of Windows PC makers. See how that works. You open your eyes and you see you have all kinds of choices. My wife tried a Samsung galaxy a very long time ago. Us personally, will never have an android device ever again. That is because we have a choice.
Click to expand...
Come on, you must be pretending not to understand. I wasn't talking about anybody being forced to buy iPhones, of course. But if you buy an iPhone, which I agree to be the best choice, you are forced to use it the way they want. And they have always put heavy obstacles for people to use the device they often paid >$1000 the way they want. You know it very well and this is a problem precisely because Android is not a great alternative.
Also, they can force developers to follow rules so there can't be real competition in some cases. That's a lot of power, often too much I believe. When people buy whatever product, they shouldn't be unwillingly signing for that. It's clearly a side effect and not a feature. Apple deserve its success but there must be regulations over it.
 
Lemon Olive said:
I don't want my users to use sign in with Apple for some reason, i want them to use something else, and Apple says NO CHOICE they have to be allowed to use this. Nothing about that is "competitive".
Click to expand...
2 choices vs 1 choice is the entire definition of competitive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: One2Grift
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