It’s not about how many devices are sold in a single category. It’s about iPhone selling really well despite the fact that it’s a walled garden, when alternatives are readily available from several competitors.
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 Sued by U.S. Department of Justice, Says Lawsuit is 'Wrong'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That whole indictment reads like 'sponsored by Google'
Maybe this isn't about the current administration? The DOJ's investigation into Apple began in 2019, when it was the other guy.
Where will they take it? There is no alternative app store on iOS. That is why DMA is fighting for Alternative app stores. And that is why Apple is fighting against the Alternative app stores.
The DoJ argues that Apple has "monopoly power", so whether it's true or not is something that is still to be decided.
That determination will be crucial for the case.
Sure, but there’s nothing stopping companies from writing legalese in their TOS to allow them to sell it. Or updating their TOS so they will down the road and users are just bombarded with “accept” for the 75 pages they don’t read.
The tech world is 90% data collection and selling, unbeknownst to users. There’s no reason health data should even be legal to sell, if this goes through it absolutely will be because that’s the current status quo.
They were never forced to select iOS. They had the option of developing for a different platform.
Yeah, if it were that simple… someone else’s phone can be a vector for hacks into other phones. Just like PCs. There’s also social hacking to be considered. I do not know if Mr. X has downloaded some rogue app to help him ‘find attractive ladies in his neighborhood’ that pillages his facebook account or starts robocalling me using his voice as extracted from his phone.
I hope phones do NOT end up like PCs. People that are naive need to be protected. The few brave people you hint at, and that know what they’re doing, are probably a minority. I’m guessing, I have no data to support that, other than the people around me. Most are naive.
The argument that governments should NOT protect PCs is nonsense. Who said that? I would argue they should do better! But there you quickly end up in the the whole encryption vs. government backdoor discussion. Complex issues not helped by simplistic statements.
All things considered, I hope Apple and Google have to open up their app stores and ecosystems, but without the risk of them being flooded with malicious apps and hardware hacks.
BTW I LIKE Apple’s walled garden. If I want to experiment I muck around on my PC or my Linux box. They’re great for that. But that’s me.
People defending Apple understand this I think
They are feigning ignorance of what's actually being argued here
No. Cognitive dissonance will not allow self reflection or even internal humility. Time to batten down the hatches
Here's the between-the-lines summary of what the DoJ is actually wanting from Apple:
- Reduce or completely eliminate the revenue share model (which would also impact Google, Sony, Microsoft, Steam, Epic, etc.)
- Eliminate HIG so cross-platform apps can look the same on every OS.
- Allow Xbox Game Pass on iOS (which they already said they would and Microsoft just said "not good enough")
- Allow users to set a default messaging app (no argument about RCS or opening up iMessage)
- Allow Samsung watches to access APIs they cannot use currently
- Allow banks and Square to make their own wallet apps and let users set a default wallet app.
Last edited:
Apple is not as innovative as they think they are. My problem is not their business tactics but their marketing ones. The biggest issue being their attitude towards bugs. The OSs are littered with bugs that apple refuses to put resources towards because they seem to think they can just release a half-baked feature and then sit on their laurels.
Rumours of this have been circulating for years. Google scrambled and divided into many different companies aka Alphabet.. Facebook threw their money away and re-organized into "Meta", Microsoft... I dont know, they are the conservatives of computing AND they got slapped years ago already (Their embracing Ai without abandon/carelessly should receive regulatory scrutiny however..)
Apple though.
Apple did nothing to avoid regulatory scrutiny. I am guessing this is really about the rise of TSMC and Taiwan, which Apple has a big hand in..
For this reason, I think Apple might get slapped quite hard.
Solutions... Split up the company into separate companies handling their diverse businesses.
Turn iOS/Vision OS into open OS`s like MacOS and raze that walled garden...
BUT, the MAIN problem I believe is TSMC... Apple being big enough to skew US international politics is the problem. IS it Apples fault? Not really, it is US politics and domestic silicon progress(and intels disregard for developing ARM for Apple) that made TSMC inevitable.
How can Apple remain competitive while doing all these things? Not sure it is possible.. Esp if they fine Apple hard enough.
It is however a crisis. I had a feeling something like this was on the way... Not sure what Apple can do, I suspect it might be the end of Tim Cook as ceo... Orelse the board will sacrifice Tim Cook to save Apple..
Apple though.
Apple did nothing to avoid regulatory scrutiny. I am guessing this is really about the rise of TSMC and Taiwan, which Apple has a big hand in..
For this reason, I think Apple might get slapped quite hard.
Solutions... Split up the company into separate companies handling their diverse businesses.
Turn iOS/Vision OS into open OS`s like MacOS and raze that walled garden...
BUT, the MAIN problem I believe is TSMC... Apple being big enough to skew US international politics is the problem. IS it Apples fault? Not really, it is US politics and domestic silicon progress(and intels disregard for developing ARM for Apple) that made TSMC inevitable.
How can Apple remain competitive while doing all these things? Not sure it is possible.. Esp if they fine Apple hard enough.
It is however a crisis. I had a feeling something like this was on the way... Not sure what Apple can do, I suspect it might be the end of Tim Cook as ceo... Orelse the board will sacrifice Tim Cook to save Apple..
And then face ostracism because US-nonsensical-blue-green-battle xD (watching with 🍿 from across the pond
)If you like innovation, you should welcome antitrust scrutiny of major players such as Apple. Apple's approach to doing business has benefits, but there are clear anticompetitive downsides. Excessive lock-in, tying arrangements, and the like harm Apple's counterparts, competitors, and customers. For example, the European Union has correctly determined that the benefits of Apple's App Store (security, ease of use, etc.) can exist alongside alternative app distribution models that Apple does not control. Similarly, while Apple's customers benefit from the close connection between the Apple Watch and iPhone, they would benefit even more if there were no technical impediments to, say, Android developers creating integrations with the Apple Watch.
Antitrust law also recognizes that anticompetitive conduct becomes more problematic as a company becomes larger and gains more marketplace control. A "walled garden" can have high and possibly impenetrable walls in a growth situation, but not when the company gains outsized market control.
Apple as we know it today would make it nearly impossible for a new Apple to compete. Left alone, it also would have increasingly little incentive to innovate.
Antitrust law also recognizes that anticompetitive conduct becomes more problematic as a company becomes larger and gains more marketplace control. A "walled garden" can have high and possibly impenetrable walls in a growth situation, but not when the company gains outsized market control.
Apple as we know it today would make it nearly impossible for a new Apple to compete. Left alone, it also would have increasingly little incentive to innovate.
exactly. people fail to understand Apple doesn't have total control of the market.
They could ignore the platform. Like many developers did not (and some still don’t) support macos.
If Apple’s system and ecosystem is really so terrible and anticompetitive, why would I want to take my business there?
The DOJ and 17 states beg to differ.
"In order to protect their model, Apple reduces competition in the markets for performance smartphones and smartphones generally. It does this by delaying, degrading, or outright blocking technologies that would increase competition in the smartphone markets by decreasing barriers to switching to another smartphone, among other things. The suppressed technologies would provide a high-quality user experience on any smartphone, which would, in turn, require smartphones to compete on their merits."
Apple suppresses such innovation through a web of contractual restrictions that it selectively enforces through its control of app distribution and its “app review” process, as well as by denying access to key points of connection between apps and the iPhone’s operating system (called Application Programming Interfaces or “APIs”). Apple can enforce these restrictions due to its position as an intermediary between product creators such as developers on the one hand and users on the other.
They also give examples of how Apple does this degradation of services to compete rather than compete on merit.
Whatever one feels about the merits, it's hard to see the courts ruling for the DOJ here when Epic's case -- which I think you could describe as a "subset" of this one -- mostly failed.
Unlike Epic, I would guess this one would have a greater chance making it to the Supreme Court -- but the Supreme Court is a lot more conservative than lower courts currently.
If Apple ever had to fight such a case, now might be a good time. When a case like this fails, it is usually not attempted again. It could end-up strengthening Apple's position ironically.
Unlike Epic, I would guess this one would have a greater chance making it to the Supreme Court -- but the Supreme Court is a lot more conservative than lower courts currently.
If Apple ever had to fight such a case, now might be a good time. When a case like this fails, it is usually not attempted again. It could end-up strengthening Apple's position ironically.
US DOJ enters the chat....
The software industry has clearly been separate from the hardware industry since the very early in the days of consumer computing (see: History of Microsoft / IBM). The main anti-trust issue violation stems from the fact that Apple is a HARDWARE company, but uses its dominance to control the software industry.
Smartphones have evolved into general purpose computing devices. There's no reason the iPhone and iPad cannot be an open platform like the Mac. They even share the same (or very similar) microprocessors now.
No one is saying Apple has to exit the App Store business. The problem is Apple forces a single App Store that is their own. This prevents proper competition.
Last edited:
No.We.Are.Not.
My wife is a small time developer. And has worked for Sony and Meta and has friends still there.
Her revenue is greater on apples App Store. But she makes the LEAST from it.
Her revenue is HALF that from the Play store and that’s where she actually makes a profit.
Last edited:
What are the several alternatives? Because the case hinges around iOS, to which there is only one alternative.
It’s going to make the consumer experience more confusing (for some) and less secure.
They were FORCED to leave the app store. C'mon man. You are grasping for straws here.