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
Yeah, thanks for this very obvious information... It's not just about their data, it's also about their ease of supporting devices that don't have 50,000 random applications installed and settings hacked/changed...PC's with malware, ransomware etc.
I'm the one doing the locking in my Enterprise. And I'm the one doing the locking at home. And I buy products for both that are built around my goals.
There was a point where I had everything in my house running Linux or some flavor of BSD, automations going off all over the place on different devices...that was 21 years ago. I gained an appreciation for things that work without me needing to interfere, that can't be broken by my wife downloading the wrong app, that will respond correctly after an unexpected reboot...
Any public lawsuit can go to the Supreme court if you have enough for the appeals.
Read the complaint. The very first paragraph is about Steve Jobs:
In 2010, a top Apple executive emailed Apple’s then-CEO about an ad for the new Kindle e-reader. The ad began with a woman who was using her iPhone to buy and read books on the Kindle app. She then switches to an Android smartphone and continues to read her books using the same Kindle app. The executive wrote to Jobs: one “message that can’t be missed is that it is easy to switch from iPhone to Android. Not fun to watch.” Jobs was clear in his response: Apple would “force” developers to use its payment system to lock in both developers and users on its platform. Over many years, Apple has repeatedly responded to competitive threats like this one by making it harder or more expensive for its users and developers to leave than by making it more attractive for them to stay.
This complaint is about more than one person.
And what moron is buying an APPLE watch expecting it work with an Android device?? Do people also buy perpiherals that require Windows to work and expect it to run on their Mac's as well?
While I like the AW, I know a lot of iPhone users that use Garmin without issue, this case is very weak; the DOJ is going to get killed in court.
Not a defense of the DOJ by any means but the DOJ has no business providing better healthcare, feeding homeless, and better education.
Same with smartphones, there are more phone vendors you can acquire your equipment from aside from Apple. Manufacturers like Samsung, Google, Huawei, Honor, Vivo, Xiaomi, etc. offer comparable smartphones. And their dominance is greater than Apple's since they use Android, but people keep conveniently forgetting that.
I could understand probe investigations if it was a Chinese company... but one of your own?
How do you think these lawsuits get paid for?
I don't see how cloud gaming could be considered "innovative" in 2024. It already existed pre-iPhone.
They are going to prove Apple's monopoly in "High performance" smart phones. So, the rest of the quote becomes non-applicable. Apple’s U.S. market share by revenue is over 70 percent in the performance smartphone market—a more expensive segment of the broader smartphone market where Apple’s own executives recognize the company competes—and over 65 percent for all smartphones.
Correct. Especially since they are not one. Mono (one). There is another option, Google Android. So, Duopoly would be the correct phrasing for Apple.
"Having defined the relevant market as digital mobile gaming transactions, the Court next evaluated Apple’s conduct in that market. Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal. The final trial record did not include evidence of other critical factors, such as barriers to entry and conduct decreasing output or decreasing innovation in the relevant market. The Court does not find that it is impossible; only that Epic Games failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple is an illegal monopolist.
Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21 Page 2 of 185"
I can paste entire sections of the suit, but if you read it, it will explain how it is abusing their monopoly by anticompetitive practices. It is fairly well documented.
DOJ says Apple wantedly diminishes the performance of its phone just to show that Android phones are inferior.
As any iPhone user who has ever seen a green text message, or received a tiny, grainy video can attest, Apple's anti-competitive conduct also includes making it more difficult for iPhone users to message with users of non-Apple products,” the attorney general said. “It does this by diminishing the functionality of its own messaging app, and by diminishing the functionality of third-party messaging apps.”
“For example, if an iPhone user messages a non-iPhone user in Apple messages, the text appears not only as a green bubble, but incorporates limited functionality,” Garland added. “The conversation is not encrypted. Videos are pixelated and grainy, and users cannot edit messages or see typing indicators. As a result, iPhone users perceive rival smartphones as being lower quality because the experience of messaging friends and family who do not own iPhones is worse.”
I find it funny that you think these are the same people doing both of these things. Also a little whacked that you think you're able to objectively declare what is good.
Smartphones and their manufacturing are irrelevant.
It’s about their operating system, interoperability and sale/distribution of apps. Having a dozen other manufacturers sell iPhone clones licensed by Apple wouldn’t change a thing (as long as the OS, Store and their rules are the same).
This is more of a limitation of MMS/SMS, so maybe the DOJ should be suing cellphone companies.
Don't forget the precedent here, Apple would also have to write software for Tizen or whatever new OS someone wants to come up with.
DOJ is arguing that Apple is forcing out functionality on other devices. I'm suspicious about most of their examples because I've seen deviations from what they claim.
That is your opinion without any supporting evidence. Even if the DOJ says something in the press conference, what difference does it make if the language in the filed suit is what it is. You think the court is going examine what the DOJ said in the press conference?
Also, without a 3rd party, how can there be a cross-platoform?
That may not be enough now. The green bubbles, grainy videos and images have to go.
Why would you pair such an elegant device to substandard phones
Evidence? The evidence is what was left out. The implication is something that can be illegal or not illegal. The cross platform would be Apple to Apple, iMessage to iMessage, one client on Android and another on iOS. Disallowing a third party would mean something akin to Apple kicking Whatsapp off iOS.
LOL...Amazon Kindle stopped allowing in-app purchases a long time ago. You go to their web site and use their payment system to buy ebooks for the app. So Amazon Kindle was never actually "locked in" and neither were iOS users.