Pro tip: Open Apple Maps and search for a) The Netherlands and b) Ukraine.
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's Fines in Dutch Antitrust Case Hit 50 Million Euros
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
First of all, take a Look at Android. Where are those 3rd party AppStores?
Google Maps is widespread today, Apple Maps still cannot compete. Do you want to be forced to use a product, when there is a better product available?
Apple ist just worried about money. Different consequences may be:
- InApp payment gets a lot cheaper for developers, since Apple has to compete.
- AppStore Apps will gain better access to underlying API (aka 'private API') - since 3rd party AppStores would allow access.
- Freedom of Speech. AppStore rules telling developers not to tell users about Apple tax will disappear.
- In the future Apple cannot remove the Nawalny or HongKong freedom fighters app.
- Users will have the choice. Do they want to trust in Apples AppStore or do they prefer a 3rd party one? Competition is the key - if Apple opens up its mind and frees the AppStore from its gag contract rules, no one will install a 3rd party store.
Apple is still a one trick pony. Where are those new products? What about invention? Apple is still a phone company and it turned the AppStore into a cash cow and it wants to grab some money from people who really invent new stuff - the developers.
Waiting to see what happens next. Hopefully this will come to an end soon with Apple’s proposal being accepted.
That would likely lead to Apple having to leave the EU. The EU is a single market and since a while also a single digital market, disallowing discrimination by country:
Regulation - 2018/302 - EN - EUR-Lex
Even if Apple would stop selling devices and services in The Netherlands, Apple Germany, Ireland or Apple in any other EU member country, must still fulfill orders by Dutch consumers.
It's simple, if you want to do business in the EU, you abide by the laws of the EU. Apple doesn't same to have the moral issues with doing this in China. In the end, they will comply -- the EU is a very large market and they don't want to leave that money on the table. (Which you should care about as a shareholder
.)Ps. I am surprised in each of these discussions about the misconceptions that a lot of Americans (?) have about European countries. A lot of laws are harmonized in the EU and there are EU-level courts. At some point most violations of laws in some country will escalate to the EU-level.
Apple are behaving like a celebrity.
They have the money and power to pay the fines and are perfectly demonstrating how a two tier system works.
Reminds me of the P&O story where they worked out the cost of doing the wrong thing and decided it was acceptable.
I think Apple needs to look at the revenue from the Netherlands and decide if the fines and other costs are worth the trouble. Apple has done a lot for me by protecting me from malware. I only Buy software that come from the App Store and discloses all costs.
The U.S. govt is coming for Apple and other big tech companies next. It's inevitable.
www.wsj.com
The Justice Department Monday endorsed legislation forbidding large digital platforms such as Amazon and Google from favoring their own products and services over competitors’, marking the Biden administration’s first full-throated support of the antitrust measure.
“The Department views the rise of dominant platforms as presenting a threat to open markets and competition, with risks for consumers, businesses, innovation, resiliency, global competitiveness, and our democracy,” says a letter to bipartisan leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, signed by Peter Hyun, the Justice Department’s acting assistant attorney general for legislative affairs.
The letter, obtained by The Wall Street Journal, expresses support for the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, which the Senate’s judiciary panel approved in January in a bipartisan vote, as well as similar legislation moving through the House.
Amazon.com Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Apple Inc. and others oppose the proposed legislation, saying it would make it harder to offer popular services. The bills’ opponents also say it is fair for e-marketplaces, search engines and app stores to profit off their creations’ popularity.
The department’s letter throws its weight behind a different view: that the platforms’ dominant position gives them unchecked power to influence the fate of other businesses, and that restricting the platforms’ conduct would carry significant benefits.
WSJ News Exclusive | Antitrust Bill Targeting Amazon, Google, Apple Gets Support From DOJ
The Justice Department told lawmakers in a letter that the rise of dominant platforms presents a threat to open markets and competition.
www.wsj.com
The Justice Department Monday endorsed legislation forbidding large digital platforms such as Amazon and Google from favoring their own products and services over competitors’, marking the Biden administration’s first full-throated support of the antitrust measure.
“The Department views the rise of dominant platforms as presenting a threat to open markets and competition, with risks for consumers, businesses, innovation, resiliency, global competitiveness, and our democracy,” says a letter to bipartisan leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, signed by Peter Hyun, the Justice Department’s acting assistant attorney general for legislative affairs.
The letter, obtained by The Wall Street Journal, expresses support for the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, which the Senate’s judiciary panel approved in January in a bipartisan vote, as well as similar legislation moving through the House.
Amazon.com Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Apple Inc. and others oppose the proposed legislation, saying it would make it harder to offer popular services. The bills’ opponents also say it is fair for e-marketplaces, search engines and app stores to profit off their creations’ popularity.
The department’s letter throws its weight behind a different view: that the platforms’ dominant position gives them unchecked power to influence the fate of other businesses, and that restricting the platforms’ conduct would carry significant benefits.
Before you even get as far as that, (as I'm questioning whether China will attempt to do any kind of physical harm to any Apple employee based on a corporate decision), did you notice this Tim Cook direct quote;
"comply with all laws in countries that we operate"
That suggests to me that your requirements are quite limited.
I have a technical industry role and would suggest that anybody that similar leanings has would be severely limiting themselves with an attitude such as yours. I used to use a Hioki battery tester for example.
The word Hioki doesn't even appear in the app store.
Also where do you get the details of "all costs" disclosed?
Only problem is there are Mac apps that aren't available through the Mac store that I need for work.
I have to have those apps for my livelihood, end of story. And I can guarantee that the developers of those apps want my money.
So it would be nice if developers were Forced (cause we know most developers aren't changing unless forced to) to use the APP store and it's guidelines to make sure I'm getting a secure as possible APP.
We have a macOS app that is available direct from our site or via the App Store and the App Store version accounts for less than 10% of total customers. Forcing us to use the App Store doesn't make sense as more than 90% of people in our case have opted to bypass the App Store and buy directly from us.
Then, my mistake. They've done a bang up job here.
Any government body that wishes to cap how much a business can make should also anonce they are no longer capitalist. And as Kevin O'Leary would say, "It's un-American".
As a shareholder I seriously disagree.
Instead of playing game, perhaps all the sides could get together and find/plan an equitable solution?
As a shareholder I don't want to see ios fractured and want one solution on a global basis. Wait...shareholders disagreeing...is that even allowed? /s
Neither the Netherlands nor the EU care about some fans trying to escalate the topic. Apple has to obey to the laws of the EU/the Netherlands. For those who don't understand - it is like the Apple developers have to follow the rules of the AppStore.
There is just no discussion. Apple has to change and if smart people would lead the company, Apple would change before the European DMA or similar acts kick in.
Apple has to turn into a service company - just like Microsoft did. Instead of using Apple tax, sell services. What services? App Hosting service, Push Notification service, iCloud storage service, just to name a few.
So instead of forcing developers to use what Apple wants them to use, Apple should sell em services they want and need. And Apple should sell em the best services (awesome, incredible services at the best price, you know).
There is just no discussion. Apple has to change and if smart people would lead the company, Apple would change before the European DMA or similar acts kick in.
Apple has to turn into a service company - just like Microsoft did. Instead of using Apple tax, sell services. What services? App Hosting service, Push Notification service, iCloud storage service, just to name a few.
So instead of forcing developers to use what Apple wants them to use, Apple should sell em services they want and need. And Apple should sell em the best services (awesome, incredible services at the best price, you know).
I don't remember exactly when but TC did make mention of Apple and the growing services sector. Now there is "rumor" about hardware as a service.
It is times like this I flash back to IBM before it imploded. Hope not.
There are some posts like this, but this isn't some cute thing with some small dutch companies suing Apple and that's it. Instead, it is the Match group out of the US and a bunch of other shady companies suing Apple in a more politically sympathetic jurisdiction. If they get a decision they want they can not only get it in the EU, but use it to argue in other countries. This will have a cascading effect to other apps and basically be a horrible scenario for both Apple and the consumer. It's a tough situation for Apple.
At this point, I'm not even sure if this is a stationary target for the law. That's why I keep saying Apple needs to just request a step by step "WHAT DO WE DO???" paper to make everyone happy and not get fined for not doing it 100% by their books.
Let's imagine Apple will split hosting cost for publishing App on App Store and revenue cut on payment "processing fee cost"...
Hosting cost 29%
Payment fee 1% (I assume alternative payment will ask developer more than 1% cut)
Should this approach drive discussion between Apple and developers?
Why government don't ask supermarket to lower fee to brand who want to sell their good in Walmart or any other distribution channel?
Do developers like to put an app on a global market place, reaching billions of potential customers?
You don't like "closed" approach, purchase Android and "sell your data and privacy for free to Big G"
My two cents... Peace
Hosting cost 29%
Payment fee 1% (I assume alternative payment will ask developer more than 1% cut)
Should this approach drive discussion between Apple and developers?
Why government don't ask supermarket to lower fee to brand who want to sell their good in Walmart or any other distribution channel?
Do developers like to put an app on a global market place, reaching billions of potential customers?
You don't like "closed" approach, purchase Android and "sell your data and privacy for free to Big G"
My two cents... Peace
Which other distribution channel? For iOS apps there is only one distribution channel: Apple‘s App Store.
Maybe you see the problem now.
Are you sure?
The problem: there is currently no other avenue of sale because Apple will not allow it.
Or in this case the disallowing of alternative form of payment for these apps even though the functionality does exist and could be leveraged in some iOS apps.
I have a Galaxy phone. It has a Galaxy Store. I use block-this, which I download from F-Droid appstore. I can install Amazon Appstore, but I do not use any Amazon products so there is no need.
While Google Maps is widespread, not being the default app somewhat cripples its functionality. (I am assuming as I do not have an iPhone. Happy to accept corrections). Everything else, I agree with you.