Australia Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Apple's App Store

[Alan Wynn]

News Update: Company has full control over other companies products (apps) and their money (in-app purchases).

Nope. Given that there are many apps exclusive to Android, iOS, Microsoft (Xbox), Nintendo or Sony developers have lots of choices. If they do not like the terms, they can always develop web apps. There are very few apps that do not have a web equivalent, and outside games (where there is already way more competition), there are almost none that could not be deployed as web apps only if this were really a hardship.

Even in countries where iOS is under 20% of the market, it has more than 50% of the revenue. People have a choice as to what phones they buy and developers have a choice as to for which platforms they develop. They purchase iOS/iPadOS/tvOS/WatchOS because of Apple’s security and privacy focus, not despite it. They purchase more apps on Apple’s App Store because they trust it more and because it is more convenient than previous models.

 

[I7guy]

There might be some tweaks but I do expect most of the business model to remain intact.

I don't expect that companies will be able to side-step Apple's percentages. Seems that would be forcing a company to give away it's services, which should be able to be challenged.

 

[LeadingHeat]

Why in the title only Apple is mentioned? 😅

Because Apple is much more fodder for clickbait

 

[Scipster]

There might be some tweaks but I do expect most of the business model to remain intact.

Agreed, Apple will come out of this relatively unscathed. They'll probably and allow third party app stores and allow users the choice to use a third party payment platform and be done with it. Most people probably won't care and will stick with the Apple App Store, hardly making a dent in Apple's profits while still permitting consumer choice.

And it will be a great selling point: iOS, iPadOS, and macOS, which already allows third party app stores, will be more unified/alike.

 

[ghanwani]

EXACTLY!!! Why are so many people blind to this monopoly?!!!

So, why is the ACCC waking up to this only now? It's not like the App Store rules changed yesterday.

 

[LeadingHeat]

Honestly if they’re more looking into the consumer privacy with the data that these app stores can collect, I’m thinking Google may be in much more hot water than Apple. They literally just announced their “privacy nutrition labels” to address what kind of information is gathered.

At first glance, the article title made it sound like it was Australia jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. Glad to see they’re looking into this for the consumer. (So far)

 

[I7guy]

Apple has already been accused of, and found guilt of anticompetitive practices. See ebook case. What makes you think they are saints when it comes to this too?

This is not binary. It's not that something happened in the past and today the same outcome is applicable.

 

[Okasian]

Next let’s ban all encryption! Think of the children!

Maybe let’s give the consumer more choice w/ regards to types of encryption, types of non-Apple video codecs, types of browser engines, yada yada.

You know, having the self-respect and agency to choose for yourself, perhaps?

 

[jlc1978]

Just because you like a monopoly doesn’t mean it is legal and should be forced down everybody else’s throats.

The corollary is just because a company is successful and controls how its products are accessed by others does not a monopoly make.
[automerge]1599575600[/automerge]

Maybe let’s give the consumer more choice w/ regards to types of encryption, types of non-Apple video codecs, types of browser engines, yada yada.

You know, having the self-respect and agency to choose for yourself, perhaps?

You do. Buy a different device from a different manufacturer.

 

[jlc1978]

They're even responsible for preventing companies from selling their products at suspiciously low prices (which can also be anti-competitive).

But it is also anti-competitive because it prevents consumers from enjoying lower pricess; and often a company is forced to keep prices low so others don't enter. In such a case, it iss to a consumer's benefit to have lower prices, regardless of the reason.

 

[Okasian]

You do. Buy a different device from a different manufacturer.

Ah right, so I have no absolute control over the thing I brought, other than jailbreaking. Got ya.

Oh yeah I’ve been spending my money elsewhere, not a problem.

 

[JKAussieSkater]

But it is also anti-competitive because it prevents consumers from enjoying lower pricess; and often a company is forced to keep prices low so others don't enter. In such a case, it iss to a consumer's benefit to have lower prices, regardless of the reason.

You don't understand predatory pricing. As explained on Wikipedia:

A dominant firm deliberately reduces prices of a product or service to loss-making levels in the short-term. The aim is that existing or potential competitors will be foreclosed from the market, as they will be unable to effectively compete with the dominant firm without making a loss. Once competition has been eliminated, the dominant firm can then raise prices to monopoly levels in the long-term to recoup their losses.

and, in case this wasn't clear, to quote once more from Wikipedia:

Predatory pricing can cause consumer harm so is considered anti-competitive in many jurisdictions and is illegal under some competition laws.

 

[Stromos]

Maybe let’s give the consumer more choice w/ regards to types of encryption, types of non-Apple video codecs, types of browser engines, yada yada.

You know, having the self-respect and agency to choose for yourself, perhaps?

Yes because people are so intelligent. We should stop giving tickets for not wearing seatbelts because choice right? Most people don’t even understand encryption and it’s importance. People don’t understand wearing a mask.

So what happens in your world if my phone number gets leaked online because you have malware on your phone? Do I get to sue you? When piracy is rampant for Apple apps do developers get to go after individuals? Will the governments that demand this open world compensate businesses for lost revenue?

 

[AndiG]

I am so looking forward to having to run memory hogging antivirus on my phone just like Mac/Windows/Android. Either that or MDM forcing AppStore only anyways so all apps that ditch the AppStore will be unavailable.

Super pumped. All so my fellow Macrumors users can sideload their SNES emulators and Snapchat hax when the walled garden breaks.

So exactly why do you think that if there would be another AppStore you will be forced to install it..?

Totes excited that I’ll have to worry about anyone in my contacts having malware on their phone sharing my location, messages to them, camera rolls, etc.

So you don't send messages to any Android user right now? If someone is using an Android phone he/she is removed from your contact list immediately?
What about hackable iPhones that have hardware bugs? So all of your friends have to be rich enough to own the latest iPhone available?

Kind of interesting ...

 

[gene731]

This whole single App store monopolistic policy eventually will not end well for Apple...

What’s monopolistic about it? Why is it just Apple everyone bashed on while google for one has the same fee structure. Why don’t you try to put a game up on Sony’s platform without paying and see what happens.

 

[CarpalMac]

Breaking news: Company has full control over their own product.

Like Microsoft did?

 

[Okasian]

Yes because people are so intelligent. We should stop giving tickets for not wearing seatbelts because choice right? Most people don’t even understand encryption and it’s importance. People don’t understand wearing a mask.

So what happens in your world if my phone number gets leaked online because you have malware on your phone? Do I get to sue you? When piracy is rampant for Apple apps do developers get to go after individuals? Will the governments that demand this open world compensate businesses for lost revenue?

Yes, people can be intelligent, it’s true. Not everyone who uses an iPhone is computer illiterate to an extent where they cannot manage their own device and dictate what should/should not be on it.

I’ve personally never heard anyone dying from a violent rooting accident. That non-hyperbolic seatbelt analogy is reasonable, yes.

In my world? You mean in the current world, as it’s currently still possible to jailbreak iOS to this day. What is your point exactly? Coddling at the result of increased security? No thank you.

Edit: I should be clear, I'm not saying you cant have a 'baby protective mode' where everything is locked down, but as a Software Engineer it annoys the hell out of me that you cant run unsigned code if you so wish, and as a consumer, I'd like the option to choose.

Edit 2: Apple could implement some toggle where they would allow non-trusted, but still sandboxed apps, if the user so wishes. This would retain the integrity of Contacts.app and your phone number (no root) whilst making it viable for other competition to, for example, create their own app stores and distribute/promote themselves, with their own payment processers that could be more secure and diverse (not just visa/mastercard/etc.) Apple doesn’t need that 30% to pay for all that really really really expensive bandwidth then, let third parties roll their own. The intelligent consumer is allowed choice, even if that choice could sometimes be nefarious. Agency > Bubblewrap.

 

[User 6502]

Breaking news: Company has full control over their own product.

Not really, laws apply no matter what the company thinks.

 

[AndiG]

What’s monopolistic about it? Why is it just Apple everyone bashed on while google for one has the same fee structure. Why don’t you try to put a game up on Sony’s platform without paying and see what happens.

Google is just an Apple follower. Google did the same Apple did, so it is like an unwritten agreement. The only difference between Apple and Google ist, that Google is less restrictive.

The smartphone market gained an important role in the last years. If you want to be successful in a market you also have to offer a product for the smartphone market.
So as a company you a forced to deal with Apple and Google, there is no way bypassing them. And especially if Apple doesn't like your app for whatever reason, you have to change you app until Apple starts to like it.

There is no way to sue Apple lets say because of discriminative or anti competitive behaviour. Apple will always tell you "look it is our store and so we make the rules". So if Apple wants to destroy your business they can. Just compare AirTags with Tile - Apple just decided to copy Tile and to give its own accessory better OS support and tried to kick Tile in the beginning.

But there are many examples why lot of organisations are having a closer look at Apple and Google at the moment. And Apple did already move and now developers can battle some AppStore guidelines (which wasn't possible before). So maybe Apple keeps moving to avoid being forced to accept rules they really don't like.

 

[mi7chy]

Why in the title only Apple is mentioned? 😅

Because only iOS has no alternative app store(s), no app side loading and the only OS designed for obsolescence where stock browser can't be updated independently of OS updates.

 

[-BigMac-]

I'm an Australian, and I disagree with you.

I think you misunderstand an ACCC investigation as "the ACCC have already decided an outcome, and it's bad for Apple and Google".

When did I say that? I do know what the ACCC does, and I'm allowed to share my opinion thanks.

 

[macfacts]

Build it and they will... sue!

These are investigations, not judgements.

 

[macfacts]

We live in a world where success gets punished. The trouble with governments is that most of them are led by people who are terrible at making a country financially successful, so what do they do? They try plugging in the holes through questionable methods like these where they suddenly fine companies for something they previously didn't care about. But check how many of them have iPads all over the house, iPhones in their pockets and Apple watches on their wrists... Hypocrites.

Being investigated is punishment?

 

[CthuluLemon]

This is exactly what Epic Games wanted. Their litigation just lit the fuse, as intended.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Yes, people can be intelligent, it’s true. Not everyone who uses an iPhone is computer illiterate to an extent where they cannot manage their own device and dictate what should/should not be on it.

I’ve personally never heard anyone dying from a violent rooting accident. That non-hyperbolic seatbelt analogy is reasonable, yes.

In my world? You mean in the current world, as it’s currently still possible to jailbreak iOS to this day. What is your point exactly? Coddling at the result of increased security? No thank you.

Edit: I should be clear, I'm not saying you cant have a 'baby protective mode' where everything is locked down, but as a Software Engineer it annoys the hell out of me that you cant run unsigned code if you so wish, and as a consumer, I'd like the option to choose.

But as has been mentioned a billion times before over the past few weeks... you do have a choice. You can use android or one if its many many forks. You can even create your own, the code is open source. There are also other non IOS and non Android mobile OS’s if you wish. You can buy one of the hundreds of other handsets available from multiple other manufacturers.
I’m not 100% sure, but I even think Xcode allows you to install unsigned apps for 7 days at a time anyway, so even that argument has a potential counterpoint.

Why are you so insanely insistant on Apple charging their way of working? They want a closed system (which by the way has been instilled in Apple by Steve Jobs since the first Mac came about), customers like it like that, what’s it to you? Go for a different product!