Why would they 'deserve' it? Don't they control the right to make and distribute their product, their intellectual property, in a way they want? The market provides many choices for phones and OS's. Should The Gap have to sell clothes made by Eddie Bauer?Those monopolist bastards!
But seriously, the only *possible upside* I see from something like this, would be if it gave way to a ruling that somehow forced Apple to open up their OS to run on any machine.
That would be the death knell for Apple, but I can't say they wouldn't deserve it.
Even so, the affront to the ideal of freedom would certainly NOT be worth it.
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.
Court Rules Apple Can Be Sued for Monopolizing iPhone App Market
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's a different argument though.
Yes, Apple absolutely has a conflict of interest with their App store rules that gives anything Apple provides a competitive advantage.
But thats a different discussion all together.
It's not the prices for consumers that sucks.
The things that suck are:
- If Apple's rules don't allow an app, you can't have that app. Sometimes Apple rejects an app for legal reasons, but often Apple rejects it for reasons like it competes with Apple's own apps, or moral reasons (Apple's moralities are not necessarily the same as yours), or security reasons.
- Limited communication between developers and consumers within the app store.
- No way to have proper demos (IE, Mario Run is plagued with 1 star reviews from people who only have the free demo.)
- $100 annual fee to distribute.
I have tons of apps that I write, but I'm unable to distribute, because I'm not willing to pay the annual fee and I don't want to pass on the fee to customers. Ideally, it'd be a small program that I'd just serve on my personal website.
Apple should handle this the exact same way as on macOS. Make it so there's a toggle in Settings that allows you to install apps from outside the App Store - IE, by mail or from websites.
The things that suck are:
- If Apple's rules don't allow an app, you can't have that app. Sometimes Apple rejects an app for legal reasons, but often Apple rejects it for reasons like it competes with Apple's own apps, or moral reasons (Apple's moralities are not necessarily the same as yours), or security reasons.
- Limited communication between developers and consumers within the app store.
- No way to have proper demos (IE, Mario Run is plagued with 1 star reviews from people who only have the free demo.)
- $100 annual fee to distribute.
I have tons of apps that I write, but I'm unable to distribute, because I'm not willing to pay the annual fee and I don't want to pass on the fee to customers. Ideally, it'd be a small program that I'd just serve on my personal website.
Apple should handle this the exact same way as on macOS. Make it so there's a toggle in Settings that allows you to install apps from outside the App Store - IE, by mail or from websites.
No. Duh.
Yeah, by Apple.
You know what I recall? How long it took before Slingbox was willing to give Apple 30% for their video player, which for years they had always sold from their own website. You bought their hardware, you always went to their site to buy the remote control / player. They had zero problem with people finding them.
The Apple App Store is easier for small developers, but can be a money pit for larger ones.
It'll be interesting to see if major game makers jump into this.
9th Circuit. It'll be overturned like most of their lame-brained decisions are.
If that gas from Ford was optimized for Ford leading to better gas mileage and lower emissions, and was sold at market value.... then you would not agree because you support the lawsuit.
This is good news. The Apple deathgrip on apps and access to your device is wrong, this may be a fruitful avenue for breaking that grip.
Yeah, And I don't want Android crap apps showing in my App Store app, just the same way I don't want any dumb judge to make it easier for malware to run on my iOS device.
I wonder who was the ignorant-idiot who ruled in favor of this non-sense, ignoring all facts about security.
Last edited:
No ones has suggested or asked for it to be free, just the ability to pick where you eat.
Anti competitive also has to do with apps being banned due to their content. For example, there isn't a single app containing porn. Because Apple doesn't allow it.
Not advocating for porn apps, just saying, if the content doesn't align with apple's vision, it isn't allowed. And there's no real avenue without jaikbreak to achieve it.
The fact that various levels of competition exist within a storefront does also not imply that there aren't certain anti competitive actions in place. For what it's worth itnused to be much worse. For a while (still talking hears) Apple wouldn't let apps into the store that duplicated functionality already in iOS. For example a calculator. "We already have one! Denied".
Yep. Just like Android/Windows/OSX - let anyone who wants to open a store and sell Software for iOS do so. Amazon, Walmart, Adobe... or even Joe down the block.
If Ford gave me the option to buy better gas but didn't require it then I would agree with the practice. I don't have any special affinity toward lawsuits; but I do have an affinity against antitrust behavior.
Expand your outlook. There have been many apps arbitrarily removed because Apple didn't like the functionality, or it mimicked an Apple function, or would mimic a future Apple function, or bled into the adult world, or...
It's a long list.
btw - Walmart does enforce censorship on some products.
No, the correct analogy would be the gasoline you're allowed to buy is not from Ford, but from a gigantic number of gasoline brands on Ford's stores. With a great amount of competition between brands.
you know, i really wish you'd think before making silly comment like this:
Because Tesla gave openly let anyone use the patents to build their own compatible charging stations. Which is exactly the opposite problem that you're trying to draw an analogy with.
Fast forward one year...
Lawsuit waged against Apple because apps purchased on other sites compromised their iPhones! It's Apple's fault!
It should come as no surprise that we are living in a world of predominately stupid people, but at least we have more data to back up that claim now. Actually the data is growing by the day...
Lawsuit waged against Apple because apps purchased on other sites compromised their iPhones! It's Apple's fault!
It should come as no surprise that we are living in a world of predominately stupid people, but at least we have more data to back up that claim now. Actually the data is growing by the day...
You can, if you don't like apple, go elsewhere. Just like if you don't like seafood, don't eat at a place that serves seafood.
Yep, race to the bottom, and even screwing developers by tapping in 30% percent into their revenue of which before Apple did get nothing (e.g. coming form the Mac).
If Ford prohibits you from buying gasoline that is not distributed from a Ford-run company then it is antitrust behavior.
