Lower prices doesn't mean just for the consumer, also for the developer because even free apps have to pay apple $99 per year for the privilege.
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
Antitrust -- If a business charges too much for a product, it can be adjudicated as a monopolistic practice, or an intent to do same. If too little, as a restraint of trade or as unfair competition. If the same as its competitors, as collusion.
Politics used to decide private matters.
Politics used to decide private matters.
Abuah?!
what?
listen, i'm all against monopolistic competitive practices.
I'm all for releasing some stranglehold on economies that filthy rich have. i'm all for competition for luxury items.
but There's no monopoly here. If you don't like Apple's app store policy, There's a giant swath of Android manufacturers out there offering competitions, many come with their own App stores. If you're looking for an open and free market, that exists.
But where then does this "monopoly" end? What about OS? Apple has 100% of iOS installations on iPhones. is that not a monopoly preventing me choice of what OS I want? (although, I would love to buy an iPhone running android)
this is a slippery slope. Sometimes, yes, Lawsuits are required to keep a company in check, but sometimes, these things are more dangerous to the market than helpful
If you do not like AppStore policies you can not load the apps you like.
Also what the heck is this new millennium **** that I can not load my own Linux onto my 1st gen iPhone or iPad now that Apple does not support in anymore anyways?!
It's always funny to me, how many people out in The Net think they are lawyers, or know enough to say what the laws are.
The App Store is.... the platform.... to buy apps....???? What the **** else would be used? As much as I am against big corporations, this just shows the court system in this country is just awful.
No need to always look for Android for the rescue: Do you want your Ford SUV only run on Ford gasoline?
You're right. Developers should be able to distribute their own product in any way they want... without making the user jailbreak their device to get it. Oh, you were talking about Apple having the right to distribute developer apps anyway they see fit. Boo.
This brings up another money grab. What if it expanded so that media producers didn't have to pay Apple whenever we buy something from their app? That could lower prices. Heck if it applied to Apple TV, we'd finally get Amazon Prime Video on it.
Last edited:
What else would be used? Like directly the developers website or another store - like cyndia or what the h*ck it was called?
If you recall, Developers are not entirely happy with the Windows 10 Store, or the Mac App Store. If Apple and Microsoft start to remove the ability to distribute aps ad-hoc via websites, etc. then I think we are going to see the fruits of the App Store model - a total shutdown of independence when it comes to a developer. Why should I pay Apple 30% of my revenue when I do the work in advertising, etc. and I want to host it on my own platform?
Or, if Apple doesn't think my content is appropriate: I have no where else to go to reach iPhone users. It is an interesting dilemma that they have created for themselves. It will be interesting to see what happens.
All that said: not certain that a lawsuit is the best course of action here. I certainly wouldn't advocate for it.
Or, if Apple doesn't think my content is appropriate: I have no where else to go to reach iPhone users. It is an interesting dilemma that they have created for themselves. It will be interesting to see what happens.
All that said: not certain that a lawsuit is the best course of action here. I certainly wouldn't advocate for it.
Most joe users I know unfortunately always tap on "continue, ignore, go away" button no matter if it is a SSL cert, security warning, or otherwise.
I'm willing to bet that a significant number of those screaming the loudest for this are in fact hackers looking to create a marketplace for their shady dealings.
This seems like a non issues to me. I personally would like to see a lawsuit against locking in hardware to software. I think it's about time ios and mac OS was available on any hardware you own. That is more of an issue than apps.
The only thing I would appreciate from partial success of this suit is if it enabled us to choose what we wanted to install on our devices. As others have said, Apple doesn't seem to steal from devs in terms of app revenue, but their stranglehold on iOS apps is horrific.
Someone releases an app to find your missing AirPod, gets pulled because go &@#! yourself. It will be provided by Apple later, but on their terms and until then you wait for something you could have *right now.*
Most of the new major iOS software implementations started as apps or tweaks you could have if you were jailbroken, and then Apple released it in the next iOS revision as "innovation."
This lawsuit is pointed just at more sources of apps, whereas I'd like to see more app freedom.
Those who enjoyed the days of biteSMS will know what I mean. Those that enjoy device-wide dark mode will know what I mean. Those who use CallBar, Bloard, Activator, and other wonderful pieces of "unapproved" software know what I'm talking about.
It's really about time Apple just supply the OS and give the device some freedom because as much as I enjoy my iPhone, jesus it can be boring to use.
Someone releases an app to find your missing AirPod, gets pulled because go &@#! yourself. It will be provided by Apple later, but on their terms and until then you wait for something you could have *right now.*
Most of the new major iOS software implementations started as apps or tweaks you could have if you were jailbroken, and then Apple released it in the next iOS revision as "innovation."
This lawsuit is pointed just at more sources of apps, whereas I'd like to see more app freedom.
Those who enjoyed the days of biteSMS will know what I mean. Those that enjoy device-wide dark mode will know what I mean. Those who use CallBar, Bloard, Activator, and other wonderful pieces of "unapproved" software know what I'm talking about.
It's really about time Apple just supply the OS and give the device some freedom because as much as I enjoy my iPhone, jesus it can be boring to use.
Ok when someone buys an iPhone what do they actually own? People can't put whatever OS they want on it. If they jailbreak it they void the warranty. If someone wants a device that they can do whatever they want with then don't buy an iOS device. Pretty simple.
As if malicious software never went thru the review, and was distributed for days, weeks, motnsh, or even years.
The AppStore is there to tap 30% into developers profits, and of course CONTROL.
I'm a libertarian and big supporter of a free marketplace, but I think this is a mistaken application of the idea.
Apple purposely built the iOS ecosystem so you'd download the apps for it from their specific App Store, or just use the bundled ones that came with iOS itself. That's part of the value you get out of using an iOS product as opposed to competing products. Every app you install has been vetted by folks at Apple first who take some steps to ensure it's safe to use and meets certain standards they enforce.
There's really no "price fixing" going on here, because developers have other options. They can code for Windows Phone instead, should they desire, or write for Android - which is the "open" alternative supporting multiple "App Stores". And as Apple already stated (which got the initial lawsuit thrown out!), developers are allowed to sell their apps at ANY price they like, including free.
If you force Apple to allow alternate App Stores, you essentially outlaw the whole idea of maintaining an ecosystem. That would seem to imply you could also force all the game console makers to follow suit with the same "logic". Sony Playstations have to let you download games and apps from alternate online shops, and so do Nintendo products.....
If you perceive that there's some added value in coding and selling your program to run on iOS devices, that would be because they're already so successful and in widespread use, right? But some of that could easily fall apart if the courts stop allowing Apple to maintain a managed environment for them.
Apple purposely built the iOS ecosystem so you'd download the apps for it from their specific App Store, or just use the bundled ones that came with iOS itself. That's part of the value you get out of using an iOS product as opposed to competing products. Every app you install has been vetted by folks at Apple first who take some steps to ensure it's safe to use and meets certain standards they enforce.
There's really no "price fixing" going on here, because developers have other options. They can code for Windows Phone instead, should they desire, or write for Android - which is the "open" alternative supporting multiple "App Stores". And as Apple already stated (which got the initial lawsuit thrown out!), developers are allowed to sell their apps at ANY price they like, including free.
If you force Apple to allow alternate App Stores, you essentially outlaw the whole idea of maintaining an ecosystem. That would seem to imply you could also force all the game console makers to follow suit with the same "logic". Sony Playstations have to let you download games and apps from alternate online shops, and so do Nintendo products.....
If you perceive that there's some added value in coding and selling your program to run on iOS devices, that would be because they're already so successful and in widespread use, right? But some of that could easily fall apart if the courts stop allowing Apple to maintain a managed environment for them.
Fantastic, just what the App Store needs - lower prices
What an idiotic law suit. Developers receive 70%-85% of the revenue passing through the store and they control the pricing so how on earth can this be deemed a monopoly...
Exactly. Plus you know up front when you buy an iPhone you can only buy apps from the app store. So if you have problems with that don't buy an iPhone. Lawsuits like this make me sick. I hope if anyone sues for this they lose and end up having to pay for all of Apple's legal expenses.
It's really simple. Don't buy an iOS device. There are plenty of alternatives.
Does this also mean Siri is a monopoly? Should Apple open its NFC chips and voice assistance for 3rd party integration?
Personally, I wouldn't enjoy that :/
And Microsoft is being sued for not letting us play PlayStation games...
This has got to be the dumbest lawsuit. Apple made their product and their App store, when it was first launched everyone knew that buying an iPhone meant you had to use the App Store. Don't like it, don't buy one, that's your consumer choice.
I'm guessing we'll now see Android having to have an App Store option, for access to millions of Apps not designed for your phone...
I was being sarcastic, while thinking of the SuperCharger Stations, which only charges Tesla vehicles.
I mentioned it not as a direct analogy, but as another non-sense lawyers may try to take advantage of in the future.
Remember, the Developer tools are basically free. Xcode etc allows anyone to learn how to code for FREE. You can even install what you develop on your own phone.
If this lawsuit is won, I suspect that the only to change would be the price for Xcode will become much more expensive.
Agreed. I would be shocked if this was upheld seeing as Apple never attempted a "bait and switch" with this "platform".