No claiming Apple had a 100% market share is off the wall which is why I put it a hypothetical strawman. It has no more logic that saying Epic is part of a some secret Chinese cabal to gather information on citizens around the world or some other insanity I have seen thrown about.
OS I believe, right, when you develop a piece of software you are creating it so that it runs on the hardware not a store. Different hardware uses different code. I’m sure some is the same. Swift for iOS, I believe android uses Java and something else, Xbox is C something I think.
Those are different consoles. I’m talking about different sources for apps on a single platform/device/OS/whatever word we want to use. The gaming thing was someone else’s example anyway.
A normal computer is different and has a lot more security issues. To the point where more people just use their phone for the internet
I mean to me that’s like going into a Target and being upset there’s not a Walmart in there as well. Companies should be allowed to have their own space imo and the iPhone is apples space. Not to mention all the problems this would bring along.
Ok? Counterpoint was that there are Apple haters and Apple fanatics on both sides. Doesn’t mean everyone is. Contrary to your statement that folks are picking on Apple just because they’re Apple.
But it’s nothing like that. It like going to Target and getting the things you want, then going next door to Walmart and getting the things you werent able to find at Target. No one is suggesting the App Store should host another store inside it, we’re saying that you shouldn’t be limited to only one store because that store might not actually have what you want or need.
I’m not sure what you think is ridiculous about the statement that some folks would still defend Apple even if they had 100% market share. Let’s get some input on that actually:
What regulations would be suitable to place on a 100% market share “legal monopoly” Apple? Could we make them allow side-loading? Alternative app stores? Significantly lower the commissions? Force them to allow any kind of app on the store? Nothing, just keep the status quo? What are your thoughts?
Not buy every company, but they could buy *a* company. Those are two very different things. Put the money to better use than just piling it up. They already have more than enough for R&D and for their share buyback programs. They have more money than any other company in the history of the earth. They could use some of it to make their products or services better.
Yeah. All of that sounds batsh** crazy right? No assumptions. It’s an analogy for exactly what Epic is doing.
They can certainly buy a lot of companies—that’s actually where most of their innovations come from. But I doubt Nintendo is up for sale, let alone if Apple could afford the number they’d ask for, or if it would even be a smart purchase for a Apple to make in the first place.
Yeah, I hope apple withdraws from china, russia, the netherlands, france & the rest of europe, south america, south-korea and australasia because of judicial backloash there.. who's next? north korea..
it could be a parastratiosphecomyia sphecomyioides defending there..
In my opinion, companies shouldn't be overburdened with regulations when competitors management make poor decisions or capitalism is alive and well. Hypothetically, if consumers voted with their $$$ and Honda and Toyota were the only two car manufacturers left, no additional regulatory burden should be aimed at these companies.
I like how you use sarcasm to imply that Apple threatening to withdraw from countries that are trying to manipulate it (and letting the backlash from citizens straighten out their lawmakers) is a bad idea, but then ask whether the next target of this bad strategy that I'm proposing will be North Korea. Fortunately, North Korea is such a trash country that Apple has pre-emptively withdrawn from doing business there by never starting to do so in the first place. Thank you for your expertly communicated, illuminating commentary
And so I take it that you believe the same thing, were Apple to have the entire smartphone market to themselves?
Why are you trying to draw a compare to AT&T that owned everything? Apple wouldn’t own, in this hypothetical example the cell phone market…just the smartphone market. Flip phones, etc would still be a thing in this hypothetical example.
I’m not saying that scenario would be the same as AT&T. I don’t care about AT&T actually. But I am asking if there’s any amount of market share Apple could have of the smartphone market, up to and including 100%, that would warrant regulations be applied to Apple.
Regulatory framework and enforcement in a vibrant market stifles innovation. Did apple get to be the way it is by playing underhanded with android, or did they produce a product people wanted? I’m not saying no regulations, I’m saying this sideloading is overegulation.
But that is capitalism in its purest form - profit not matter what. Go read The Jungle or Midnight is a Place some time.