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.
Epic vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it does look bad when a ceo contacts politicians because then everyone is going to demand audio logs be released due to potential stuff of the company swinging opinions tim cook isnt an ordinary citizen
I agree with you 100% tim cook isn’t an ordinary citizen and has the right to it but think of th PR nightmare if people demanded the call logs between tim and house speaker nancy pelosi which is the only one he called also cook isnt the only ceo to challenge it think of the impact the new legislation it would have if new legislation were to be passed in the middle of the apple v epic trial it wouldn’t be fair or proper to. Impose it until after the trial why? Because why should apple be held accountable for stuff that was legal but no longer is in the middle of things and could impact a judge’s decision its not fair at all
Not even close to what I was referring to but thanks for playing……
I dont want a free open system on apple. states get your head out of your asses and stay out of this. android can stay with android and apple people can stay with apple. we dont care what android does with their devices, stop caring what we do with ours.
jealousy is making them crazy
jealousy is making them crazy
I dont care about other nations, they all suck. only usa matters, and thats where we should focus. idc what others do outside of the usa. not our issue. I feel we could pull everything out of all those nations and be perfectly fine, they dont need our soldiers, our policies or our technology. let them be 3rd world nations.
That’s not her point, the point is it’s not just the US having issues with Apple, are they jealous as well?
Sometimes democracy does work. You’ll find it working if and when apple isn’t found in the appeals process and the bill dies. We all want democracy to work the way we want it to work.
My point exactly, which brings me back to my earlier argument that Apple is technically a monopoly of iOS devices even if they have sold only one iphone to date. It’s an argument that is never going to hold up in court. I am not arguing in favour of it, I am trying to show just how ludicrous it is.
Well in Eastman Kodak the court ruled that Kodak violated the Sherman Act because it was a monopoly over the repair market for its own photocopiers. Although the key difference there is that Kodak started restricting the repair market after already selling its machines, whereas Apple has never allowed unapproved software on the iPhone- in fact it considers this restriction an advantage for consumers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1992/06/09/antitrust-case-ruling-goes
Well, what you want doesn't weight much, antitrust laws around the world will take care of this.
Btw. exclude the "WE", don't speak for all, you absolutely don't know how many iOS users would prefer a open iOS and how many don't.
In the US at least, antitrust laws are supposed to come into effect if the party has caused harm to consumers. Has Apple caused harm to consumers? I would say no. I understand why some big developers are upset at Apple, but from a consumer point of view the App Store is great. No consumer wants five different stores for all their stuff.
And that’s the issue I have with this whole thing. No one has asked iOS users if they want all these proposed changes. Do the majority of iOS users want sideloading? I personally don’t have an issue with it for apps Apple doesn’t want in the Store (emulators, adult content, etc.) but I don’t want whole alternative stores. Do the majority of iOS users want third parties to have access to the same special hardware features and private APIs that Apple does? I certainly don’t. I don’t trust any random app the way I trust Apple, especially if that App may not even be from the Store. And it’s not fair to Apple for others to be able to free load off its innovations if it doesn’t want them to. Do the majority of iOS users want Apple to be unable to bundle its default services in when you buy a device? Well, I definitely don’t want to buy a phone without a default messaging app, email client, web browser, etc.
So, if all this regulation is meant to help me, the consumer, why is no one asking me if I want the device ecosystem I paid into to be changed unilaterally? All the complaints against Apple have come from big devs, not users. Users are generally happy. I like the walled garden, I paid thousands of dollars for the walled garden, and I don’t want to see Apple’s user experience centered business model constrained for the sake of “helping” me.
Actually the last time Apple did license their OS to others it was a disaster as instead of growing the MacOS it broke the market into smaller pieces. When Apple got Jobs back he looked at the contracts ($50 for the OS per machine) came up new ones more favorable to Apple and offered them to the third party companies. He did this four or five time and every time they told him to "go pound sand." "We finally made the decisions we had to make." (Steve Jobs Killing the Clones) and he upgraded the OS effectively locking out the clone makers from updating their hardware.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome and Apple is not insane. Don't know about Epic though.
Yes. OS 7 wasn't a good OS to license anyway due to its poor memory management.
Jobs did tinker with the idea of licensing OS X to Sony because the Vaio had some interesting designs but chose to build better looking PowerBooks instead.
And who would pay that fee?
If the developer has to pay money every time a consumer downloads their free app that they will get no revenue from... that's a quick way for the developer to go out of business.
And if the consumer has to pay money to download a free app... then it's not free, is it?
I guess I'm gonna need a little more clarity on your statement.
?
Well, that's because usually users has no notion about the consequences that Apples and Googles monopoly/duopoly has. These are rulings that will affect the present and also the next 20/30 years, children and even unborn will be affected.
Rulings taken in the U.S. will affect the rest of world , and vise versa, rulings taken in the EU will affect the U.S. Apple HQ is in the U.S., but they are an international Company and will have to play the rules of many countries, they will have to apply to the common denominator of all these rulings. They could try to break all these upcoming rulings apart per country, but this would be too complicated and just slow Apple completely down.
Antitrust rules does not only exist to protect customers, they also exist to keep the economy running, healthy and competitive for now and in the future.
What I or you want is not of significance here.
Anyway, I'm for sideloading, and for an overall healthy market competition.
I don't care much if Apple, Microsoft, Google, EPIC or any other company exists in 30 years from now, I just care that innovation keeps coming and that other companies incl. startups has a chance to dethrone Apple & Co. in the future.
Thanks to EPIC the Apple land started to slide, of course they also have personal interests, but overall this will have a positive impact to the market.
Last edited:
I think it’s telling that all the complaints we have heard thus far are from larger developers. Not a squeak from consumers. Perhaps companies like epic and Spotify are well aware that consumers don’t really dislike closed apps ecosystems and this is all just one giant ploy to wrest control of Apple’s ecosystem away from them.
In short, it’s everything to do with enriching themselves and nothing to do with benefiting the end user at all.
Maybe it’s time the consumers who like the iOS App Store model for what it is stand up and tell these companies just what we think of their pitiful little rebellion.
Apple will fight this to the death beacuse they know sideloading of apps will lose them billions of $$$ a year because a sideloaded app would not be hosted on Apple's servers which means Apple will be unable to charge hosting fee's and in-app commision fee's because the app will not be on Apple's app servers thus meaning not having to abide by the app store rules of having to use Apples own payment system which is what incurrs the commision payments in the first place.
Apple makes billions of $$$ every year from app's that have in-app purchases. Now just think what would happen if the developers of those app's moved their app off the app store and onto another store that allowed sideloading but that store did not charge a commision on in-app purchases, all they charged is a yearly hosting fee. App developers would move over in a heart beat because it would mean they would get 100% of in-app purchases.
Apple can scream and shout all it wants about how security might be comprimised by sideloading but it's all about how much $$$ Apple stands to lose over sideloading and in my opinion they will do what it takes to make sure that does not happen.
Apple makes billions of $$$ every year from app's that have in-app purchases. Now just think what would happen if the developers of those app's moved their app off the app store and onto another store that allowed sideloading but that store did not charge a commision on in-app purchases, all they charged is a yearly hosting fee. App developers would move over in a heart beat because it would mean they would get 100% of in-app purchases.
Apple can scream and shout all it wants about how security might be comprimised by sideloading but it's all about how much $$$ Apple stands to lose over sideloading and in my opinion they will do what it takes to make sure that does not happen.
Exactly they don’t give a $%#!* for customers and devs, it’s all just about money by anticompetitive behavior, and now they has been caught in flagrante.
That key difference is why Kodak got ruled a monopoly. Funny thing no one has gone after McDonald's regarding their ice cream machines which are somewhat similar - A franchiser can only get a Taylor ice cream machine and until Kytch came along only Taylor authorized people (basically their own people) could repair the things. The lawsuit Kytch brought has showed some really shady crap.
Where were all the these AGs when Taylor was pulling that crap and why haven't wrote letters in support of Kytch given the 800 pages of internal emails and presentations that mention its approach to Kytch given they how Taylor
closely examined and sought to mimic specific Kytch features. The emails also show that at some points McDonald's, not Taylor, led the effort to prevent restaurants from adopting Kytch's gadgets.
Where is the outrage regarding the Taylor-McDonalds thing that is being thrown Apple? I hear only crickets.
The developers
Not at all, considering they have adds inside or in app purchases. It could be 0.001$ per download etc
That’s why the developer pays the feee
It could simply be true free apps with no in app purchases or adds pays nothing as today. Add supported apps would pay as well as those with inapppurchase instead of apple taking 30%
We already have a big movement about that. It’s known as right to repair movement pushing bills in almost every state.That key difference is why Kodak got ruled a monopoly. Funny thing no one has gone after McDonald's regarding their ice cream machines which are somewhat similar - A franchiser can only get a Taylor ice cream machine and until Kytch came along only Taylor authorized people (basically their own people) could repair the things. The lawsuit Kytch brought has showed some really shady crap.
Where were all the these AGs when Taylor was pulling that crap and why haven't wrote letters in support of Kytch given the 800 pages of internal emails and presentations that mention its approach to Kytch given they how Taylor
closely examined and sought to mimic specific Kytch features. The emails also show that at some points McDonald's, not Taylor, led the effort to prevent restaurants from adopting Kytch's gadgets.
Where is the outrage regarding the Taylor-McDonalds thing that is being thrown Apple? I hear only crickets.
And guess who is working hard against it? Apple and Taylor is against it so they can continue to make money on their repairs and service fees. By claiming it’s dangerous or copyrighted information that shouldn’t be shared with other people