It seems laws in the EU and US are different. Apple faces charges of abuse of dominant position in the EU like in the Netherlands.
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
Non-negotiable “contracts of adhesion“ typically don’t have the enforceability of a contract hashed out in detail between two parties since a contract is supposed to be a “meeting if the minds”.
They did. The DOJ took serious antitrust action against Microsoft in the 90s.
I believe Apple (and many Apple fans) supported that action.
Unfortunately it doesn’t work that well, that’s why regulators exist because voting with your dollars doesn’t mean harm isn’t done. And literally voting have spoken.
Well what a shame, if apple just allowed third party payments or lowered their commission we wouldn’t be here. But I guess apple and you rather trade short term greed to long term losing the platform
If the App Store is compromised I believe you will see it go away eventually. Expensive and resource intensive products and platforms quickly lose favor with Apple and it should. They have an obligation as a publicly traded company to focus on profit producing ventures and delete those that are not.
Development would grind to a halt and Apple will return focus to internal projects and limited direct partnerships. They have no incentive to maintain a platform for other companies to profit and they are locked out. Apple could invoice the DOJ, states and companies involved in this suite for the direct cost related to managing the platform and transfer responsibility to handle ongoing fraud and customer support issues related to the platform. Rename the store the Platform formerly known as the Apple App Store.
Sending someone 5,000 miles through the air is also hard, but we make a big deal when airplanes crash. I agree software is hard. That should mean less software not less quality.
Lol, I think you are the one who presume everyone are technically literate.
Making side loading a complicated and scary proses will fix that as 99% will just stay with the official store
If I switch from Windows to macOS, should Microsoft have to compensate me for all the money I spent on Windows software? What if I switch from my PS5 to Xbox? If I move from the US to Europe, should all the appliance companies have to give me new appliances for free?
This problem affects any company running a successful platform with an app store, so Nintendo, Sony, Google, Microsoft, and Apple at the very least. Should they all be forced to allow third-party app stores on their platforms? Shouldn't the third-party app stores have to pay something for the additional security checks and testing that the platform owner will have to perform in order to verify the software on the third-party app stores is safe?
We really don't have to guess. Google has already run this experiment, and the result has been greater choice, but at the cost of security and usability. If we are going to force the other companies to follow Google's model, then as a consumer, I want a checkbox which will allow me to block any side-loading or third-party app store software from being installed on my device.
Changing taxes and forcing different fee structures is not within the power of the attorneys general. In any given state the legislature and executive are not necessarily held by the same party and may have totally different goals.
Sure. Right now the minimum threshold for charging sales tax is $100,000 or 200 transactions. Any Etsy seller contributing taxes in a state should be able to make that request.
Try ~60%.
Mobile Operating System Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats
This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.gs.statcounter.com
But 60% is in no way a monopoly. Apple can't control the market in the U.S...and their worldwide market share is much lower than 50%.
I’m not sure why you are making assumptions about my motives. Also, i don’t know how you landed on me being supportive of Apple’s profits for which I gain nothing directly!
My only point is that the app store is an economy with a lot of variables and complex interactions. Apple has decided to fund the App Store with a progressive tax model. Large developers subsidize the costs of maintaining the App Store and smaller and free developers gain value with little contribution. This model has indeed been profitable for Apple and arguably has contributed to a plethora of free and low cost apps. (For good or ill, the cost of software distribution has been reduced significantly and the mobile app market is flooded with low cost apps and services. )
I repeat, my point is that any changes to the model will have consequences that many people have not considered. Time will tell if these changes end up being positive. We just shouldn’t assume that it would necessarily be beneficial for consumers.
No, the two aren't comparable. The code for a plane's autopilot relies on several sensors, but it is in no way as complicated as software running on a game console or computer.
And the autopilot software isn't routinely updated with new features or to address new components added to a $200M aircraft, although there may be occasional updates to fix bugs.
Why cant you use Googles backup/restore feature that is built into all Android phones?
What is this telling us? Units sold per year? Active units? Units used to a specific website? Units running a specific OS? Units running a specific app? Phone surveys? Three college kids standing outside LAX? I can not figure out how they got this data so I have no idea how to interpret it.Try ~60%.
Mobile Operating System Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats
This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.
Apple’s fees are industry standard now, but were the reverse just 15 years ago. If they followed the standard in place when they opened the App Store it would have been 70% + $10,000 to as much as $100,000 per year for the right to be a developer. Then do your own marketing, production, sales, and support in-house.
A few greedy asshops are about to eliminate the platform that has allowed anyone with $99 a Mac and an idea, to partner with the largest company in the world to sell your product to their customers and they handle the rest. If you have a great product that they come to enjoy, they might even include you in their million dollar ad campaigns for free and change your life forever. And they give you the 70% instead of keeping that much themselves.
Greedy People are really dumb, or more likely really selfish.
So it's ok for software to fail because they shipped the software incomplete and needed to push out updates? When it comes to iOS apps they know exactly what hardware will run them. So it is comparable.
The final outcome of the case (maybe at the US Supreme Court level) will set legal precedent and after that any other company’s dealings that closely fall under the same structure will have to abide with that legal precedent.
They are going to force Apple’s hand and Apple will change their model going forward to the Arcade model. I believe Arcade is a test. The current App Store investments will fade few new APIs will go into that space and the focus will be on the new one price Store that Apple will buy rights to apps and create partnerships with participating developers. Consumers will pay one subscription to access all their selected Apps. Now that I think about it, they have already released it. Apple One is the new platform. It will be opened up to new app genres as soon as they see they have no choice. These companies trying to undermine the App Store is doing so at their own peril. Apple has no obligation to continue to support the current platform if its profit center is removed. Apple has killed unprofitable, but beloved products before and they will again.
Apple is part of a duopoly which can have the same kind of negative impacts to a market that a monopoly can. U.S. regulators are rightfully concerned with the U.S. market which they have power over. The rest of the world need not matter to them.
Actually based on all the time I have spent reading comments on this MacRumors and the AppleInsider discussion forums I assume that Apple’s iPhone customer base is less technically sophisticated than average. The Apple ecosystem is the equivalent of the nanny state.
Yep and developers know this and would continue to put their apps on the Apple App Store, if Apple allows them to.
Where we need this is for Apps that Apple, in its nanny ways, has decided are not appropriate for the Apple App Store. These are Apps that compete with Apple because they are just better or Apps that support Free Speech, which Apple does not.
I guess I should've known that the comment section for a news post like this one on an Apple fan site is not the place to find dispassionate analysis.
Apple advertises their services in places no competing service can, like the Settings area of your iPhone and iPad. And in the bottom tab row of preinstalled software like Music and Fitness. Furthermore, those competitors need to advertise in the App Store if they want extra visibility, which means... paying Apple for a lesser form of visibility than what Apple gives itself. And Apple wants 30% of competitors' subscription fees too!
Meanwhile people on this site will contort into pretzels to explain how this is perfectly legitimate, presumably because they own Apple stock and see it as a part-time job to post propaganda on sites like this.
Apple advertises their services in places no competing service can, like the Settings area of your iPhone and iPad. And in the bottom tab row of preinstalled software like Music and Fitness. Furthermore, those competitors need to advertise in the App Store if they want extra visibility, which means... paying Apple for a lesser form of visibility than what Apple gives itself. And Apple wants 30% of competitors' subscription fees too!
Meanwhile people on this site will contort into pretzels to explain how this is perfectly legitimate, presumably because they own Apple stock and see it as a part-time job to post propaganda on sites like this.
Uhh, I think we know where the profit center is and that's the iPhone itself. Good luck selling more iPhones when you no longer support countless devs resulting in consumers losing access to their apps.
