EU Plans to Hit Apple With Antitrust Charges Over Apple Pay

[vipergts2207]

I said it was easier than getting "dozens of credit cards" as was your comment. You also said "switching to Android". I hold that it is.

No, what you said was:

Changing banks or credit cards is not always easy to do. If none of your current credits cards will work with ApplePay since they all now have their own apps you have to apply for another card that does support ApplePay. Are you even able to qualify for another card? Will that new card be supported forever, or just until the bank's app is ready?

This is actually harder than moving between phone platforms.

I then commented that I personally could apply for dozens of credit cards in the time it would take me to switch platforms (not just phones). Clearly your bolded statement above is not true for a lot of people, especially those heavily invested in a specific platform. I can open a new credit card in less than 10 minutes. Switching platforms would take me orders of magnitude longer.

What are the steps?

1. Switch Platform
   1. Swap SIM
   2. Test mobile comms
2. Migrate first-party configuration (both Android and Apple facilitate this)
   1. Run migration process and was a while to migrate core settings and data - phone book, on-device photos
   2. Migrate iCloud data and iTunes media - SmartSwitch will import your iCloud data directly to your Android device. Install Apple Music on Android and you have access to your iTunes library. And it looks like there are several options for video, too.

Data migration is even easier if you don't rely on iCloud or iTunes for your data and media. DropBox, Box, OneDrive for data, Amazon for media. All cross platform and instantly accessible.

Arguably, you are done then. Obviously, there is still application configuration to accomplish in order to completely replace your current phone with all app functionality..

Finding and adding the cross-platform apps would be my first stop (think, streaming and other apps from the large players). That would entail installing and logging in. Yeah, you may have to set up direct payment if you were using subscriptions before. But the tenor of most commenters here is that Apple is bad for charging developers to process the subscription payments so I guess we can assume that most are already directly billing with the providers.

Finding and installing comparable apps for those that are not cross-platform would possibly need to be done

But, on the other hand, this application installation process also enables one to seriously look at their usage - how many apps are installed that are rarely or never used?

The last step is probably the longest and the most difficult. But it is really not all that hard.

Looking at all the steps, I'd venture the configuration could be complete in a matter of hours. Then let the phone process the data transfer.

This part is just you admitting in detail how it can actually require a not inconsequential amount of time to switch platforms, which is exactly the same thing I said. You're twisting yourself into a pretzel to maintain your original stance. You say:

Arguably, you are done then.

But then proceed to immediately counter that very statement with:

Obviously, there is still application configuration to accomplish

Finding and adding the cross-platform apps

That would entail installing and logging in.

Yeah, you may have to set up direct payment if you were using subscriptions before.

Finding and installing comparable apps for those that are not cross-platform would possibly need to be done

You yourself literally detail the multiple steps required to actually finish switching platforms. And you left out potential smart home integration to boot.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The EU used to have Nokia. It's now effectively dead. The EU will never now have a sizeable (smart) phone maker. They've lost

I can’t help but think that part of this legislation is due, in part, to that. When Nokia owned the world, were they just as interested in Antitrust? Focused on making sure that Nokia didn’t have a monopoly on the market? Mmmmm, I think not.

 

[I7guy]

Exactly, and OP made an overly broad statement that switching platforms was easier than getting a new credit card. Clearly that's not the case for a great many people, in fact I'd wager a majority of people.

No definitionally I disagree. When one puts a new SIM card in one is on the new platform. This equivalency thing is an absurd notion. We all know it takes time to figure out a new setup, which may not be any way equivalent to the old setup.

No that's switching phones, not switching platforms. The former is the first step in the latter.

No, once I'm on android I'm on the platform.

Obviously meaning an equivalent as possible state. For example, there may be apps that are unavailable on one platform versus another. Being able to simply make a call or send a text is very different from having your music and photo libraries transferred and dozens of apps installed and working. Likewise the ability to control your smart home devices. Hard to say you've successfully switched platforms when you can't even do something as simple as turn on a smart lightbulb yet.

True, but if you photo libraries, documents and music are already on amazon or google, swapping SIMs is about all that is needed. There are a range of extremes but the point is, an nearly quick switch is well within the realm of possibility.

 

[vipergts2207]

No definitionally I disagree. When one puts a new SIM card in one is on the new platform. This equivalency thing is an absurd notion. We all know it takes time to figure out a new setup, which may not be any way equivalent to the old setup.

If we all know it takes time get setup, why are you pretending that it's not part of the process? If you decided to move to Android are you leaving behind all your photos with iOS? Are you not going to download many of the same apps to the new Android device? Would you have needed to do those things if you weren't switching platforms? If the answer is no, then it's part of the platform switching process. Swapping phones is just step numero uno, unless one is willing to leave behind all of their data and configurations.

True, but if you photo libraries, documents and music are already on amazon or google, swapping SIMs is about all that is needed. There are a range of extremes but the point is, an nearly quick switch is well within the realm of possibility.

Nobody said a switch couldn't be quick for some people. The original statement referred to it being quick without exception. If all you do is make phone calls and text, switching platforms will be mighty quick for you. Most people use their smartphone for more than just texts and calls though and thus most people will find applying for a new credit card to be faster than switching platforms.

In fact, I bet I can open a new credit card faster than someone can remove the SIM from their iPhone put it in the new one and get through the multi-step process of just setting up their new phone to the point where they can even get to the home screen, even leaving aside the rest of the crap required to switch platforms. Applying for a new card is dead simple and quick. Put in name, address, DOB, SSN, and income and you're done. And since devices will generally autofill most of that info for you, I bet I could open a new card within a minute or two of pulling my phone out of my pocket.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Your view of what actually swapping platforms means is asinine and unrealistic. Swapping your SIM to a new Android is only the first step in actually switching platforms. Until your Android is in an equivalent position as your previous iPhone, then the switch is not complete. Whatever though, everyone can see the absurdly unrealistic argument you’ve setup for what switching platforms means.

He and others are shareholders. They don’t give a cent about iPhone users or businesses in general as long as Apple profits … they profit. These people will oppose any measure to keep Apple business practices in check.

Beyond this there is little rationale in their stance.

 

[I7guy]

If we all know it takes time get setup, why are you pretending that it's not part of the process? If you decided to move to Android are you leaving behind all your photos with iOS? Are you not going to download many of the same apps to the new Android device? Would you have needed to do those things if you weren't switching platforms? If the answer is no, then it's part of the platform switching process. Swapping phones is just step numero uno, unless one is willing to leave behind all of their data and configurations.

Because the figuring out part could take 1 minute or maybe longer. There's no pretending. Reality is different for each of us. But it could be you can switch platforms faster than the first credit card application is the point.

Nobody said a switch couldn't be quick for some people. The original statement referred to it being quick without exception. If all you do is make phone calls and text, switching platforms will be mighty quick for you. Most people use their smartphone for more than just texts and calls though and thus most people will find applying for a new credit card to be faster than switching platforms.

In fact, I bet I can open a new credit card faster than someone can remove the SIM from their iPhone put it in the new one and get through the multi-step process of just setting up their new phone to the point where they can even get to the home screen, even leaving aside the rest of the crap required to switch platforms. Applying for a new card is dead simple and quick. Put in name, address, DOB, SSN, and income and you're done. And since devices will generally autofill most of that info for you, I bet I could open a new card within a minute or two of pulling my phone out of my pocket.

That's not the way I took the original statement as an example of something that is possible, not a black and white statement without exception. If all you have a setup that facilitates this and all you do is, make phone calls, text, email, check facebook, read the wsj etc, yes it may be very quick to switch...under a minute But that's the point isn't it, the possibility for some people switching to android is faster than filling out an on-line application. And of course some people will not be able to complete an online application due to some circumstances.

 

[I7guy]

He and others are shareholders. That they give a cent about iPhone users or businesses in general as long as Apple profits … they profit. These people will oppose any measure to keep Apple business practices in check.

Beyond this there is little rationale in their stance.

What's the issue with shareholders and what's wrong with profit? Nothing wrong with lobbying for a particular cause. There is little rational in many posters stances...since that was brought up.

 

[vipergts2207]

What's the issue with shareholders and what's wrong with profit? Nothing wrong with lobbying for a particular cause. There is little rational in many posters stances...since that was brought up.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with shareholders. But if you can’t recognize and put aside your biased viewpoint, it makes it impossible to argue in good faith and sometimes even rationally. I’ve held AAPL directly off and on in addition to indirectly through index funds like VOO and my 401k. Apple is probably my favorite company out there because of the generally great products they make. That fact doesn’t render me incapable of recognizing their flaws or critiquing them. Being able to recognize one’s own bias gives one the ability to be more objective.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

If android allows whatever web engine to run on its devices. Why aren’t web apps more popular on android than normal apps?

Because it's much cheaper/easier to make an Android app and distribute it via your website (or Dropbox or literally whatever) than to make a web app.

The same can't be said for iOS, where the only way to distribute your app is via Apple's app store.

 

[I7guy]

There’s nothing inherently wrong with shareholders. But if you can’t recognize and put aside your biased viewpoint, it makes it impossible to argue in good faith and sometimes even rationally. I’ve held AAPL directly off and on in addition to indirectly through index funds like VOO and my 401k. Apple is probably my favorite company out there because of the generally great products they make. That fact doesn’t render me incapable of recognizing their flaws or critiquing them. Being able to recognize one’s own bias gives one the ability to be more objective.

I agree 100%. This is a bit off the beaten path, but being a shareholder, or not, is totally irrelevant to putting aside one's bias and to discuss an issue in good faith.

I also recognize they have great products and have no problem criticizing their decisions when I believe they have gone astray. Of course, that's the entire issue, what one believes another may not and because of that, there are labels of bias being thrown around.

 

[vipergts2207]

I agree 100%. This is a bit off the beaten path, but being a shareholder, or not, is totally irrelevant to putting aside one's bias and to discuss an issue in good faith.

I also recognize they have great products and have no problem criticizing their decisions when I believe they have gone astray. Of course, that's the entire issue, what one believes another may not and because of that, there are labels of bias being thrown around.

I've seen vanishingly little evidence of this, as you take the pro-Apple position almost exclusively in discussions I've seen.

 

[I7guy]

I've seen vanishingly little evidence of this, as you take the pro-Apple position almost exclusively in discussions I've seen.

Being labeled "pro-apple" doesn't usually mean the debater is objective.

 

[vipergts2207]

Being labeled "pro-apple" doesn't usually mean the debater is objective.

You're going to have to rephrase that into an actual point.

 

[M3gatron]

I can’t help but think that part of this legislation is due, in part, to that. When Nokia owned the world, were they just as interested in Antitrust? Focused on making sure that Nokia didn’t have a monopoly on the market? Mmmmm, I think not.

Baseless assumptions.
First Nokia is not dead, it's one of the biggest telecommunications companies in the world.
Even when it comes to smartphones the Nokia brand is alive and kicking.
Second there's no reason to assume that if the old Nokia phone division would be around and act in an uncompetitive manner that they wouldn't be sanctioned by the Commission and get preferential treatment.
For example: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_3581
So Europe's darlings Daimler, BMW and Volkswagen group (Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche) sanctioned by the Commission. A lot of European companie are constantly sanctioned for uncompetitive behavior I don't really see any preferential treatment.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

What's the issue with shareholders and what's wrong with profit?

If you read carefully don’t see anything wrong with it. But that is where some shareholder buckets stops.

Whatever else is irrelevant so it hard to have rationale conversation about the topics Anti Trust deal with regarding Apple. Not all shareholder proceed this way, but hey, some do … no problems. But its an important disclaimer because there might be obviously a conflict of interest between when looking at multiple options regulators are putting foreword on the tablet across the globe. Some will never consider whatever Apple does abusive and will ever consider the merits of the contrary view. So, fundamentally noisy yet irrelevant views because the base where they start is beside the point.

 

[vipergts2207]

Baseless assumptions.
First Nokia is not dead, it's one of the biggest telecommunications companies in the world.
Even when it comes to smartphones the Nokia brand is alive and kicking.
Second there's no reason to assume that if the old Nokia phone division would be around and act in an uncompetitive manner that they wouldn't be sanctioned by the Commission and get preferential treatment.
For example: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_3581
So Europe's darlings Daimler, BMW and Volkswagen group (Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche) sanctioned by the Commission. A lot of European companie are constantly sanctioned for uncompetitive behavior I don't really see any preferential treatment.

The Nokia argument also ignores the vast difference between the phone market during the days of the Nokia 3310 and today's "phones." Back then a handset maker's decisions didn't dictate who or where a user could buy software from on their most used computing device, which back then would have generally been a PC. Handset makers didn't control who had access to or how payments were made between a business, a customer, and their bank. Today's smartphone companies (Apple, Google, Samsung especially) are supremely powerful over their users in a way that the phone companies of old never even came close to. Back then a phone was just a phone. Today "phones" touch a huge number of tangential markets that they did not back at the turn of the century. And not only touch, but seek to at least partially control in some cases. It's one thing for a phone maker to have the ability to act anti-competitively with regard other phone makers. It's another thing entirely when a phone maker has the power and ability to act anti-competitively in other markets such as software distribution and finance.

 

[weckart]

what annoys me about the EU is that they say they are fighting for customers but they are really fighting for businesses...
in the U.K. for example the fight against Uber has nothing to do with whether customers had a good service with Uber and more to do with making sure black cab drivers didn’t go out of business. Is that really the right angle?

Yeah, that's complete and uttter crap. What actually happened was that the black cab drivers and minicab drivers united to complain that Uber was effectively acting as a taxi service without having to jump through all of the legal and regulatory hoops that they had to, which meant that it had a manifestly unfair competitive advantage. So, Uber had to start jumping through the same hoops and suddenly it became less lucrative. Who would have thought that?

 

[I7guy]

You're going to have to rephrase that into an actual point.

Sorry if you missed it.

If you read carefully don’t see anything wrong with it. But that is where some shareholder buckets stops.

Whatever else is irrelevant so it hard to have rationale conversation about the topics Anti Trust deal with regarding Apple. Not all shareholder proceed this way, but hey, some do … no problems. But its an important disclaimer because there might be obviously a conflict of interest between when looking at multiple options regulators are putting foreword on the tablet across the globe. Some will never consider whatever Apple does abusive and will ever consider the merits of the contrary view. So, fundamentally noisy yet irrelevant views because the base where they start is beside the point.

What rationale conversation are you referring to? The one where Nuno Lopez declares that Apple has run afoul of anti-trust laws? Does putting forth an opinion by multiple regulators equal guilty as charged? Are they doing their job, or are they targeting Apple because it has a lot of pull, successful ecosystem and these foreign regulators don't want a US company controlling assets in their home turf.

Is apple ruthless is the question. Sure seems like they are, and why shouldn't they be? Warren Buffet is ruthless as well, one has to be to survive in the business world. (But be ruthless legally)

 

[vipergts2207]

Sorry if you missed it.

Or perhaps its existence is similar to that of the flying spaghetti monster..

 

[I7guy]

Or perhaps its existence is similar to that of the flying spaghetti monster..

Or perhaps...ZING!

 

[threesixty360]

Because it's much cheaper/easier to make an Android app and distribute it via your website (or Dropbox or literally whatever) than to make a web app.

The same can't be said for iOS, where the only way to distribute your app is via Apple's app store.

As a customer not sure I care about how easy it is for devs to make and distribute things. I’m kind of interested in the best quality software that is safe and state of the art.

I suppose Apple is for the consumer before it’s for the developer.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I suppose Apple is for the consumer before it’s for the developer.

Apple is for Apple
I don't really believe they have a particular care about consumers or developers.

That's all just marketing and spin

 

[Scoob Redux]

What NFC operator? What does that even mean? What players are being disadvantaged by being banned from access to NFC? I think anti-trust action from the EU is premature. I think it’s way too early for this type of anti trust action around this specific issue and there are significant security risks to getting it wrong when it comes to NFC. EU is nit picking here. EU needs to back off, study the issue more and first decide what the law is so companies can comply rather than arbitrarily lob anti-trust suits at companies.

Tbqh the EU should be focused on users being allowed to side load apps to open up competition.

Your MSFT example earlier with the EU cases focuses on the bundling software and doesn’t focus on MSFT hobbling JAVA on Windows devices or strong arming a whole industry into only using its Windows software on almost all hardware. Ultimately the EU never actually addressed the monopoly aspect of MSFTs business. Instead MSFT just got complacent, the iPhone and intel based Macs came out, new browsers came out and those things combined opened up the markets to other players in the OS space.

However, even then in the PC space MSFT Windows is still on like 90% of computers 2 decades after EU “anti-trust”. EU didn’t actually get to the crux of the issue. It was just luck that any other players have any chance at all in the computer OS market.

You might consider reading with context. I was responding to a post that referenced a hypothetical independent NFC operator in a given scenario. It wasn't my example, I only contrasted the ApplePay case with the OP's scenario.

Secondly, I never referenced ANY Microsoft EU cases, Java, or Windows monopoly. I only pointed out that a U.S. court found Microsoft guilty of monopolistic behavior in their bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows.

It seems that most of your comments have zero to do with my post.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Are they doing their job, or are they targeting Apple because it has a lot of pull, successful ecosystem and these foreign regulators don't want a US company controlling assets in their home turf.

It’s not just foreign but internal.

But keeping with the foreign … it makes little sense that rationale. US companies have been quite successful and welcome abroad case in case EU … to the point that half of its revenue does not even get to the US … and the President needs to beg to bring in some to its borders … showing that these companies have moved beyond countries … these are global. Countries at these level are just markets … instruments for profit … including the country of origin.

So history show precisely these companies success’s abroad … being rewarded … so on and so forth. History does not change because of Apple … only how it is told … surely Apple will try this one … been reading some interesting comments about this in Mac rumours.

Do not confuse companies with citizens of a country, or the country of origin. At least in the west, liberal economies.

 

[threesixty360]

Apple is for Apple
I don't really believe they have a particular care about consumers or developers.

That's all just marketing and spin

Well thats a bit silly really. We all known businesses dont "care" about any one in the true sense. They are there to make money. The difference with Apple is they generally make money by pleasing their customer (you and I). Whereas other companies have advertisers or other businesses as their main customer.

Basically apple would rather please the user of their product vs the developer of an app.