You knew what you were buying before you bought it...
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.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg: Apple's App Store Blocks Innovation and Competition
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You knew what you were buying before you bought it...
Can't be proven either way for those multi-device households. Could be yes, somewhat and/or no.
My opinion, that is an incorrect answer.
The ios app store being a monopoly is a narrow definition. One maybe the courts will address or not.
in related news:
www.fool.com
Facebook Is About to Start Harvesting Oculus User Data | The Motley Fool
What took so long?
www.fool.com
It would also mean Apple will focus less on APIs and improvements in the development area if they get much less of a cut. The iPhone cost alone won't make up for it, especially now that phones have matured to the point where I really don't notice that much of a difference between an iPhone 6 and the iPhone 11. I am not a photographer, so all the constant talk year after year about camera this, pictures that just does not interest me at all.
Being kicked out of iOS is exactly the same. You have the Android environment. You can keep selling on Android just like you can keep selling at Target.
You do realize Windows has a version like this right? Windows 10 S. We specifically got that for my Grandma because our entire family got sick of dealing with malware every week.
why would a struggling company enter a deal with facebook to have an event where FB takes their revenue then hands it to them?
see how asinine that really sounds?
I threw house parties and showed the event on FB and in NO way did I use Fb to handle my money or the funds for the venue or to pay the DJs!
post an announcement with calendar date and an RSVP. Don’t involve FB for anything related to payment - it would be foolish.
Here we go again. Its not because of marketshare. I agree with you m11rphy that its not the same as the Microsoft case. Here is why.
79. Microsoft's first response to the threat posed by Navigator was an effort to persuade Netscape to structure its business such that the company would not distribute platform- level browsing software for Windows. Netscape's assent would have ensured that, for the foreseeable future, Microsoft would produce the only platform-level browsing software distributed to run on Windows. This would have eliminated the prospect that non-Microsoft browsing software could weaken the applications barrier to entry.
143. Decision-makers at Microsoft worried that simply developing its own attractive browser product, pricing it at zero, and promoting it vigorously would not divert enough browser usage from Navigator to neutralize it as a platform. They believed that a comparable browser product offered at no charge would still not be compelling enough to consumers to detract substantially from Navigator's existing share of browser usage. This belief was due, at least in part, to the fact that Navigator already enjoyed a very large installed base and had become nearly synonymous with the Web in the public's consciousness. If Microsoft was going to raise Internet Explorer's share of browser usage and lower Navigator's share, executives at Microsoft believed they needed to constrict Netscape's access to the distribution channels that led most efficiently to browser usage.
And also complaints from Sun Java.
MICROSOFT'S RESPONSE TO THE THREAT POSED BY SUN'S IMPLEMENTATION OF JAVA
386. For Microsoft, a key to maintaining and reinforcing the applications barrier to entry has been preserving the difficulty of porting applications from Windows to other platforms, and vice versa. In 1996, senior executives at Microsoft became aware that the number of developers writing network-centric applications in the Java programming language had become significant, and that Java was likely to increase in popularity among developers. Microsoft therefore became interested in maximizing the difficulty with which applications written in Java could be ported from Windows to other platforms, and vice versa.
I can't produce an x-rated website on Squarespace. "So move to a different host" you might say? What makes my response to you "Move to android" any different? Squarespace has a monopoly on the Squarespace engine that I prefer to use, I just want to make an x-rated website with their tools and features!
(not really, just making a point)
"Monopoly" is a diction-defined term:
Any business can be a "monopoly" if you define the relevant market narrowly enough. For example, BMW has a "monopoly" on car sales that take place inside BMW dealerships. But we'd all agree that the "market" in that context should be broader than BMW showrooms, right?
Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words
The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!www.dictionary.com
Same principle here. Apple can only be a "monopoly" if the relevant marketplace is defined as the iOS platform. But that's a stupidly narrow definition for market in this context.
Now, to your point, Apple may yet be found to be in violation of anti-trust laws. But they aren't a monopoly by any meaningful definition of that term.
Yep. Its like saying Microsoft has a monopoly on Xbox Games. Or Sony has a Monopoly on PS4 games. Or Netflix has a monopoly on Netflix originals.
The EU has more encompassing privacy laws that the US at the moment. I can see conflict there between perceived anti-monopolistic behavior vs the ecosystem's privacy-friendly stance. But who knows, it may just be the calm before the storm.
Coming from one of the most smug and unethical ****heads on the planet who sells users' info right down to the mouse coordinate? He can go eat a can of minced dicks.
I think I'll let the great Steve Jobs sum up this whole issue with developers is less than a minute
A world without Facebook is something I'd be willing to try.
BS.
You can buy and install games bought outside Microsoft their app store for the Xbox one X.
Microsoft does not force people to do it, like Apple does.
It was a Facebook initiative that Apple hadn’t signed up to - so why would Apple effectively provide financial support? If Zuckerberg feels so strongly, perhaps Facebook could pay Apple’s fees - now that would be a demonstration of commitment.
It still has to be licensed with Microsoft. So you don't avoid any fees from Microsoft.
Frankly I don’t care what you choose to install on your iPhone. There are jailbreak options out there right now that will let you install what you want. Just don’t expect to be able to change the rules in a way that makes the rest of us less secure. Your “right” does not trump everybody else’s!
Off you got to Malware Ridden Security hole that is Android outside the playstore. It's like the Wild West but with machine guns. I am a dev and happily give my 30% to Apple ( and playstore ) for security for me and my customer. I stopped developing for Windows because despite the reasonable sales 80% of users were on pirated copies and then a malware version got out - and I got the grief.. probably me saying serves you right on the forums
Apple win NEVER sacrifice the security. They of course want your 30% but also offer free apps where they don't make a penny. The thing with Epic they want ALL apples customers and goodwill for free and to ables to sell for free and also a backdoor to your data.
It's like if you set up a bricks and mortar store...it become popular then Epic comes along and DEMANDS to be able to set up a stall inside and also not pay a penny to you.
Things I will never do:
1. Buy anything Facebook sells. Unfortunately mean Oculus is out.
2. install any Facebook Apps. FB / Instagram / WhatsApp - Facebook is on my borrower and completely locked down and every privacy option checked - but they change them and reset them without you realising - especially the advertising. The apps reset for me every update... and they give it away because the annoying in-app notification sound comes back.
Facebook is basically the most evil company out there. Those leaked Zuckerberg mail from years ago showed how little he cares about users and actually sees us as cattle to be milked, then slaughtered. All he care about is how he can package us up and sell us. And people just blindly walk into that hole for him.
1. Buy anything Facebook sells. Unfortunately mean Oculus is out.
2. install any Facebook Apps. FB / Instagram / WhatsApp - Facebook is on my borrower and completely locked down and every privacy option checked - but they change them and reset them without you realising - especially the advertising. The apps reset for me every update... and they give it away because the annoying in-app notification sound comes back.
Facebook is basically the most evil company out there. Those leaked Zuckerberg mail from years ago showed how little he cares about users and actually sees us as cattle to be milked, then slaughtered. All he care about is how he can package us up and sell us. And people just blindly walk into that hole for him.