Nor can you sell your XBox Game, PlayStation Game, Nintendo Game, etc if those companies say no.
France Asks EU to Examine Apple's Removal of AppGratis From the App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nor can you sell your XBox Game, PlayStation Game, Nintendo Game, etc if those companies say no.
Manicmonday
macrumors newbie
Kind of funny, especially since it looks like France is investigating Google, and is thinking about banning Android tracking features, and Google Maps
I guess they think they can get money from the two global giants =/
Google's Legal Problems In Europe Could Hurt Earnings
I guess they think they can get money from the two global giants =/
Google's Legal Problems In Europe Could Hurt Earnings
Guess France ran out of religions to cheat.
What ?????
Perhaps you think McDonalds should show the menu for Burger King in store too ? Perhaps even allow them to have a serving aisle there too.
Maybe Barnes and Noble should have an Amazon Desk in their stores.
Perhaps Shell can also have some pumps with Exxon fuel too.
After all the extra choice will bring in more customers...right ?
Here's what actually needs to be done.... NOTHING.
The Customer KNOWS it is a curated store
The Developer KNOWS it is a curated store
No one is in the dark here, the rules are there BEFORE you buy a device or write a line of code. At no point was Apple the only choice, there is Android, Windows Phone, Blackberry, Symbian, etc.
If Apple were "Anti-competitive" they would not host FREE apps, because each App costs them money to host, transmit, account for etc. Sure its not a lot of money, but when it thousands of Apps downloaded millions of times, there is a real cost. Apple is NOT setting the prices for Apps, each developer is doing that themselves.
gotluck
macrumors 603
iOS devices are computers, not game consoles IMO
----------
So then why was MS subject to persecution? If we're playing in MS' sandbox, why shouldn't we be forced into Internet Explorer? Anyone that had a problem with IE could have just bought a Mac.
So, I open a store, say it sells hats. I MUST sell any vendors hats that wants to sell hats in my store? Say one day I decide that I don't like yellow hats, there is no way for me to stop selling the hats of a vendor that only makes yellow hats?
Of course the issue is, that both sides are dancing around is:
1) Apple is not a monopoly
2) Apple is a monopoly
Well it cannot be both, so which is it?
Apple is not a monopoly in terms of mobile platforms. There is Android, Blackberry, Windows, etc...
Apple is the sole operator of "legitimate" app stores for iOS. They are not the sole operator, see Cydia for example.
So your issue is not that Apple can decide to not offer some apps for sale, clearly any store should have that right, it is that you cannot then offer the apps on a non-Apple run iOS store (which is not true, again see Cydia).
The reason that nobody is coming up with good analogies for all of this is simple because there isn't one. Software is not a physical good. In the hat store example the vendor can go to another hat store to sell their goods.
So what you really are after is simply that Apple should have to allow for App stores that are run by companies other than Apple. Why should Apple be forced to have a particular business model?
----------
Hmmm....
"Cydia is an alternative to Apple's App Store for "jailbroken" devices, at this time including iPhones, iPads, and iPod Touches, specializing in the distribution of all that is not an "app"."
Seems you can.
gotluck
macrumors 603
The best analogy is the EU case vs MS.
Microsoft was subject for persecution for illegally leveraging their monopoly (something Apple does not have) in one market to gain an advantage in another. There is no parallel for Apple, since, again, Apple doesn't have a monopoly and they are not trying to leverage one thing to get an advantage in another.
Oh ?
So where is the File system
Where are the Users
You need a Computer to develop for IOS, you can't develop for IOS on IOS (yes, I know you can write code/text, but you can't compile !)
IOS has more in common with a console.
gotluck
macrumors 603
Regardless, there are more parallels with that case than any other analogy I've seen.
The file system is fully intact. It is simply hidden. Multi user makes a device a computer? news to me. Sure you can't code for it from the device itself, but that is because Apple wants it that way and won't design software for it.
gotluck
macrumors 603
It's MS' sandbox, why shouldn't we be forced into IE? Or at least a forced default? Just like Safari, Mail, and all the other stock iOS apps. MS paid serious fines for the lack of a default browser choice.
The two companies seem to be judged on two different rulesets.
bushido
Suspended
Because its written for iOS. To rewrite it in a different language for a different platform takes time and money, which means it is a NEW item. I am talking about the iOS app, which can only run on iOS, and which can only be purchased at the App Store. That item cannot be sold in any other market.
From the EU commission website: "This Decision found that Microsoft had abused its dominant position in the PC operating system market by"
Note the key words "dominant position". Microsoft was investigated because they were abusing their dominant position in the marketplace.
Apple does not have a dominant position in the marketplace.
Note that the "marketplace" would be mobile phones, not IOS devices, just as it was "PC operating system
You have failed to show any parallels to the issues.
Oletros
macrumors 603
Walmart was forced in some states to sell some type of anticonceptives if I remember right
----------
Can you show me what fines has paid lately Apple in the EU?
----------
I think that this is the weirdest analogy that I have seen in any forum.
And wrong analogy, by the way
They were forced to sell Plan-B as part of their ability to have a pharmacy. The alternative was to not have a pharmacy.
So, no, they were not forced to sell it as such. Had they chosen to not have a pharmacy and still had to sell it then, yes, they would have been forced to sell it.
The more accurate statement is that pharmacies in MA were forced to sell emergency contraceptives. The arguments for those cases (there have been a few) primarily centre on religious view of the people at the companies refusing the sell the products. Is someone suggesting that religion is behind Apple pulling this app from its store?
threesixty360
macrumors 6502a
Apple's issue is exactly the same as Nintendo or Sony in the console market. They provide a complete solution, the hardware, the OS and the services to make that system work. When customers buy an apple integrated solution apple need to make sure all these parts work well. If anything goes wrong on any part of the system it reflects badly on apple and it breaks the promise to the customer that apple have made by providing an integrated system.
That's why apple have a licensing system for third party software in the same way that Nintendo and Sony do for consoles. That way they get to stop things happening that might negatively effect the working of the integrated system. I.e. viruses, malware etc...
Microsoft on the other hand provide 1 product and are not responsible for the whole solution that their customers use. Users are buying Dell hardware combining it with MS software and perhaps an ATI graphics card. MS are not responsible for what happens to that solution because they did not design and integrate the whole thing. A third party did (I.e. Dell) or the user built it themselves. The whole point of the MS based pc system is that it is open but you lose the protection of one vendor providing an integrated service for you.
When apples maps didn't work well it massively effected their brand because the contract with the consumer and apple is that apple provides the full service. Even if the issues are data related that apple can't solve it reflects badly on them. If anything goes wrong with your device, regardless of whether a third party item did the damage or not, apple end up dealing with it. When adobe flash was crashing macs all day it was apples brand that suffered not adobe. That's one of the reason flash isn't on iOS. It meant that apple couldn't guarantee a full service to its users. That's not good for the brand.
The reality is apple need to be just as hard nosed as Nintendo etc... When it comes to what runs on their systems. Their brand is way more important to them than any third party tools business needs.
That's why apple have a licensing system for third party software in the same way that Nintendo and Sony do for consoles. That way they get to stop things happening that might negatively effect the working of the integrated system. I.e. viruses, malware etc...
Microsoft on the other hand provide 1 product and are not responsible for the whole solution that their customers use. Users are buying Dell hardware combining it with MS software and perhaps an ATI graphics card. MS are not responsible for what happens to that solution because they did not design and integrate the whole thing. A third party did (I.e. Dell) or the user built it themselves. The whole point of the MS based pc system is that it is open but you lose the protection of one vendor providing an integrated service for you.
When apples maps didn't work well it massively effected their brand because the contract with the consumer and apple is that apple provides the full service. Even if the issues are data related that apple can't solve it reflects badly on them. If anything goes wrong with your device, regardless of whether a third party item did the damage or not, apple end up dealing with it. When adobe flash was crashing macs all day it was apples brand that suffered not adobe. That's one of the reason flash isn't on iOS. It meant that apple couldn't guarantee a full service to its users. That's not good for the brand.
The reality is apple need to be just as hard nosed as Nintendo etc... When it comes to what runs on their systems. Their brand is way more important to them than any third party tools business needs.
But they hold 100 percent of the iphone market. Im glad the EU will stop Apples terrible behaviour.
Shockingly, every vendor holds 100% of the market of their product. Your statement is meaningless, of course Apple holds 100% of the market for the phone that only they make, what else could it be?
Sit down, this might shock you, Samsung holds 100% of the Galaxy S4 market.
How much of MacDonalds market does Burger King hold, for example?
Oletros
macrumors 603
But they don't have 100% of apps distribution, nor Google or HTC
Dorje Sylas
macrumors 6502a
By that logic Sony holds 100% of the Playstation market. Microsoft holds 100% of the Xbox market. How dare they keep anyone from stamping a DVD that has code executables for their systems. I'm mean the arrogance.
iPhone is not a market unto itself. There are no other 'iPhone' makers. Or rather they are called smartphone makers these days. There are plenty of "Smarphone" makers and even a few different operating systems for them.
Does it suck that Apple is limiting how it's System Development Kit for its product can be used? Sure. And if the kinds of controls they impossed drove customers to seek *gasp* other options in the Smarphone/Tablet Market then maybe they'd change how 3rd parties are allowed to interact with their device.
So far we haven't hit a Windows (on everything) vs Mac (restricted) tipping point of OS war with Android vs iOS. It may one day come, then the Smarphone market will shift... not an iPhone market.
Like the French ever won any argument (or war for that manner )
It`s quite simple - if you try to make a living of a single app that - from the moment they thought about it - violated the rules of AppStore, well then it's just a matter of time until someone pulls the plug. I've had apps rejected for more foolish reasons and you don't hear me bitch about it - or any small, indie developer either. You just fix it and resubmit.
Apple is not abusive in any way. You can even talk to your reviewer and ask what to do to get it through.
If EU's going to do anything about AppStore, then do something about XBox Live, PSN, Windows Store and whatever is that copied crap from Google called. Seriously, EU, I've never agreed for our country to be part of this ********.
) It`s quite simple - if you try to make a living of a single app that - from the moment they thought about it - violated the rules of AppStore, well then it's just a matter of time until someone pulls the plug. I've had apps rejected for more foolish reasons and you don't hear me bitch about it - or any small, indie developer either. You just fix it and resubmit.
Apple is not abusive in any way. You can even talk to your reviewer and ask what to do to get it through.
If EU's going to do anything about AppStore, then do something about XBox Live, PSN, Windows Store and whatever is that copied crap from Google called. Seriously, EU, I've never agreed for our country to be part of this ********.