Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Alleging App Store Monopoly

Icaras said:
I don't think you're understanding the whole point of competing mobile platforms, especially a vertically integrated one such as Apple's. Just as you can't access the Apple App or iTunes stores on Android devices, you can't access the Google Play store or the Windows store on an Apple device. Etc. etc.

You're never going to make Apple budge on this so you might as well jump ship now. And I'm sure Apple cares for the other 90% of legitimate iOS users, and not the 10% of jailbreakers.
Click to expand...

I don't pirate, and I do pay the Cydia store. To say I'm somehow less legitimate of a user is to say you're somehow more legitimate because you respond better to marketing.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't need restriction on how many megabytes I can download, or how well my device is connected to youtube. I'm on unlimited LTE. It might be nice to have this in toggled settings. This is one of MANY reasons to jailbreak. But...then you have the topic of emulators and that legal gray area. And, frankly, the app store doesn't allow any preview of apps. Apple's stock settings for notifications is still a downer in my opinion. I like to openssh my device. The list goes on and on and on.

If Apple feels it needed to drive away a paying customer that has spent hundreds of dollars on apps from its mobile OS because it wants to keep control of my experience to a degree I'm neither comfortable with, need or desire, then that's Apple's stupidity. And if you agree with this logic that I should "go and jump ship" because there's no legal recourse or common sense at Apple to allow what I'll call more advanced users to "opt-out" of Apple's vertical integration, then in my case, you're talking about thousands of dollars lost to Apple on one person ALONE.

But enjoy your limited toy that can't download files off the internet. Cause my iphone can.
 
clibinarius said:
But enjoy your limited toy that can't download files off the internet. Cause my iphone can.
Click to expand...

All my content is purchased from iTunes and the App store anyway so I am enjoying it very much. Other than PDF files, I've never had the need to download anything else off the internet so I'm not sure how you trying to imply that I'm having an inferior experience to your jailbroken one is even relevant when I simply don't share the needs that you do.

So I don't see anything wrong with saying if you don't like the experience, you're free to explore other options. That will always ring true.
 
MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Apple that alleged the company had an illegal monopoly because the iPhone does not allow users to use alternative app stores.

Apple had requested that the suit be dismissed because Apple doesn't set the price for paid applications and because charging a price for distribution of products on a platform does not violate antitrust laws.

However, the suit was dismissed on a something of a technicality and can be refiled at a later date. Bloomberg reports:
A lawyer for the plaintiffs told Bloomberg that they can refile with "no difficulty" and will argue that Apple has "cornered the distribution market for software for the iPhone".

Article Link: Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Alleging App Store Monopoly
Click to expand...
So the situation is actually advantageous to Apple with Android being the "dominant" mobile OS. iOS has only 1x% of the market and Apple is doomed! How can Apple have a monopoly? LOL.
 
Don't you just wish you became a lawyer for the electronics industry? All these stupid cases and patent wars must be like winning the lottery every week for them all?

----------
Glideslope said:
Captain Crunch? :apple:
Click to expand...

It's actually Mint-Berry Crunch:

71179_165714573452915_7579838_n.jpg


:D
 
japanime said:
OK, I understand what you're saying. But how is this different than when Microsoft refused to bundle any browser other than IE with its operating system?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just trying to figure this whole situation out.
Click to expand...

First of all, it wasn't an issue of MS "bundling" IE. It was an issue of planting IE so deep that you couldn't get rid of it.

Second, when Apple has 95% of the phone market the plaintiffs can come back and talk about monopolies.

Just wish these lawyers had something productive to do with their days.
 
Fine be that way... this, along with the lack of a larger screen has all but driven me away from iOS. Just need to figure out which upcoming android phone to go with.
iOS without restrictions is to good to be true it seems. I'm to used to freedom on my forever jailbreak able iPhone 4 to go back.
 
japanime said:
OK, I understand what you're saying. But how is this different than when Microsoft refused to bundle any browser other than IE with its operating system?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just trying to figure this whole situation out.
Click to expand...

Was that bad?Back the I was on windows and had no problem acquiring Netscape and Opera.
 
Icaras said:
All my content is purchased from iTunes and the App store anyway so I am enjoying it very much. Other than PDF files, I've never had the need to download anything else off the internet so I'm not sure how you trying to imply that I'm having an inferior experience to your jailbroken one is even relevant when I simply don't share the needs that you do.

So I don't see anything wrong with saying if you don't like the experience, you're free to explore other options. That will always ring true.
Click to expand...

And I don't like Apple controlling my experience. This is my other option and if Apple is able to get rid of it, I will be rid of Apple. I think that's a very reasonable opinion which doesn't need you casting doubt on my motives as in your initial comment.

Furthermore, just because YOU don't need to download files aside from PDFs has nothing to do with me not needing to. I use attachments to emails, for instance. You'd be surprised the kind of information that passes through my phone. In terms of communications hub, my iPhone is more useful than any other computing device I have, simply because it can do what I ask (when it is jailbroken) and is always connected to the grid when I need it to do it.

But...jailbreaking is evil, and us 10% should just find a new platform because we're somehow harming your experience by...oh wait, if you don't like jailbreaking, don't do it, and then hide by saying that since you don't need to jailbreak, no one else does, and that Apple's business practices of burning 5-10% of its userbase because somehow it commits piracy (via initial comment) makes any sort of economic sense...
 
Catalyx said:
I don't see how Apple is obligated to allow other app distribution systems on their own platform when there are other options for consumers in the smartphone market.
Click to expand...

Exactly, that lawyer and the plaintiffs should have opened a standard economics book and looked up the definition if a monopoly. Would have saved them and everyone else involved time and money.

----------
Cartoonkid said:
Exactly.

If Apple didn't allow any third-party apps to be sold on the App Store, then the MSFT analogy would be applicable.
Click to expand...

It still wouldn't apply as a monopoly. There are numerous alternatives at different price-ranges. The consumer is in no way committed to the iPhone platform.
 
Next they should go after Mercedes for not allowing people to order them with Ford engines. Brother. :rolleyes:
 
clibinarius said:
But...jailbreaking is evil, and us 10% should just find a new platform because we're somehow harming your experience by...oh wait, if you don't like jailbreaking, don't do it, and then hide by saying that since you don't need to jailbreak, no one else does, and that Apple's business practices of burning 5-10% of its userbase because somehow it commits piracy (via initial comment) makes any sort of economic sense...
Click to expand...

I've got no problem with you jailbreaking your phone - and from their actions, I don't think Apple has a problem per se, except to the point where the vectors used for jailbreaking are also usable/used for malware. I would object if Apple deliberately left open a hole for malware because it was used for jailbreaking.
 
GadgetDon said:
I've got no problem with you jailbreaking your phone - and from their actions, I don't think Apple has a problem per se, except to the point where the vectors used for jailbreaking are also usable/used for malware. I would object if Apple deliberately left open a hole for malware because it was used for jailbreaking.
Click to expand...

yep ... case dismissed!
 
clibinarius said:
If Apple successfully prevents me from installing what I want on my phone, they will successfully move me to another mobile OS.

And I believe the 10% of us who jailbreak for the most part feel the same.
Click to expand...

If you are jailbreaking then, obviously, Apple is not preventing you from loading any software you want to on your iPhone.
 
japanime said:
OK, I understand what you're saying. But how is this different than when Microsoft refused to bundle any browser other than IE with its operating system?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just trying to figure this whole situation out.
Click to expand...

A couple of things...

Microsoft made software for multiple hardware devices made by other companies. Unlike the iPhone, it wasn't entirely their closed platform.

So in that context, the moral/legal issue wasn't that Microsoft refused to bundle any other browser with their operating system. The issue was that Microsoft used unethical strategies to disallow the hardware manufacturers from including any software other than Microsoft's on their hardware.

Apple has every right to control their own smartphone. If you don't like their smartphone you can go buy someone else's.

This whole thing is like trying to get the legal system to force Ford to sell cars with General Motors engines in them or something. Hopefully we can all see how ridiculous that is...?

----------
MUrhino said:
I'm so tired of a majority of people trying to get a piece of the pie that Apple created. You think it's unfair for Apple to restrict you to their ecosystem? Well guess what. Tough *****.

Apple invented the iPhone, iOS, and they can do whatever they like, whether you like it or not. Period. End of story.

Now, it's in their best interest to keep customers happy and continue to improve their products, but trying to sue them because they don't allow competitors to run their own app stores within iOS is insane.

If you want it so bad, get off your lazy butt and invent it! Use that piece of meat that sits atop of your neck and make the world what you want it to be...but don't try to mooch off of someone else.

I truly wish frivolous law suits like this would get thrown out immediately and a hefty fine given to those who brought it to cover the costs of wasted tax dollars and time.

Okay...off my soap box. Have a great day :cool:
Click to expand...

+1.

Agreed entirely.
 
clibinarius said:
And I don't like Apple controlling my experience.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're so missing the point.

If you don't like Apple controlling your experience then don't buy an Apple device!

What part of that do you not understand?

Sure you can complain that Apple won't implement the particular features or freedoms you want, but the legal recourse for it isn't to sue them for not implementing the particular features of freedoms you want. The legal recourse is go buy another phone instead. Or if there isn't any phone on the market that's good enough for you, then invent your own.

Seriously, if you are so opposed to Apple's way of handling their products and their platform then why are you even here?

----------
richsadams said:
Next they should go after Mercedes for not allowing people to order them with Ford engines. Brother. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

gotluck said:
terrible analogy
much more akin to Apple only allowing Mac apps to be installed from their app store. something any self respecting consumer would be against
Click to expand...

It sounds like the perfect analogy to me.

Mercedes' car = Apple's iPhone
Ford's engine = Some app store other than the Apple App Store.

Why exactly is it a terrible analogy?
 
DaveGee said:
"cornered the distribution market for software for the iPhone"??

Like Microsoft has cornered the market on x-box software distribution?
Like Sony has cornered the market on play station software distribution??
Like Nintendo has cornered the market on wii software distribution???

Yea....
Click to expand...


So are you saying that you absolutely cannot buy any software for X-Box from anywhere other than Microsoft, or any software for PlayStation from anywhere other then Sony, or any software for Wii from anywhere other than Nintendo? :rolleyes:
 
0x0x0x0 said:
So are you saying that you absolutely cannot buy any software for X-Box from anywhere other than Microsoft, or any software for PlayStation from anywhere other then Sony, or any software for Wii from anywhere other than Nintendo? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The distribution is different, but you cannot buy any software for X-Box that wasn't approved by Microsoft and doesn't pay a royalty fee to Microsoft. Same for Sony and Nintendo.
 
Jsameds said:
Good, the whole thing was stupid anyway as it's their own platform. It's like saying Waterstone's has a monopoly on book sales in their own stores. Well duh!
Click to expand...

It would actually be more like saying Ford has a monopoly because you can only buy gas for your Ford car at Ford

Dosen't matter though . If you don't like it don't buy an iPhone. Thats why I switched to android
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back