You go for the one that after considering costs and effort will make you the most money. Cost benefit analysis. Business basics.
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.
Judge Says Apple Has Until December 9 to Make App Store Change Letting Developers Link to Alternate Payment Methods
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thanks, I didn't realize that.
Well you keep stating the same erroneous comments so gotta keep correcting you.
Sadly I don’t think you are learning anything.
If Microsoft cannot do it who can? They had a more than decent mobile OS. They couldn’t make it work. Even after they bought Nokia, they couldn’t make it work. Their most mobile gadget, the surface duo, runs Android. The world has room for just two mobile OSes.
China has a few degoogled android forks though.
it tickles me that you’ve been saying the same thing I have while not understanding the implications of your own words and somehow thinking you’re disagreeing with me.
No sorry, that's not how it works. The Judges job is to see how the situation fits into the framework of the existing laws or prior rulings about existing laws. That then becomes precedent, not law. If it does not fit into any existing law then thats up to Congress to fix that.
So… what’s the problem then? If the world has accepted the lack of competition in the smartphone operating system market, why is there suddenly outcry over the lack of competition in the smartphone operating system market?
Does it? I’m pleased we are finally in agreement and I’ve helped you to understand.
There's the rub. Apple is now in the situation of amending their contracts to enable tracking and commissions on in-app sales that take place through 3rd party payment systems, or charging up front for all apps, or just letting this revenue go away. If they adopt #1 or #2, this might well go against them in the bigger question of allowing apps to side-load into iOS.
It’s WebKit, not Safari. This is a security and battery drain issue. Apple doesn’t like apps running code that they cannot review. A browser will run arbitrary JavaScript code, when only Apple’s own WebKit runs the JavaScript, they still have some control.
What exactly does "accepted" mean here? Did U.S. consumers also "accept" having just three mobile service providers to choose from? Did they "accept" having one, two, or maybe three if they're lucky, home ISPs to choose from? I think you're conflating accepting reality as it exists with being happy about said reality.
It wasn’t me who said the market had accepted just two options.
I certainly haven’t. I think we should have a lot more.
Well you're complaining that people are complaining about the market as it exists..
Unfortunately we're very unlikely to see more. Barriers to entry are too high and the reward will almost certainly not be worth the absurd level of risk required.
No one here but me is complaining about the lack of competition in the smartphone operating system market.
Some people are complaining about the lack of competition on the iPhone, but that is not a valid market, hence people should not be complaining about that.
We should all be complaining about the actual problem, the lack of competition in the smartphone operating system market.
And yet nobody has put forth a viable solution to that. Because there doesn't appear to be one. Even your suggestion of splitting Android from Google is unlikely to change anything. If a handset maker can either license Android or make their own OS, why on Earth would they do the latter? There would be few to no third-party apps available, which would be a non-starter for most consumers. Yeah, let me buy a smartphone where I can't even control my smart home devices. Do you think giants like MS, Samsung, and Amazon haven't already done a cost benefit analysis of entering (or re-entering) the smartphone OS market? There's too many benefits of using the existing OS and too many drawbacks of creating your own. Some markets can support many competitors and some cannot. You can have hundreds of different screwdriver manufacturers, They all do the same thing and work with the same screws.. Conversely, operating systems require many interdependencies. Once a few players are well-established, entering and taking their market share is extremely difficult. Look at the desktop market. It's been Windows and macOS with Linux as a minor player for decades.
Last edited:
Setting new precedent is a way of creating new law without actually creating new law. What she did here was set new precedent that says "I can force a software company to make it convenient for developers to avoid paying to use the platform". This decision will be the first of many such decisions that refer back to it as precedent, and cross the lines into dictating what a company can do with their product and platform beyond any scope of anti-competitive law or consumer protection.
Fundamentally I agree with you, but I'm challenging you on this point because there is not enough thought has gone into this on your part. What makes it NPC speak is chanting "corporate bad, more laws good" without much thought into the specific situation.
As long as I can still pay through Apple, and the developers don’t make it cheaper only if you do it through their platform.. who cares. Doesn’t change anything for anyone, and gives people more options.
The same reason Apple does... to control the company destiny, differentiate your product and make a huge amount of money.
Sounds like we should just give up complaining then since it's a foregone conclusion that there's only ever gonna be iOS and android.
I don't see how that is true. She clearly said that Epic owed commissions on the sales that they made outside of the app store. She did not have issue with the contract that Apple had in place to collect these commissions, nor did she indicate that this would be an issue going forward. As I said in a later post, it is now up to Apple how they want to pursue the need to monitor and capture this, and what the possible repercussions may be in regard to the bigger side-loading issue.
I agree with you on that, lots of activist judges take it upon themselves to write laws from the bench. That's why we have appeal courts and Supreme courts to fix these when warranted.