Multiple U.S. States Sue Google for Violating Antitrust Laws With Play Store Fees

[christophermdia]

We should sue Apple to stop overcharging us for iPhones and iPads … let’s lobby to pay only $500!

this crap always bothers me … a company is in business to make money … if the number is 30% to play then it’s 30% to play, if you don’t like it, go play somewhere else, and lets see if you make money. Enough people buy products with an uptick that covers many things, this is just one of them … such greed out there … and no Apple is not one of them, they charge market price for their services and give us a much better experience, even Google charging the same doesn’t give us as good experience with a Pixel phone … and they can’t produce a tablet to save their lives.

 

[fncd]

You do not seem to get it. One reason the App Store is typically the first target even where Apple has under 20% is that application developers do not have to worry about piracy (a serious problem with Android). Eliminating that benefit eliminates that advantage. Opening the system to side loading and additional application stores will just guarantee that some major developers like Facebook who hate the privacy policies will only support one of those application stores (maybe even their own), that will make it so people that want the secure, curated experience offered by Apple today will not be able to have it.

You have a choice that offers you want you want (Android). Please stop trying to ruin the choice that hundreds of millions (if not more) have consciously made. We like the walled garden. That is why we are here!

Most members of this site do nothing but go out of their way to defend the anti-competitive behavior of Apple and call it a "feature" of their products. They are so blinded by their love of all things Apple that they cannot see the forest through the trees. How can you go about your day if Apple doesn't protect you? How do you decide what to eat without Tim Cook blessing the food. Take your head out of the sand. Apple could care less about you, me, or anyone else who sits on this board day and night and defends them. Your "privacy and security" has been bought and paid for by Apple's marketing team, and you're lapping it up and asking for seconds. Their entire story falls apart when it comes under scrutiny. Their best arguments are so flawed that they have to tarnish their own operating system just to save their cash cow iOS.

My god, how did people EVER get along before Apple started playing gatekeeper, holding their hands, and tucking them in at night?

 

[dwaite]

It's about time IOS gets opened up, that way we can finally have true third party browsers with adding.

Third party browsers aren't really an App Store issue - its a javascript/wasm engine issue. Languages like Java and C# d o ahead-of-time compilation on iPhone because you can't do just in time per platform security, and interpreters are just too slow.

We can have torrents and emulators and all the good stuff Android gets.

I've had those on my iPhone, you just build them yourself or get them through testflight/ad-hoc distribution.

Emulators are likely more fun if you have a controller case - on screen controls get really stale, especially for games with zero allowances for them.

I mean having Youtube with off screen playback without having to do the desktop trick would be great too.

Thats not an App Store issue, that's Google making YouTube a ****** experience on purpose to try to convince people to pay money to make it slightly less ******.

Sideloading on IOS would make it so much more appealing, it also means better developer support as people like Epic don't want the App Store.

Not really, its a trade-off. Right now Apple acts as a customer advocate. Today if Facebook wants to put a crapload of telemetry in their app, Apple says no and has the bargaining power of all iPhone users behind them. That future just means Facebook pulls their app from the store and tells people they have to install by side-loading, so they can do all the spying they want.

 

[Analog Kid]

The members of this site do nothing but go out of their way to defend the anti-competitive behavior of Apple and call it a "feature" of their products.

How are you posting if you aren’t a MR member?

 

[Alan Wynn]

It seems like between Apple, Microsoft and Google only Microsoft saw where the play was going on the field and called an audible with their new "no commission" Microsoft store option. This should buy them time for when cases come for the games.

Sorry just not true. First, they did this on a store that has a tiny market share, not their locked store on their consoles.
This helps them gain market share for application distribution on Window (a smaller percentage of something is better than a larger percentage of nothing). Second, they maintain the requirement that one use their payment system for games - the most valuable in-app purchase market. In other words, use the lower price and more liberal rules to get people to look at their store as a reasonable distribution platform and then get people already using the store to consider it instead of Steam and the other game stores.

 

[dwaite]

Hopefully Apple is next seeing how the App Store is the text book definition of antitrust.

You mean how their competitor mobile OS has 3x the marketshare they do?

 

[fncd]

How are you posting if you aren’t a MR member?

Sorry. MOST members.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Most members of this site do nothing but go out of their way to defend the anti-competitive behavior of Apple and call it a "feature" of their products.

I made a series of points explaining the specific issues I have both as a user and with which I have had to deal as a developer. Your response addresses none of my points and just declares that anyone who disagrees with you is blind, wrong, in a cult, etc., just like so many others (those are the thoughts you express whether you use the specific words listed or not).

They are so blinded by their love of all things Apple that they cannot see the forest through the trees. How can you go about your day if Apple doesn't protect you? How do you decide what to eat without Tim Cook blessing the food. Take your head out of the sand.

I will ignore your ad hominem drivel.

Apple could care less about you

I do not think Apple does any of these things because they love me and they care about me as a person. I think they do them because their business and mine are currently aligned. I do not trust them because I think they are altruistic, I trust them because they know they are able to command a premium price by doing what they are doing. It seems so hard for so many people to get this.

Apple sells hardware, services and software that work on that hardware. They differentiate that ecosystem by focusing on privacy and security. They do not make their money selling my data nor by including sponsored spam ware and bloat ware on their devices.

Your "privacy and security" has been bought and paid for by Apple's marketing team, and you're lapping it up and asking for seconds. Their entire story falls apart when it comes under scrutiny. Their best arguments are so flawed that they have to tarnish their own operating system just to save their cash cow iOS.

If that is the case, why not make it by presenting evidence, rather that marketing fluff. This is what I used to describe on on student’s papers as “Proof by vehement assertion” and would have gotten you no point.

 

[Alan Wynn]

How are you posting if you aren’t a MR member?

He means anyone that does not agree with him.

 

[Moka Akashiya]

So, main agrument to not to have sideloading for experienced users is "bad companies will create personal app stores for vital apps"? Is there some vital apps outside of google play on android after all these years? That's would be interesting to see.

As a developer, i would like to not to pay anything to Apple for developing free apps on 25% of mobile marketshare. But that "haha, go android noob" argument is just too strong =)

 

[fncd]

You do not seem to get it. One reason the App Store is typically the first target even where Apple has under 20% is that application developers do not have to worry about piracy (a serious problem with Android).

Source?

Eliminating that benefit eliminates that advantage. Opening the system to side loading and additional application stores will just guarantee that some major developers like Facebook who hate the privacy policies will only support one of those application stores (maybe even their own),

Speculation. And here's why. People like YOU who don't want to have to get their apps from somewhere else are the reason they will stay. They'll balance giving Apple 30% (or whatever the government knocks it down to) with making 100% from their own store.

that will make it so people that want the secure, curated experience offered by Apple today will not be able to have it.

Speculation. See above.

You have a choice that offers you want you want (Android). Please stop trying to ruin the choice that hundreds of millions (if not more) have consciously made. We like the walled garden. That is why we are here!

The only thing you said that really makes sense. Except, as an Apple user for nearly 25 years, I don't believe that only one opinion matters. You can have your walled garden, and those that don't want it will (eventually) have the choice of other app stores. It's only a matter of when, and whether Apple is forced to allow it by the government, or whether they finally cave.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I've had those on my iPhone, you just build them yourself or get them through testflight/ad-hoc distribution.

A very simple solution for open source side loading.

Thats not an App Store issue, that's Google making YouTube a ****** experience on purpose to try to convince people to pay money to make it slightly less ******.

I do think that it is funny that the simplest solution “Google not having the first party apps be dumpster fires” does not even get mentioned. :-D

Not really, its a trade-off. Right now Apple acts as a customer advocate. Today if Facebook wants to put a crapload of telemetry in their app, Apple says no and has the bargaining power of all iPhone users behind them. That future just means Facebook pulls their app from the store and tells people they have to install by side-loading, so they can do all the spying they want.

This. Exactly this. Right now people have two choices Apple’s walled garden and Google’s more open environment. Taking away the walled garden does not increase choice, it takes it away.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Source?

Based on all the revenue estimates, Apple’s App Store has a customer base that is 1/3 as large as Google’s Android Play Store and yet brings in twice the revenue.

Speculation.

Epic has already tried this on Google’s Play Store and are suing to have this on iOS. How is this speculation? Are you really arguing that if Facebook’s apps (like Facebook, Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp) were only available on the Facebook store that was mandated to be as easy to install as the iOS store that a large enough percentage of Apple users would not install it making it easy for them to ignore the hundreds of millions who not want that?

Same for Epic’s games?

Sure, it is speculation, but based on the data we know.

Speculation.

Nope. This is not speculation. You have taken away the walled garden and that is what many others and I want.

The only thing you said that really makes sense.

Which is just a summary of everything I said before.

 

[One2Grift]

We should sue Apple to stop overcharging us for iPhones and iPads … let’s lobby to pay only $500!

this crap always bothers me … a company is in business to make money … if the number is 30% to play then it’s 30% to play, if you don’t like it, go play somewhere else, and lets see if you make money. Enough people buy products with an uptick that covers many things, this is just one of them … such greed out there … and no Apple is not one of them, they charge market price for their services and give us a much better experience, even Google charging the same doesn’t give us as good experience with a Pixel phone … and they can’t produce a tablet to save their lives.

That is correct. Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Huawei, Facebook, many others, these are all for profit businesses. Their pricing will all eventually hit market equilibrium (charge more, sell less or charge less, sell more -- both equal the same Gross Profit(GP). That's generally what is market equilibrium).
Market equilibrium for calendar Q1 2021(last 4 quarters) GP:

Apple GP Margin %: 39.9%
Google GP Margin %: 54.3%
(GP = in basic terms is pricing of goods and services minus cost of goods and services).

Takeaway: Google is a GP generating machine! Numbers that suggest it has incredible pricing power. It also suggests it's a very solid investment for one's money (Apple is too but generally considered less short term growth upside)

Hater Takeaway: Apple only does it for the money! Pass a law or force a judge to make Apple cut prices!

 

[Alan Wynn]

I will address your points in reverse order because you have made a typical motte-and-bailey argument.

As a developer, i would like to not to pay anything to Apple for developing free apps on 25% of mobile marketshare.

On Android do you deliver your application only via side loading? If not, you make it clear why the rest of your argument is specious. No one who argues for sideloaded apps has that as the end goal, just a stop on the way to requiring other application stores that can be installed as easily as the App Store (possibly at the same time as the App Store) with none of its privacy and security restrictions.

So, main agrument to not to have sideloading for experienced users is "bad companies will create personal app stores for vital apps"? Is there some vital apps outside of google play on android after all these years? That's would be interesting to see.

No, the main argument against side loading is that it is mostly used for piracy and will be used by bad actors to trick the less knowledgeable to install malware (see the Windows and Android ecosystems).

But that "haha, go android noob" argument is just too strong =)

My argument is much simpler. You cannot always get what you want. However if you try, you can deliver iOS apps via the browser without paying Apple anything.

 

[incoherent_1]

So Google should just run its App Store as a public charity? It should pay for development of the software, maintaining the store, providing regular software updates, etc., but they shouldn’t be able to cover their own costs or make a profit?

The amount of entitlement these days just blows my mind. I’m no Google fan by any means, but this is nuts.

 

[trip1ex]

I don't get it either. I mean can't you load your own App Store app onto Android?

 

[JagRunner]

seriously, i don't want torrents and emulators anywhere near my iphone. it's mind boggling that someone is actually expecting apple to do this...

Then dont do it.

 

[0924487]

They are a minor player for phones

Not in terms of profits or captive market of users.

 

[m4mario]

Are these people dumb? Google is working on Android for free. Smartphone manufacturers don’t have to pay a penny to use Android. How else should Google monetize this? And what happens to the world of Google dumps Android? Google has done a much if not more to create this modern smartphone world we live in. Protecting their monetization should be the priority of these law makers.

 

[firewood]

My god, how did people EVER get along before Apple started playing gatekeeper, holding their hands, and tucking them in at night?

They sold PalmPilot and PocketPC app's which were often pirated. And, except for the biggest devs, still had to pay 30% (or more!) to PalmGear and Handango for market visibility. Maybe paid even more for Brew and RIM apps. Not sure about Symbian. Nowhere near as profitable in total for developers as Apple's App store, even with Apple's $99/annum plus 30% hand-holding gatekeeper fee.

 

[Moka Akashiya]

A very simple solution for open source side loading.

Building emulator from source or paying $299 for ad-hoc is not that simple, not sure if there is nice solution yet?

On Android to you deliver your application only via side loading?

Yes, why not? I don't get where is you see fallacy. I don't have statement (i think?), just question about bad sideloading example irl.

main argument against side loading is that it is mostly used for piracy and will be used by bad actors to trick the less knowledgeable to install malware

Lets make it available only through warning popup and hidden developer menu? Thats would be simplier that spend hours on developer setup to build app yourself on another device. This will not allow to run apps with app store code signing, so no piracy. Not sure if there is scam-call possibilities too, they dont need sideloading to get credit card numbers.
There is almost zero possibility to get anything like that, of course, but i don't think that adding feature X is sort of disaster, if you are not Apple itself.

 

[Alan Wynn]

They sold PalmPilot and PocketPC app's which were often pirated.

Yup, just like Android and Windows. One reason so many apps have to build an infrastructure to call home constantly is to avoid this.

And, except for the biggest devs, still had to pay 30% (or more!) to PalmGear and Handango for market visibility.

Typically much more, especially if they developed for the open platforms like Window or macOS and sold via retail or boxed software online. After slotting fees and the retailers margin they usually paid 70%. Oh, they also had to advertise in order to get reviewed in most of the trade magazines.

Nowhere near as profitable in total for developers as Apple's App store, even with Apple's $99/annum plus 30% hand-holding gatekeeper fee.

True. Piracy on Android was a huge problem for the major mobile game developer with whom I consulted, but was not on iOS.

 

[ian87w]

What's interesting is the claim that developers want more options on IOS to deliver their software. The irony is they will have made the App Store like the Play Store. And that means I won't buy or install any apps that are not included with the iPhone.

I'm a developer, I know what can happen from this, so I will choose not to purchase any more apps. And even then I am put more at risk because other app stores can introduce vulnerabilities to Apples services, which I consume.

There is a reason I chose the 'walled garden'. It isn't perfect, but not much is...

Yup. People are trying to enforce "choice" by eliminating the choice itself, by making the choices more of the same. It's funny. "We want choice so iOS have to be like Android." It's very strange logic.

 

[farewelwilliams]

It’s not that simple. Google has taken steps to make it difficult and warning-filled when users try to install software from outside the Play Store.

You're complaining about things that are there to protect the lesser capable users.