Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
One of the absolute most asinine and insincere analogies I've ever read in my life.

So you have no argument against it and can only name-call?

Walmart doesn’t allow Amazon to sell out of its stores. GM doesn’t allow ford to offer telematics services in GM cars. Microsoft doesn’t allow Sony to set up a PlayStation store on xboxes. None of these things is a monopoly.
 
Instead of selling songs at $.99 a pop, Spotify created a streaming service of unlimited music. Tile created a product to find missing items. They MADE something. Apple is the one that didn’t innovate and decided to copy them. But now Spotify and Tile obviously can’t compete with Apple.
Why can't Spotify compete with Apple? I don't understand why Spotify wants to match the price of Apple Music. Spotify already has more users and if the product is truly better than Apple Music, why can't it cost more? Instead of positioning themselves as the more premium product, they want to be cheaper.
 
While I agree with you wholeheartedly about Spotify getting true OS level feature parity with Apple Music, I don’t really understand the second half. Apple Music and the App Store are owned by the same company, so effectively they pay 100% of their commission to the App Store’s owner (Apple). If anti-trust breaks the App Store into its own company separate from Apple, then yes, they should have to pay 30% to that separate company.

I see your point, it all ends up in the same pot at the end of the day. But it's sort of like parents paying their kids allowance for doing their chores. Sure it all stays in the same household but different parties in the household are affected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AdonisSMU
Why can't Spotify compete with Apple? I don't understand why Spotify wants to match the price of Apple Music. Spotify already has more users and if the product is truly better than Apple Music, why can't it cost more? Instead of positioning themselves as the more premium product, they want to be cheaper.

Actually you have it exactly reversed. Spotify existed long before Apple Music, so Apple Music is matching Spotify's price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pauloregan and IG88
just brainstorming. I’ve never really used it. Just assumed it would work. But if you tell me it would be much worse I believe you.
For whatever reason, for the most part, people on mobile only seem to use apps from the 2 major app stores. If your app gets pulled, your user base plummets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG88
Except the 30% that Spotify doesn't want to pay supports the indie developers who rely on Apple developer resources to create useful apps for iPhone customers which expands the customer base and makes more money for indie devs in the long run. Don't like that paradigm? Then don't develop for it.
But why should Spotify or any other company subsidize and support indie developers?

If Apple wants to attract indie developers and have them create useful apps and thereby expanding Apple's customer base, then it is Apple who should be encouraging and supporting the indie developers.
 
Why can't Spotify compete with Apple? I don't understand why Spotify wants to match the price of Apple Music. Spotify already has more users and if the product is truly better than Apple Music, why can't it cost more? Instead of positioning themselves as the more premium product, they want to be cheaper.
That is why, their product is inferior to Apple Music, at least on Apple devices. They also sign up exclusivities such as Tesla, etc, where it is still possible to use Apple Music, but just a poorer experience. Look at how to use Apple Music on a Tesla....you have to use Bluetooth, and there is no way to directly select a song on the large screen, instead, you have to use Hey Siri, or select the song on the phone...whereas Spotify gets their own button, and very nice UI....

Too bad I still think Spotify sucks. Especially on the computer.
 
Why can't Spotify compete with Apple? I don't understand why Spotify wants to match the price of Apple Music. Spotify already has more users and if the product is truly better than Apple Music, why can't it cost more? Instead of positioning themselves as the more premium product, they want to be cheaper.
Apple takes a 30% cut of Spotify's subscription fee for iOS users.
They really cannot compete with Apple Music on price. Both can offer a $9.99 monthly subscription, but Apple is making more by taking the cut from their competition. I don't really see how that will sit well with regulators in the long run.
MS got beat up over a simple browser that cost nothing. This has deeper implications.
 
For whatever reason, for the most part, people on mobile only seem to use apps from the 2 major app stores. If your app gets pulled, your user base plummets.

I wish web apps were more common. It was Steve's original vision for the iPhone after all and I still think it was the right one.
 
Maybe because when we build our own businesses we don’t want the government to come along and say “you need to help out your competitors who didn’t put in the effort that you did?”
Except that's not how the real world works.
MS nearly got broken up over a free web browser.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdr733 and IG88
Instead of selling songs at $.99 a pop, Spotify created a streaming service of unlimited music. Tile created a product to find missing items. They MADE something. Apple is the one that didn’t innovate and decided to copy them. But now Spotify and Tile obviously can’t compete with Apple.
They made part of something. They relied on Apple to subsidize the missing pieces of their business model. Bringing the device, the OS, the development tools and the customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kengineer
Pretty sure Spotify hasn't turned a profit since they opened their business. Not sure how they're keeping the lights on.
Hard to know if apple music has made any money, for all we know apple is using iPhone money to keep their services division going.
 
Pretty sure Spotify hasn't turned a profit since they opened their business. Not sure how they're keeping the lights on.
Full year profit? No.

Quarterly profit? Yes.

 
What happened with Microsoft? What did they do?
Crack a history book... MS nearly got broken up and had federal regulators in house for years supervising some of their activities. Much like Apple today, Microsoft was trying to make it so only their approved software would work with Windows. They refused access to APIs and of course the whole IE farce that the EU had a field day with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG88
What happened with Microsoft? What did they do?
What Microsoft did was way worse. They were strong-arming their OEM vendors not to pre-install software or even offer other operating systems as options on their computers. If Dell or HP wanted to sell a box with RedHat they risked losing their license to sell Windows (or having to pay full retail price for it if they could get it.) It would be like Apple telling verizon if they sold iPhones they could not sell any other vendor's phone. Or if a developer wanted to have an app in the AppStore they could never make an Android version of the same app. Oh, and Apple would have to have 90-95% of the market while doing it.
 
It's funny...

In quarterly results articles... we hear "Android is dominating with 85% market share! Apple is doomed!!!"

But in Epic/Spotify articles... we hear "Apple is too big and powerful! They are a monopoly! They need to be broken up! We need government intervention!"

:p
 
It's funny...

In quarterly results articles... we hear "Android is dominating with 85% market share! Apple is doomed!!!"

But in Epic/Spotify articles... we hear "Apple is too big and powerful! They are a monopoly! They need to be broken up! We need government intervention!"

:p

Who is calling for Apple to be broken up? Companies are just asking to be treated just like Apple's apps on the platform.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG88
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.