Supreme Court Allows App Store Monopoly Lawsuit Against Apple to Proceed [Updated]

[jlc1978]

Also the shrimp on the thread mill, I don't support things like that.

To go completely off topic, you realize that was to test the impact of water quality on shrimp as part of a much larger study on shrimp, which are very economically important to SC? About $1K were spent, out of half a million, on the treadmill study. Even the senator who made the claim waffled when called on it.

A larger question is what should government's role be in funding science? Much of the computer tech we take for granted today exists because government spent money that created the basic building blocks.

the problem is groups are happy to cherry pick one part of a study to make it seem like the money is wasted, and it becomes a meme despite not being the whole story or in some cases factually incorrect.

 

[falainber]

Can someone smarter then me explain this to me? Seems if you don’t like Apples way of doing things then go elsewhere...


All I see are devs who want the ability to reach IOS users through Apples platform, but don’t want to pay the price of admission. If you are not happy then go android.

Here is what you are missing. App developers want to reach people who own Apple devices. The business is between the developer and the user. Apple should not interfere. They can provide services and charge whatever they want for them but not prevent the developers from interacting with their users directly.

 

[macjoshua]

To turn that around, Apple opening iOS up to allow alternative app stores and sideloading does not mean you have to participate in using those methods. An Android user can choose not to install other non-Google play stores and Android has a system setting to block app installs from other sources.

I feel like a lot of the Apple fanboi "NOOO! We can't open iOS app installation!" viewpoint here is based on ignorance of how Android works when it comes to this. Like they think by allowing alternative ways of installing apps your device is now inherently going to allow things to install willy-nilly without any user control. That's not how Android works, and you can lock down an Android phone to a single marketplace in exactly the same way Apple does. The "malware free" platform iPhone users (falsely) believe they have is not due to the closed nature of iOS/Apple's App store. It's just due to better vetting of apps by Apple on their own personal store. An approval process that has already been shown to NOT be the perfect utopia of security the proponents think it is.

You could have the same thing on Android by turning on a single switch on the Android system setting and if Google made getting apps published the same process Apple does.

My point is giving customers a CHOICE is not an issue. To quote you: They can always buy only from the Apple App Store if they want a more limited and potentially more secure way of getting apps.

Sure, Apple could take that approach... but why? They don't owe that to the customer or anyone else for that matter. I am far from an Apple fanboy, I just think that if they created the platform, they should be able to call the shots - whether I like it or not. I don't have any problem with Android's approach, but it's that difference that leads to a superior software experience for iOS, in my opinion.

 

[WiiDSmoker]

It’s not though. You’re basically buying a license to software that comes with an end user license agreement (EULA) which dictates what can and can’t be done with the software. It’s not a monopoly because one can easily buy something else.

Except this is why Microsoft had to un-bundle IE from Windows; which Apple fanboys were applauding back in the day.

 

[realtuner]

Here is what you are missing. App developers want to reach people who own Apple devices. The business is between the developer and the user. Apple should not interfere. They can provide services and charge whatever they want for them but not prevent the developers from interacting with their users directly.

Apple developers (the whiny self-entitled minority) want free access to a huge market and the ability to keep all the money themselves without paying for that privilege.

It’s like me going to Walmart and demanding shelf space in their store, but without paying for it.

 

[jlc1978]

Here is what you are missing. App developers want to reach people who own Apple devices. The business is between the developer and the user. Apple should not interfere. They can provide services and charge whatever they want for them but not prevent the developers from interacting with their users directly.

Apple is upfront about what you can and can't do if you want to develop for an iPhone. Their platform, their rules. Developers can decide if they like them or not. Apple does not owe them anything but what is in the T&Cs.

 

[a.gomez]

Logical. This went under the radar long enough.

Apple Store can compete with other stores for the business (and 30%)... If tomorrow Microsoft says I can only get apps and services on Windows via the Microsoft store - they get sued.

It does not matter if they built Windows or you can go buy a MAC instead. Not how it works.

 

[cube]

Apple developers (the whiny self-entitled minority) want free access to a huge market and the ability to keep all the money themselves without paying for that privilege.

It’s like me going to Walmart and demanding shelf space in their store, but without paying for it.

If you could sideload like on any proper platform they could sell the apps on their own websites.

 

[realtuner]

Except this is why Microsoft had to un-bundle IE from Windows; which Apple fanboys were applauding back in the day.

Not the same for two huge reasons:

• Apple doesn’t have a “market dominant position” (the language the EU uses as opposed to “monopoly”) like Windows did.
• Apple doesn’t license iOS to third party OEMs.

[doublepost=1557776737][/doublepost]

If you could sideload like on any proper platform they could sell the apps on their own websites.

Doesn’t change the fact they want access to over a billion potential devices/customers and don’t want to pay.

Apple is right to restrict third party App stores. We don’t need iOS to turn into the garbage that a Android is.

 

[a.gomez]

Apple developers (the whiny self-entitled minority) want free access to a huge market and the ability to keep all the money themselves without paying for that privilege.

It’s like me going to Walmart and demanding shelf space in their store, but without paying for it.

No it is like selling software via your own distribution channel on Android, Windows or MacOS and not having to pay a cut to Apple, Google or Microsoft for services you do not need.

What you are saying is Walmart opening a Mall and demanding every store is technically "inside" Walmart by default and only using their registers at a 30% cut because "They built the mall".

They should be compensated for building it - sure. Some think This is just not the way... and now they can take them to court.

 

[Rafterman]

"Competing stores". LOL. Back in the days of Pocket PC's, late 90s early 2000s, there were many stores, like Handango and Brighthand. And vendors could sell direct too. And it was a HUGE PITA. Some used codes, some used activation servers, some used pre-activated apps you had to download. It was all over the map how they handled the purchasing and activation of apps. And if you needed to update your apps - good luck with that. Again. everyone had a different method - if you could even get to the updates for old purchasers.

People who complain about what is essentially the convenience of a single Apple store never had to go though all that bullcr@p us old-timers had to.

 

[cube]

Doesn’t change the fact they want access to over a billion potential devices/customers and don’t want to pay.

Apple is right to restrict third party App stores. We don’t need iOS to turn into the garbage that a Android is.

No. They are not right. ISVs have never been forced to pay a fee to the owner of a platform before the AppStore.

What has existed is paying royalties in order to develop with some tools (you would be forced to do it with some game consoles).

 

[I7guy]

Here is what you are missing. App developers want to reach people who own Apple devices. The business is between the developer and the user. Apple should not interfere. They can provide services and charge whatever they want for them but not prevent the developers from interacting with their users directly.

As a user I want safe apps, easy to find apps, quality apps. As a user it seems multiple app stores are the antithesis of this, especially safe apps.

 

[skinned66]

Except this is why Microsoft had to un-bundle IE from Windows; which Apple fanboys were applauding back in the day.

Remember when Microsoft infused Apple with some cash and announced Office for Mac because people literally chose the Wintel platform in rather monopolistic sales figures? It was around that time I think...couldn't possibly be related to antitrust.

 

[poopiebabies unite!]

Well, this little poopie says:

Regular milk? choclit or strabweery? ...It’s good for the developer to have options. HOWEVER. End user would load apps from another resource at their own risk. It might affect the performance of their phone. A sloppy or malicious app might even BRICK yo’ phone. An’ what Apple gonna do ‘bout it? Fix/replace yo’ phone. Ha, ha, ha! As a developer, My experience with Apple has been a love/hate one. Apple has been mean to me, Apple has been nice to me too.

I think I would stick with Apple, now that I have published 6+ apps on the AppStore. The process hasn’t been a joy tho’. This little poopie can tell some stories!

I cute an’ me smart too!

 

[falainber]

Apple developers (the whiny self-entitled minority) want free access to a huge market and the ability to keep all the money themselves without paying for that privilege.

It’s like me going to Walmart and demanding shelf space in their store, but without paying for it.

What privilege is that? What exactly does Apple have to do with it? I own my iPhone and the developer owns the app. Apple prevents us from making a deal. Your Walmart example would be accurate if Walmart also prevented the vendors, say, Panasonic from selling their stuff anywhere but in Walmart. They don't, hence they are not being sued and Apple is. Developers just want to be able to distribute their apps themselves or through the alternative stores (like selling in Walmart and Target, you know).

 

[pier]

What apple could do is offer a path for people to buy apps from a third party app store.

Yes, which would basically break all the current rules Apple imposes on iOS developers since each store would have its own rules.

 

[firewood]

I own my iPhone and the developer owns the app. Apple prevents us from making a deal.

Apple does not prevent you from making a deal. The developer can sell or license you source code (for free or for any agreeable price), and you can build and install the app on your iPhone yourself using Xcode on your Mac.

 

[coolfactor]

Good. It IS a monopoly.

As I've said repeatedly, it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone. I should have the choice to install apps from whatever source I desire, and I shouldn't have to go through ridiculous machinations with Xcode every week to do it.

Disagree.

You have choice. Buy an Android phone and lose all the benefits that Apple invests heavily into making iPhone what it is. That 30% cut on paid apps helps to finance those efforts to keep "your" phone experience safe and secure.

 

[cube]

What apple could do is offer a path for people to buy apps from a third party app store.

Which could be outside of the phone, or there could be no store.

 

[falainber]

Apple does not prevent you from making a deal. The developer can sell or license you source code (for free or for any agreeable price), and you can build and install the app on your iPhone yourself using Xcode on your Mac.

Selling app and selling source code are two very different things. It's like if Ford would sell you the parts for a car and let you assemble it. Besides, one would need to buy a Mac and a license from Apple to do this. Don't be ridiculous.
[doublepost=1557778243][/doublepost]

As a user I want safe apps, easy to find apps, quality apps. As a user it seems multiple app stores are the antithesis of this, especially safe apps.

I am fairly sure that Google or Microsoft owned store would be just as good (or better, especially in terms of search). As a user of Android and Windows based systems I have never had any issues with security and quality. You are just spreading FUD.

 

[CaneCollegeboy]

No it is like selling software via your own distribution channel on Android, Windows or MacOS and not having to pay a cut to Apple, Google or Microsoft for services you do not need.

What you are saying is Walmart opening a Mall and demanding every store is technically "inside" Walmart by default and only using their registers at a 30% cut because "They built the mall".

They should be compensated for building it - sure. Some think This is just not the way... and now they can take them to court.

In a Mall the store pay rent and a % of the profits depending on the contract.

 

[falainber]

Doesn’t change the fact they want access to over a billion potential devices/customers and don’t want to pay.

Apple is right to restrict third party App stores. We don’t need iOS to turn into the garbage that a Android is.

Apple does not own these billion devices, people do and the devs have access to them thanks to Internet not Apple. Your contention that Apple has some right to tell a billion people how to use their devices is just outrageous. Who exactly gave them this right?

 

[cube]

In a Mall the store pay rent and a % of the profits depending on the contract.

The app developer does not need to have a store on the phone.

Amazon does not need to pay Google to have a store on a phone.

 

[jlc1978]

Except this is why Microsoft had to un-bundle IE from Windows; which Apple fanboys were applauding back in the day.

not quite. MS had a dominate market positoin and was using it position to stifle competitoin in anothe rmarket. Very different form what is happening with the app store.