What if you buy a Honda Accord, but don't like the engine and want a Toyota engine in your Honda? No alternative? You are forced to use a Honda engine with your purchase of the Accord.
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.
Tim Cook Ordered to Attend 7-Hour Deposition in Apple vs. Epic Games Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your comment compares to “don’t like our laws go to another country.” That’s not how things work.
While it may provide a comforting myth to believe that "market" is in some way inherently "smartphones as a whole", or "personal computers as a whole", and therefore by definition it is impossible for Apple to be a "monopolist" - that's really just the same logic that says "America waterboards prisoners, America doesn't torture, therefore Waterboarding isn't torture".
The more complex truth is that "market" as a definition has been developing in multiple cases, both in America, and internationally. Increasingly, it is being defined more narrowly, such that iOS itself is a market, within which Apple will face increasing scrutiny over their actions to prevent developers from using competitors to Apple's own offerings for App download hosting, and payment transaction processing.
It's ironic the more that Apple does to differentiate its own devices and platforms through unique integrations and features, the more they reinforce the impression that they are not merely players within a larger market, but constitute a market on their own.
Epic's entire case has revolved around the fact that Apple charges Epic 30% of their revenue, for a service (app download hosting, and payment processing) that Epic can provide themselves for ~1/10th of that price.
The fact that Epic also has their own app store for PC games, and could easily compete with Apple in providing an iOS-native appstore that independent developers could sell their apps through, yet is unable to, because Apple controls the iOS market in such a way as to exclude competitors, is exactly the sort of thing that antitrust legislators world-wide are currently examining.
Unlike the economies of games consoles, where console makers eat a loss on the device in order to cut the entry price for the consumer & provide the largest possible addressable market for games developers (which would justify a large cut / exclusive store position to make up for that loss), Apple makes a profit on the hardware and operating system at the cost of reducing the overall size of the addressable market for iOS developers.
As for Apple's previous conviction for antitrust violations, Apple had access to the best lawyers money could buy, and the full range of appeals in the US justice system, yet they were still convicted and sentenced, so maybe it's time for Apple fans to accept that it doesn't matter why Apple broke the law (because Amazon was a market abusing 800-pound gorilla), or who else was breaking the law, the fact is Apple DID break the law, which is why they were found guilty - Apple colluded with publishers for the purpose of raising the price of Ebooks. That's not some civil contract that two companies can disagree on in court, as per Apple Vs. Epic, that's committing a corporate felony against the citizens of America. Fundamental to any civilised system of justice, is that guilty parties are supposed to acknowledge their guilt, and reform their behaviour.
Twain remarked that if you give a man a reputation as an early riser, he can sleep in till noon without consequence. People need to stop considering Apple's actions in light of its reputation, and start reconsidering Apple's reputation in light of their actions. Apple is a convicted antitrust felon, and it is appropriate for courts to view any competition disagreement in which Apple is a participant, through that lens.
Last edited:
Absolutely not. You are quite welcome to design your own OS for the hardware. Install said OS, and utilize whatever applications your new OS is capable of running. Oh, you don't have those resources? Then, you'll need to license a pre-developed OS for your hardware of choice - be it MacOS, iPadOS, iOS, Windows, Linux, Android, DOS, PlaystationOS, etc.
The Corellium guys have developed a version of Android that works on Apple iPhone hardware. Apple won't like it, but it is absolutely legal (assuming there was no illegal reverse engineering of Android or Apple code to make it happen). Same as many people use Apple hardware and run Windows as the boot OS.
The open web doesn't allow for high performance access to device features, nor does it allow access to all of the device features.
Apple needs to allow users the ability to do what they want with their device... just add in a simple "Allow software from other sources" and be done with it.
Most will prefer the App Store, but others would appreciate being able to install Kodi or some emulators, neither of which should be blocked from the App Store in my opinion.
I doubt it will be that simple, things seem to be more about anti-trust at this point
So to summarize:
1. Apple is not a monopoly, or businesses within Apple are not a monopoly until it is deemed they are.
2. Epic violated App Store guidelines and had their app kicked out of the app store, which was affirmed by a judge.
3. Apple's purported anti-trust violations have no bearing on this case.
4. The quote by Twain is a great aphorism, but still has no bearing on this case.
Except it's impossible to install said OS onto retail iPhone hardware.
The only hint of an alternative OS is booting a Linux desktop environment with barely any access to the hardware, and even then it required an old device being tethered to a computer in order to power up.
You don't have control of the device you own because the bootloader is locked and there's no way to unlock it.
Easy, don't buy an iPhone. When you buy an iPhone you go in knowing what the 'limitations' are regarding OS and App stores available. Buying something even though it doesn't meet your needs, and then complaining about it, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
When you buy an intel cpu, can you reprogram the microcode? Isn't that essentially the same as what you are saying? You don't have control of the device you own.
The bootloader is software, licensed to you. Write your own bootloader.
So then one should be allowed to download something other than Apple licensed software to it if they own the phone
Sure. Because one cant figure out how, Apple is not obligated to help you.
Wrong. I’m sure many mechanics could put a Toyota engine in a Honda.
None can run other OS’s on a iPhone
Look. Some may believe apple is a monopoly. And let me ask you why you think that? What's stopping us from thinking Samsung is a monopoly? Or say google (I mean they own most of the markets atm, am I wrong?). All because Apple has an updated more secure AppStore than the other competitors doesn't mean they're a monopoly? There store guidelines that every user follows when uploading their app has been fine up until epic comes along and wants more profit from a game that is free to download. Sadly you're using apple's store that you don't own (let me make that very clear) So for free games like Fortnite, Apple takes a cut of the paid profit threw transactions. It's only fair seeing as your using their store. And some may disagree but let me tell u this. Other companies do it and if they don't, they will. Tell me if I'm wrong...... Apple is no different.
Im sorry, but if you were Samsung or google and one day they did what apple is doing with user experience and everything done by them, would you call them out for being anti-competitive because the way I see it Apple is only trying to make an experience that others currently enjoy. And if you don't like the ways the company does things, then go somewhere else.
Tim cook has always been more involved in making the company money. Sadly any CEO will always keep that as there top priority. Even if you don't like it. Apple today and has been a huge influence in the smartphone market from removing ports to spreading awareness to some factors. Apple is a company that has always focused on users privacy and how they want their users to feel and connect threw their devices. It's not always a race with Apple to do things bigger than any other competitor.
And let me just make it very clear to some users who are talking about other issues. Airpods has been one of apples biggest sellers in the last few years and because of the success of them, other companies like Samsung now follows suit to making them So calling them a "fail" is very very wrong.
Im sorry, but if you were Samsung or google and one day they did what apple is doing with user experience and everything done by them, would you call them out for being anti-competitive because the way I see it Apple is only trying to make an experience that others currently enjoy. And if you don't like the ways the company does things, then go somewhere else.
Tim cook has always been more involved in making the company money. Sadly any CEO will always keep that as there top priority. Even if you don't like it. Apple today and has been a huge influence in the smartphone market from removing ports to spreading awareness to some factors. Apple is a company that has always focused on users privacy and how they want their users to feel and connect threw their devices. It's not always a race with Apple to do things bigger than any other competitor.
And let me just make it very clear to some users who are talking about other issues. Airpods has been one of apples biggest sellers in the last few years and because of the success of them, other companies like Samsung now follows suit to making them So calling them a "fail" is very very wrong.
Why not just purchase the correct phone that "other OS" is designed to work with?
It's on that "other OS" to be fully and 100% compatible with Apple's hardware architecture, design, security, specifications, and feature set of its phone.
I think you have misunderstanding. What app the phone can run should be decided by the user not Apple. It is so obviously that website lacks of notification and weak on interaction comparing to App.
Justice is about hearing both sides. That is the minimum fairness that can be offered. Deciding which is right and which wrong comes later.
Sure, there is an army of mechanics that can actually put a Toyota engine in a Honda without actually making the car into a Toyota. As I'm sure there are sufficiently clever people who can load their own o/s on an iphone, we just haven't heard of it.
Dahell you talking about. Quoting the 18th century when we’re talking about 21st century app stores and the potential for cyber crime.
You missed the point: Apple certainly can do whatever they want in their app store. No doubt. The key point is apple doesn't allow any other store run on their phones. And there is no fair reason with that.
For whatever arguments you want to use, I will beat you in one sentence: macOs allows that!
And monopoly is not necessary to a whole market. For all iOS users, who paid for their devices, the monopoly on app store is very clear.
Again: Mercedes got fined by monopoly spare parts. They have much less market share comparing to Apple
Then buy an android phone - you talk like this is something new from Apple. Been like that since day 1 - find a different OS to install on it if you got the know-how. Apple is not obligated to help you.
It would be like if you bought a diesel truck and then started whining you want to use it with unleaded gasoline. Don't like it, get a different vehicle, otherwise that diesel truck is useless without it.
If Apple is a software company that sells hardware, as Jobs is so often quoted, than I expect the majority of the cost of a Mac to be refunded. Just like when you buy a Windows PC.
