Exactly!
THEN... "Android dominates with 85% market share... suck it Apple!"
NOW... "Apple is too powerful... they must be stopped!"
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.
U.S. Antitrust Committee Likens Tech Companies Including Apple to 'Oil Barons and Railroad Tycoons'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly!
THEN... "Android dominates with 85% market share... suck it Apple!"
NOW... "Apple is too powerful... they must be stopped!"
Having more app stores or being forced to be more open wouldn’t stop Apple, though. The only reason Android exists is it’s the “more open” iPhone. Once the iPhone is open, folks who’ve been settling won’t need to, and the US marketshare for Android will drop even further.Exactly!
THEN... "Android dominates with 85% market share... suck it Apple!"
NOW... "Apple is too powerful... they must be stopped!"
I really can’t see too many options as a result of this where iPhone sales don’t increase.
I think this is Apple hedging their bets. If they are forced to make changes they don’t feel are workable, they could just end the whole App Store experiment and go back to when they published everything on iOS. Apple Arcade isn’t a store and the only games on there are ones that Apple publishes for use on iOS. Of course, that cuts out EVERYONE else, but Apple has these non-app based subscription services that are still doing good business.
Android would become known as the App Phone and Apple would more clearly control iOS as an entire product end-to-end. I’d hope for developers that it wouldn’t come to that, though. The vast majority are quietly making nice little bundles of cash from the Apple App Store.
Ma Bell didn't think it should face competition on its own phone lines either.
The government forced Ma Bell to let other companies run over their phone lines. Their entire infrastructure was their platform too.
That was then and this is now. Sure anything can happen, including nothing or little. Ma Bell in every sense of the word was a monopoly. Apple in no sense of the word is a monopoly.
The passage of time is a poor defense against anti-competitive behavior. And a company doesn't need to be a de facto monopoly to violate Antitrust laws.
The courts have ruled a company can be a (legal) monopoly with it's own products. We can recirculate a lot of material from previous threads, but suffice it to say, that today on 10/8/2020, the IOS App store is a platform that has not run afoul of anti-trust laws. Sure that could change, or it could stay the same.
But that’s different. If the phone lines are the *only* way for something to work on, and the company owns the only ones and controls what or what doesn’t travel over them, then that’s a monopoly. The App Store is not the same at all. There are plenty of other manufacturers to buy a mobile phone from with which to purchase the same app on.
The only other option is Android, which also charges developers 30%. An oligopoly is just a monopoly with a BFF. Not to mention that iOS has the lion share of mobile app revenues and profits, which makes it an effective monopoly to developers who like to eat.
Nonsense. It’s not apples fault they’re successful. There are other os’ and there are other phone manufacturers. Apple doesn’t prevent anyone from writing apps on any other platform. The problem here is devs becoming successful because of Apple and then claiming it’s all unfair.
ANDROID does not charge developers. Developers are ONLY charged if they use the Google Play store, which they’re not required to use.
It wasn't Ma Bell's fault that they were successful either. It doesn't matter how a company got to a position that allows them to exercise anti-competitive power - they could have been the most competitive and fair company in the universe. Once they achieve monopoly power the rules change. That is what's coded into our antitrust laws.
Last edited:
It was absolutely their fault.
AT&T was LOOKING for a monopoly in the telecommunications (note how it’s a generic term and not a trademark owned by AT&T), so they refused to let rival phone companies connect to their network (of which there were many) until they sold out to AT&T.They were looking to create a monopoly, and did so. A little different from a company that are successful because a very large number of people want to own their products. AND, let’s not forget that in order to maintain their monopoly they effectively gained control of their biggest competitor, Western Union. Apple would have to take a few more steps in order to reach the same level where AT&T was.
Probably Little Stevie as well, since Little Stevie started it?
Exactly!
THEN... "Android dominates with 85% market share... suck it Apple!"
NOW... "Apple is too powerful... they must be stopped!"
You need to spin little bit to see the reality, App Store ALONE the only App distribution channels in iOS 100%
vs
Google Play Store competes with other app distribution channels such as Samsung App Store, Huawei App Store, Honor Store etc...
Well yeah... the App Store is the only way to distribute apps on iOS... and it's been like that for 12 years.
Why is this suddenly a problem?
If developers don't like Apple's rules... why did they put their apps on Apple's App Store? And why are they still there? Why don't they abandon iOS altogether and try their hand at the other app stores from Google, Samsung, Huawei, Honor, etc?
Oh wait... is it because the iOS App Store is actually very successful for developers? And they can still make tons of money from iOS even though Android has twice as many users?
I'd rather get 70% of something than 0% of nothing.
People can buy apps for as little as $1... or they can get them for free. So I don't see what "competition" will do to the consumer app market.
And if we're talking about developers... there are no better deals to be found on Android despite there being multiple app stores. The Samsung app store takes 30%... and the Amazon app store takes 30% too. And we know Google takes their 30%.
So even though Android has "competing" app stores... apparently it's not the magic bullet you think it is.
My only point in my above message was to highlight the monopoly in the App Store market vs options (however you want to see it) in Android world. Huawei & Samsung sell apps through their App Stores competing against Google Play Store. Developers making money in one platform vs other is a different topic. If developers didn’t adopt iOS as against let’s say Windows Mobile platform, iOS popularity would have gone down.
More over Android world provides more services & sells more products through Apps than iOS (Uber, Amazon, Ticket Bookings for example) due to its availability of android mobiles with huge population. Domestic service providers see large value in Android customers just because sheer volume. They earn their money outside of ‘SELLING APPS” in the App Store, the revenue generated is beyond anyone’s imagination.
BTW, I do have two iPhones XS Max 512 GB, iPhone 11 Pro Max 512 GB 😁😁
I owned the first iPhone in 2007 when it was not even available in my place. I love iOS for what it is but Android is way more different after 2015-16....imo
So if it’s more than one geo it’s maybe a sign of certain corporations taking their game too far.
I don’t think so. I think they’d be lost without the App Store and that you can hardly sell enough devices with just the apps and services made by Apple.