U.S. Antitrust Legislation Would Require Users to Be Able to Delete All Pre-Installed Apple Apps [Updated]

[4jasontv]

Nonsense duly noted.

Dude. Every iPhone sale is divided into payments and reported over time. It's how they get around adding new features to products they already sold without charging a fee.

Remember 802.11N's $0.99 fee? That when they changed their accounting practices to avoid the The Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Every device is a subscription.

 

[JimmyHook]

That rep’s phone number is 202-225-4911. Press 1 to leave him a message.

 

[Michael Scrip]

So wait... are they saying Apple can't include a calendar app because it harms other calendar app makers?

Those calendar lobbyists must be effective.

 

[duffman9000]

Microsoft was almost broken up because they installed IE on Windows PCs 25 years ago. What Apple, Microsoft, and Google have gotten away with the past 15 years or so is incredibly far beyond that.

This legislation makes total sense and I support it.

Monopolies are a bad thing folks.

I applaud how badly you misrepresent what Microsoft did wrong with IE. It’s astounding.

 

[vipergts2207]

Dude. Every iPhone sale is divided into payments and reported over time. It's how they get around adding new features to products they already sold without charging a fee.

Remember 802.11N's $0.99 fee? That when they changed their accounting practices.

Every device is a subscription.

Apple’s accounting practices, which may or may not be accurate here, doesn’t make the OS a subscription. A subscription would require payment in perpetuity to continue to use said service. I could grab any one of my old iPhones going back to the 3GS and use it and the OS without paying any kind of fee. And Apple has no doubt finished reporting a more than decade old sale on its books.

 

[macintoshmac]

Apple shouldn’t put its own apps in its own OS. Maybe Apple should not put it’s own OS on its own hardware next?

Microsoft should also just provide the OS. Shouldn’t provide a single app inside. Not even Settings. And hey, taskbar can be changed with software too, right? So there shouldn’t be a taskbar too, since that will hurt developers who earn their living with alternative taskbars.

On that note, there should be no default wallpaper and default sounds. That would infringe upon the rights of sound-makers. Everyone should have an equal right to being the default sound on the OS.

The only one with no choice in the matter is the consumer. No one cares what consumers want on their devices.

Probably the government should make a law that no company would indulge in more than 1 business. Make laptops? Don’t you dare make anything else, don’t you dare create an ecosystem of hardware and software because then we will have anti-trust against you.

 

[4jasontv]

Apple’s accounting practices, which may or may not be accurate here, doesn’t make the OS a subscription. A subscription would require payment in perpetuity to continue to use said service. I could grab any one of my old iPhones going back to the 3GS and use it and the OS without paying any kind of fee. And Apple has no doubt finished reporting a more than decade old sale on its books.

I like how you tried to imply I was wrong (I am not) to object to a definition you made up just now in order to support being wrong.

Does that mean the $9.99 I paid back in 1992 for 12 issues of MacWorld wasn't a subscription because I can still read them now? Of course not, it was a subscription at the time I paid for it.

This is the problem with digital subscriptions. People seem to think that by default you lose access to content when you stop paying. I am sure MacWorld would have loved me to return the magazines if I stopped paying, if only as a threat to keep paying for it. That's not how this works.

It's not how any of this works.

 

[coolkid93]

Stupid that’s what this is

 

[vipergts2207]

I like how you tried to imply I was wrong (I am not) to object to a definition you made up just now in order to support being wrong.

Does that mean the $9.99 I paid back in 1992 for 12 issues of MacWorld wasn't a subscription because I can still read them now? Of course not, it was a subscription at the time I paid for it.

This is the problem with digital subscriptions. People seem to think that by default you lose access to content when you stop paying. I am sure MacWorld would have loved me to return the magazines if I stopped paying, if only as a threat to keep paying for it. That's not how this works.

It's not how any of this works.

The subscriptions and services where Apple is acting anti-competively are digital subscriptions. Last I checked if someone cancels Apple Music, they no longer have access to the content, same as with Spotify. If someone cancels Apple TV+, they no longer have access to the content, just like with Netflix. If someone cancels their iCloud plan, they no longer have access to the storage, same as Dropbox. See how this works? Lawmakers and regulators, at least as it relates to anti-trust enforcement, do not care a whit about Apple’s accounting practices. Apple’s accounting practices aren’t causing an issue and bringing them up amounts to nothing more than a red herring.

 

[McG2k1]

Well, turnabout is fair play.

 

[LV426]

Anytime I get a new iGadget, I set it up using an iCloud backup. That model would break if it refused to install Apple’s default apps. Which would definitely be bad for me.

 

[lah]

Haven’t read all the pages of this thread so if this has been already suggested, my apologies.

If this legislation gets any traction, I would think they can offer a solution like the following as a workaround : on initial setup, give the user 3 options (each with detailed explanations), 1. set up phone with Apple’s default apps, 2. customize phone without Apple’s apps or 3. restore from previous back-up.

it is all about the choice right? And i guarantee most users will select 1 or 3 so Apple will be fine regardless.

 

[BvizioN]

Sometime I feel that these politicians are bunch of donkeys who have absolutely no clue on technology field.

 

[Abazigal]

Haven’t read all the pages of this thread so if this has been already suggested, my apologies.

If this legislation gets any traction, I would think they can offer a solution like the following as a workaround : on initial setup, give the user 3 options (each with detailed explanations), 1. set up phone with Apple’s default apps, 2. customize phone without Apple’s apps or 3. restore from previous back-up.

it is all about the choice right? And i guarantee most users will select 1 or 3 so Apple will be fine regardless.

Seems like they also do something like what Apple did with Russia, where you get a pop up providing a list of apps you like to download as part of the installation process.

 

[mejsric]

Up next, Congress will force automakers to sell cars without steering wheels, since they shouldn't use their dominant position to bundle their own steering wheels to the exclusion of all the other steering wheel makers out there.

McDonalds should sell KFC chickens and others too...

 

[x-evil-x]

I’m ok with this. There’s stock apps I don’t want. I’m sure apple would just have a bundle in the App Store to download them all when you get a new phone.

 

[4jasontv]

The subscriptions and services where Apple is acting anti-competively are digital subscriptions. Last I checked if someone cancels Apple Music, they no longer have access to the content, same as with Spotify. If someone cancels Apple TV+, they no longer have access to the content, just like with Netflix. If someone cancels their iCloud plan, they no longer have access to the storage, same as Dropbox. See how this works? Lawmakers and regulators, at least as it relates to anti-trust enforcement, do not care a whit about Apple’s accounting practices. Apple’s accounting practices aren’t causing an issue and bringing them up amounts to nothing more than a red herring.

I’m sorry but I don’t typically read ten books at the same time. I’m having trouble keeping your stories straight.

 

[Trhodezy]

American congress, the art of idiocy. Why can’t they just leave well enough alone?

 

[Trhodezy]

I’m ok with this. There’s stock apps I don’t want. I’m sure apple would just have a bundle in the App Store to download them all when you get a new phone.

Surely you can just delete those stock apps though, would that not suffice? 🙂

 

[Wildkraut]

This is a depressing development because it shows how the nanny Apple does not allow users to download and install Apps from the Internet, or from third party AppStores. They preinstall Apps, and set absurd anticompetitive rules up to shoulder away the competition.

What I find most insulting about these types of regulations, bans, laws, surcharges, taxes, and fees enforced by Apple, is that they treat everybody as incapable of making informed decisions on their own. You know what? When I decide to drink a soda, I know it can be bad for me. Or when I ask for a shopping bag at a store, I know I am doing something with an environmental impact. Good that antitrust laws exists, this saves customers from being devoured by greedy corporations.

Just corrected it for you 🙂

 

[Wildkraut]

So what now? It can’t have a built-in calculator? Or a messages app? Or the ability to make phone calls? Or the App Store?

This is getting out of hand.

Seems like it works out! Look, no calculator preinstalled on the iPad.

 

[Wildkraut]

Then Apple should just make a "cluster App" that's titled, "All the iPhone apps that used to be preinstalled on your iPhone when purchased for ease of installation, convenience and best experience."

As long others can also build and distribute cluster Apps, why not?!

 

[x-evil-x]

Surely you can just delete those stock apps though, would that not suffice? 🙂

Yes. if it had an actual option I’d be fine with it

 

[genovelle]

Awesome, I was waiting for this day. Hope the bill passes and we get a better device without the Bloatware/BloatApp and user get a choice to install/use their preferred apps ...

Why not just by an Android?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Ok I'm no longer going to address the market nonsense you have decided to go all in on, even to the point of believing that the liquor/potato chip market I made up is a thing.

No worries, you don’t have to address things that are inherently true. 👍

It was also just a coincident that the modifications to both resulted in the same structure where the split is 85/15 on the developer's first $1 million per year.. 🙄

OH, it’s a coincidence that they’re exactly the same… only as long as you exclude the areas where they’re entirely different. If you exclude all the differences between McDonald’s and Burger King, they’re exactly the same, too.