They should be, but they are the most powerful company in the history of the world. Nothing will happen to them.
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.
United States Justice Department Launching Antitrust Review of Major Tech Companies
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They should be, but they are the most powerful company in the history of the world. Nothing will happen to them.
amazon. they own the internet. you pretty much can't do anything commercial on the internet without aws.
That doesn't negate the fact that the person who is going to spend $100 on gems for the latest Burn the Castle to the Ground game is more likely to own an iPhone than an Android phone.
The image that fills my mind after reading this is the penultimate scene of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Tim Cook and Craig Federighi are tied to the stake at the back and Tim is screaming, "Don't look at their data!" while Mark Zuckerberg is standing behind the ark admiring the angels flying around.
Someone should make that a political cartoon.
Someone should make that a political cartoon.
App Store is retail, but if anything Apple will just have to make some compromises on the App Store front and be done with it. We don't live in Elizabeth Warren's fantasy land.
The issue with labeling anyone as fake news (Regardless if they are or not) is that say someone in power (Repub or Dem) can say that whatever does not support their views is fake news and consequently have the power to enforce that view if it is fake or not. That is why the founding fathers pushed the issues of a free press to begin with. It is up to the people to make that distinction.
With that said, all news is both fake and real since both political parties like to "Spin" BS to their favor. It is more like the start of some movies "Based on a true story" because it is just "Based on" and not the full facts. That is why the Muller report was so long to clarify all the facts before the spinners twisted it to their liking. If all news did this, the daly news paper would be 50 pounds and still cover jthe same stories.
The thing that has Apple is under the microscope is about how they are using the App store to protect their customers form harmful apps like viruses and other apps that spy on you, and so they can remove them globally, when one does slip past them. Apple does take about a third of any profits from the App store for this. This action annoys the publishers of the good apps since they are paying for the users protection services. In the end this is largely a benefit to the end user and that is a rare thing that any large company is protecting the customers at the expense of profit. I myself am extremely happy that they do this. At the same time I remember a game (I dint remember the name of the game) that withdrew form the App Store since they realized that they have sold like 30K copies of the game but have something like a million accounts on their servers from the people that are playing the game on jailbroken iPhones using a stolen copy of the game. In the end the App store systems is the best protection iOS users have. The people crying about this are the ones that are annoyed that they louse a third of the profits to Apple and there are some that are annoyed that they can't get spy apps on to your iPhone. Since the government has so manny problems invading the privacy of iPhone users, they may use this to penalize Apple so it will become an issue sooner or later.
Think about it. if the government can gain access to your iPhone, they also gain access to your keychain and all of your passwords and can go into all of your accounts to see if you are a supporter of their political views or not. I understand how they want to get around this for a terrorist issue but I don't want them up my rear about it.
Last edited:
Why is it that people have to be 'protected' from themselves? Can't people just decide what information they care about, and what they don't?
Why do I need the Facebook gulag agents to decide for me what I can and cannot see? Maybe it's because it has nothing to do with protecting anyone and everything to do with silencing the opposition, as they see it.
If you have to erase your opposition because your ideas can't stand toe to toe with theirs, you have a real problem.
I'm not throwing my weight or support into any camp. But I can see what is happening very, very clearly. I don't want anyone I disagree with silenced by anything other than better ideas.
There's a big difference between that stuff and wanting private businesses and stock holder controlled public corporations to be owned and controlled by the government. The end goal for socialists like Warren, Sanders and AOC is government ownership and control of all businesses and wealth redistribution. They'll never come out and say all of that (the new Green Deal) is close, but it's what they want.
Completely false.
Say, America is 20% socialist (i.e schools, parks, libraries, etc) and 80% capitalist (businesses). Wanting something to become, say 35% socialist does NOT mean that you want 100% socialism.
Apple dominates the online retail space for the app stores for iOS/iPadOS/TVOS devices? The walled garden approach could be challenged even more as part of this?
I believe there are other motives at play, but, will keep my paranoia to myself.
The only dominate for their own products. It's their products. They should be able to decide how and where they're available, along with the apps that go on them.
There you go, trying to apply common sense to anything involving the US (or any) government ;-)
That's about the same argument as this:
McDonald's dominates Big Macs. Should McDonald's be declared a monopoly since you can only buy a Big Mac at Mcdonald's? McDonald's has a 'walled garden' and only sells the types of food they want to. You can't buy a hot dog there! Oscar Meyer Weiners are shut out!! You aren't allowed to buy or even bring in a Pepsi. You MUST drink Coke products or go without! Conspiracy!
None, which is something that I’m sure frustrates Tim every night and motivates him greatly when he goes into work the next day based on recent efforts by Apple to move away from relying so much on the iPhone for profits.
Look who is controlling the DOJ these days! There is no longer a separation of power with three separate branches of government. Heck, many departments have no directors only "acting" puppets who fear being fired if they sneeze incorrectly. "Sad!"
I agree, but you're trying to apply common sense to anything the government does. Rookie mistake. And, again, I doubt this has anything to do with consumer protection. There are other motives at play.
It's a pretty easy sell as to why this is customer beneficial. For that reason, I expect the walled garden to stand but Apple will likely have to adjust how they arrange the App Store.
All persons fictitious. Any resemblance between the characters in this picture and any persons, living or dead, is a miracle. All celebrity voices are impersonated – poorly. The following program contains coarse language and due to its content it should not be viewed by anyone. No animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture.
It's the same bad comparision as always. Apple is not an individual with its actions limited to himself, but a corporation. A better one is this. Apple is basically the landlord for half the population (in the US) that in some things forces them to do things the way they'd like. Not saying Apple shouldn't and are not allowed to setup some rules, just that they have the potential of behave in an unlawful manner.
Apple does not dominate any of those fields. Apple has no search engine of it’s own, it has no social media of it’s own, and it’s retail services hardly dominates the field of retail services.
[doublepost=1563995445][/doublepost]
Yes, conservatives never have a problem giving welfare to huge corporations, they just have a problem helping out poor people.
Yawn. When you use these services, you agree to their ToS. If they choose to suppress your speech, they're not violating your rights. They're not government. There is no guarantee you can spread BS or hate messages and not get punished by it.
The monopoly bit makes me chuckle. Google search is impeccable. It wasn't always good. It improves each year it seems. It isn't Google's fault other companies don't spend R&D into better algorithm development. When's the lat time Bing was as good a search engine? Bing is just a rebrand of Microsoft's prior search engine.
The monopoly bit makes me chuckle. Google search is impeccable. It wasn't always good. It improves each year it seems. It isn't Google's fault other companies don't spend R&D into better algorithm development. When's the lat time Bing was as good a search engine? Bing is just a rebrand of Microsoft's prior search engine.
Companies don't have opinions. There is no collective conscious, intelligence, or morality in a group of employees. Instead, companies have agendas, priorities, and strategies. If a company appears to support a moral or political position, it's an effort to court the best wallets and purses.