WSJ: Apple Apps Unfairly Dominate App Store Search Results

[gregohb]

They can't have it both ways - either its a fair store or and Apple store. But given the Spotify suit, and the fact, that you can not sell apps anyway except through the App Store this seems very unfair. Perhaps thats why the Federal investigation was announced today.

 

[keysofanxiety]

No...not at all

the APP store works like this....to use your "tyres" analogy. The only place I can buy tyres is from the Apple store. The only way to sell tyres is via the Apple store. The only tyres I can fit to my car can only be sourced from the Apple store....the first tyres advertised are always tyres made by Apple.

That’s a solid r/whoosh from me dawg

 

[gaximus]

because you can shop elsewhere.

when there's only one store, the store owner can push out all competitors easily, and this affects the economy as a whole. we call this a monopolistic practice.

of there were alternatives to the app store, this would be a non issue, just like your Walmart example.
[doublepost=1563973851][/doublepost]
and you'd be sued if you had the only store in country loo

What if there were 2 stores in the country, but you had to have a membership to access either store. In that case there is an option, but you are kind of locked into one store, but it was your decision which store you were locked into?

 

[TonyC28]

because you can shop elsewhere.

when there's only one store, the store owner can push out all competitors easily, and this affects the economy as a whole. we call this a monopolistic practice.

of there were alternatives to the app store, this would be a non issue, just like your Walmart example.
[doublepost=1563973851][/doublepost]
and you'd be sued if you had the only store in country loo

I’d get sued for advertising my own products in my own store first?

 

[Remy149]

I get that it's free. The point is Apple's favoring their music app in search results since they offer a subscription service for it.

The more people Apple can get to use their music app, the more opportunities there are to get them to subscribe.

[doublepost=1563916594][/doublepost]

Maybe because you're in Sweden. Different laws (pro competition?) in EU vs in the U.S.

The music appis preinstalled on every new device unless someone deletes it there is no reason to look for it in the app store
[doublepost=1563984677][/doublepost]

Yeah, this isn't any different from a grocery story putting their house brand front and center. Of course they do that.

Yup and all 3rd party brands pay for prominent lacing on shelves and especially in aisle end displays.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

Yet another WSJ hit piece on Apple. Jeff Bezos must still be pissed his phone did worse against the iPhone than Microsofts Zune did against the iPod.

EDIT: I got The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post mixed up. My bad!

Well... when the Microsoft Zune launched I didn’t expect it to last. it’s name said it all: Microsofts Zune To Fail.

And then, their new Phone came out, with those annoying Tiles. I liked it better when it was using PocketPC or Windows Mobile OS.

 

[Timemaster]

Was on toyota.com the other day and the only cars that came up were Toyota’s. Completely unacceptable. Needs to go to the Supreme Court.

The problem with this argument is where can you go search for apps to install on your iOS product elsewhere...

Oh wait you can not. You can only go through Apple. No one else. To get a car there are tons of choices. Very different words and not comparable.

I am not surprised if Apple is cheating and abusing their position. It would not be the first nor the last time they or other large companies do it.

 

[Quu]

Well... when the Microsoft Zune launched I didn’t expect it to last. it’s name said it all: Microsofts Zune To Fail.

And then, their new Phone came out, with those annoying Tiles. I liked it better when it was using PocketPC or Windows Mobile OS.

I read once that Microsoft had an agreement with Apple to make Windows Phone look significantly different to iOS which meant no grid of application icons. And that is why it looked the way it did.

 

[Swift]

In no sense are Pages, Numbers and Keynote anything but, well, basic. They're very nice, but they never really go beyond basic word processing, number processing and presentation. They are, in some cases, lessons for developers for how to develop. But if you want to write a PhD thesis, a novel, or many other business reports, you will get Microsoft. Or the dozens of other programs that deal with words, or numbers, or presentations. I think they come first because, well, they're good enough for many, many uses. It's not costing Microsoft or Google a thing. That's why Google pays Apple a whole bunch of money just to be the default search engine.

I don't think this is aimed at anything else but social media. And I predict that what Barr wants is, more Trumpism on the social media platforms.
[doublepost=1563990702][/doublepost]

The problem with this argument is where can you go search for apps to install on your iOS product elsewhere...

Oh wait you can not. You can only go through Apple. No one else. To get a car there are tons of choices. Very different words and not comparable.

I am not surprised if Apple is cheating and abusing their position. It would not be the first nor the last time they or other large companies do it.

You can search for apps on Google. Heard of it? You can't download it from the web to your phone, but really, that's for security. Once Apple provided the App Store, what happened? Everybody else did it.

 

[vader3d]

If I owned a store and made products that were sold in it I'd probably put my stuff up front too.

Not you specifically, I find it funny that many of the same folks that call out Google for doing the same thing is now saying the opposite. Google got in trouble for putting their product in the search result first and people on this forum skewered Google as monopolistic.

Apple using their app store monopoly to favor their product is probably illegal, unless Apple can prove that all their apps are 100% superior, which it is not btw.

 

[heov]

I’d get sued for advertising my own products in my own store first?

Yes if you don't give that opportunity to others, and you own the only store.

Obviously there isn't a "hard line" on when you have a monopoly... that's what courts are for, but in your example, if you have the only store, and you advertise only your products in a manner that stifles your competition, chances are you will be sued.

I mean, what do you think an anti-competitive monopoly is lol?_ there's a reason why this is regulated in a capatilistic economy...

these practices can kill competition, and leave only 1 company alive, and that company will control the market. this is not good for the economy.

the only question is whether the practice is anti-competitive or not.
[doublepost=1563990982][/doublepost]

What if there were 2 stores in the country, but you had to have a membership to access either store. In that case there is an option, but you are kind of locked into one store, but it was your decision which store you were locked into?

I mean, that's what the courts are for. Monopolies har subject to interpretation. We have courts in the US to decide that. For example, some think Apple has a monopoly. Some don't. Arguments will be presented. Courts will decide.

 

[justperry]

Most of the comments on the first page don't seem to have any clue.....are biased........wait until even Apple gets slapped a big fine in the EU or even in the states although I doubt the last, or just maybe things are changing in the US, these companies get too big, the DOJ is investigating, says enough.

 

[hortod1]

The problem with this argument is where can you go search for apps to install on your iOS product elsewhere...

Oh wait you can not. You can only go through Apple. No one else. To get a car there are tons of choices. Very different words and not comparable.

I am not surprised if Apple is cheating and abusing their position. It would not be the first nor the last time they or other large companies do it.

Replace toyota.com with tesla.com and that argument falls apart

 

[Defthand]

We can easily imagine why Apple would want to promote its Books and Music apps above others. But what does Apple gain by favoring its Maps app? Answer that question, and you'll realize why Apple's "walled garden" has the same trappings as Google's lures.

 

[Timemaster]

Replace toyota.com with tesla.com and that argument falls apart

nope still not the same argument.
Does telsa sell 3rd party items from its site. Nope.

If apple app store was ONLY apples app then that is a different story.
If Apple allowed 3rd party app store. Again different story.

Apple choose lock things down like they did for "security" but for control but that also means their own internal apps should play by the exact same rules as everyone else. Apple choose not to and cheats.

 

[Michael Scrip]

This is an interesting thread. So what's the real damage here?

If you go searching for some 3rd-party app... but Apple's own apps sometimes appear at the top of the list... do you stop searching altogether?

Has anyone went to the App Store to download Netflix or Spotify and not found them? And instead subscribed to some alternative streaming service because those search results were higher on the list?

On a similar note... often I search the web on Google and the thing I'm looking for is not the 1st or 2nd result.

Guess what? I can still find what I'm looking for.

 

[Breaking Good]

I'm angry because there is no way to see all of Apple's apps at once. I've never been able to find an "Apps Made by Apple" section in the App Store.

Like others, I'm shocked that Apple's app don't always come out first. I think Apple should change their search function to make sure their apps are always listed first.

 

[Rob_2811]

Break them up

 

[Michael Scrip]

Break them up

Into what?

I always wondered what that means. Let's say Apple is forced to break the App Store out into a separate company.

Wouldn't that company still be controlled by Apple? Or at least by the same people and corporate DNA as before?

What would actually change for consumers and developers?

I guess I don't understand how breakups work...

 

[hortod1]

nope still not the same argument.
Does telsa sell 3rd party items from its site. Nope.

If apple app store was ONLY apples app then that is a different story.
If Apple allowed 3rd party app store. Again different story.

Apple choose lock things down like they did for "security" but for control but that also means their own internal apps should play by the exact same rules as everyone else. Apple choose not to and cheats.

Lol - if you say so

 

[szw-mapple fan]

They are claiming Apple is the landlord, business partner, and -here's the crux- competitor that puts it's wares up front.

How is this different than brick and mortar stores promoting their own store brands over competitors?

 

[Zachari]

How are you people coming...


up with the same terribly themed analogies?


What the WSJ is claiming, from an analogy standpoint, is this:
Apple is a flea market that charges it's tenants yearly rent for their booth and takes a cut of each of the tenants sales. But to get to the tenants booth, you have to run the gauntlet of Apple booths before getting to the tenant.

They are claiming Apple is the landlord, business partner, and -here's the crux- competitor that puts it's wares up front.

And again we say... so?

 

[senttoschool]

Does it really matter? The apps are all free....

Yea it matters a lot.

Imagine if Google decided to make a product for every category and place its products first in their search results no matter what.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Yea it matters a lot.

Imagine if Google decided to make a product for every category and place its products first in their search results no matter what.

Sure... let's say Google puts one of their apps in 1st place in every single search category.

What about 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th place, etc? People will see those apps too.

There are millions of apps downloaded every day. Maybe every hour.

Do you think people ONLY download the first app they see? And then quit searching completely?!?

What is going on here? There have been many comments suggesting this type of behavior.

They're called search results... result(s)... plural. It's a big list. You can keep scrolling through these results to find what you're looking for.

I've never heard of this "stop at the first result" thing.

 

[senttoschool]

Sure... let's say Google puts one of their apps in 1st place in every single search category.

What about 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th place, etc? People will see those apps too.

There are millions of apps downloaded every day. Maybe every hour.

Do you think people ONLY download the first app they see? And then quit searching completely?!?

What is going on here? There have been many comments suggesting this type of behavior.

They're called search results... result(s)... plural. It's a big list. You can keep scrolling through these results to find what you're looking for.

I've never heard of this "stop at the first result" thing.

The first result gets twice as many clicks as the second result on Google. The 10th result gets 1%.

If Google's apps have twice as many downloads as the second result apps, they can spend the extra profit to make their own apps better and spend extra on marketing. Eventually, their apps will be the best because they started with an unfair advantage in rankings.

Consumers benefit from fair competition. This is why we have so many laws in the U.S. promoting fair business practices.