Um, Apple's App Store and Apple Pay were wholly created by and paid for by Apple. These are not public utilities paid for by taxpayers money. These are also not the only shows in town for app stores or payment systems. What's the beef?
Yeah yeah, yeah I know how this works. It's the same reason robbers rob banks - that's where the money is. Governments and bureaucrats who survive by sucking on the financial gains of others are always on the hunt for new money cows to latch on to. Apple just happens to be one of the biggest and juiciest money cows on the planet so there'e no keeping the parasites at bay. Apple is their beef. Big tasty beef.
Pretending that this is about "competition" is a farce. They don't even know what competition is, because, unlike Apple, nobody is competing with them and trying to eat their lunch and crush them in the marketplace. They can totally suck at their job, or miserably fail their obligations to their customers/constituents, and they'll still get paid and collect a pension. They just want a cut of Apple's action, plain and simple.
Follow the money.... Always follow the money....
How would government benefit from this?
Instead, it is most likely, I think, private enterprise using governmentto achieve something that they could not achieve on their own: break into Apple's walled garden. And, yes, like the AT&T debacle decades ago (where a great company was destroyed to open their market to other, private companies) they will be claiming the the glories of "competition" to justify their robbery.
Actually, Apple should simply: (1) Create an ApplePay app for use in Android devices; (2) Insist, however, that it is premised on being able to implement its needed security protocols, which includes the requirement of lack of data-sharing and of hardware features that Android must build into its devices from the get-go; (3) If Android makers fail to provide those security protocols, Apple should bring an EU antitrust complaint against Google (yeah, and not its proxies) and Android.
You know that Android users -- especially post-COVID where no one wants to touch a frikkin' POS device -- would FLOCK to ApplePay, and Apple would collect a couple of pennies on every transaction, i.e., many billions of dollars.
Let's see how long these stupid complaints last.
You don't know how secure enclave works on Android devices, do you?
Actually, Apple should simply: (1) Create an ApplePay app for use in Android devices; (2) Insist, however, that it is premised on being able to implement its needed security protocols, which includes the requirement of lack of data-sharing and of hardware features that Android must build into its devices from the get-go; (3) If Android makers fail to provide those security protocols, Apple should bring an EU antitrust complaint against Google (yeah, and not its proxies) and Android.
You know that Android users -- especially post-COVID where no one wants to touch a frikkin' POS device -- would FLOCK to ApplePay, and Apple would collect a couple of pennies on every transaction, i.e., many billions of dollars.
Let's see how long these stupid complaints last.
You don't know how secure enclave works on Android devices, do you?
I fail to see what antitrust theory the EU is touting in its argument. Does Apple have a monopoly in the smartphone market? No. Do they have market share anywhere near what Windows had on PC software or Google has in search or Facebook has in social media? No.
So basically, what the EU is saying is if you sell a product so desirable that you are able to attract the most lucrative customers you need to allow other companies access to those customers, through your infrastructure that costs money to build and maintain, for free.
I generally think the EU is better at antitrust compared to the billionaire-friendly approach of the US, but not in this case.
By the way, 30% mark up sounds draconian to the uninformed but that's not remarkable in retail. And Spotify is a leech company that makes its money by underpaying artists (in cahoots with the record labels).
The sad thing about this is that it doesn't matter if Apple is technically guilty or not. This is more about people in the European Union attacking American companies due to the in ability of EU companies to compete. It is rather pathetic and frankly the type of stuff that can lead to WW3
Actually, Apple should simply: (1) Create an ApplePay app for use in Android devices; (2) Insist, however, that it is premised on being able to implement its needed security protocols, which includes the requirement of lack of data-sharing and of hardware features that Android must build into its devices from the get-go; (3) If Android makers fail to provide those security protocols, Apple should bring an EU antitrust complaint against Google (yeah, and not its proxies) and Android.
You know that Android users -- especially post-COVID where no one wants to touch a frikkin' POS device -- would FLOCK to ApplePay, and Apple would collect a couple of pennies on every transaction, i.e., many billions of dollars.
Let's see how long these stupid complaints last.
You don't know how secure enclave works on Android devices, do you?
Why don’t you tell us, O Knowledgeable One?
Apple Pay and Google Pay are equally secure Anant. Both operate in the same manner. Re: Pixel's specifically, they've included the Google designed Titan hardware chip "secure enclave" for a few years now, essentially the same as Apple's "secure enclave", so it's also used as an ultra-secure and separate storage area for certain other very private data.
The sad thing about this is that it doesn't matter if Apple is technically guilty or not. This is more about people in the European Union attacking American companies due to the in ability of EU companies to compete. It is rather pathetic and frankly the type of stuff that can lead to WW3
No, not the people of Europe. Why would they care?
It's some company or companies pushing for this so that they get a piece of the pie Apple created -- and using government to get there. It's not a new tactic.
As with all of these cry baby lawsuits we all end up losing if they are successful. Spotify is pathetic. They had no problem with the App Store rules, which are as clear as light, until they had a gained a significant number of users. Of course some of that is because of the ability to make a friction free purchase via the App Store. One thing to also note is that they have never turned a profit. I guess the plan is to steal back 15% from Apple to help make the profitable.
Spotify is going to run out of money and investors at some point and the case will no longer matter.
Actually, Apple should simply: (1) Create an ApplePay app for use in Android devices; (2) Insist, however, that it is premised on being able to implement its needed security protocols, which includes the requirement of lack of data-sharing and of hardware features that Android must build into its devices from the get-go; (3) If Android makers fail to provide those security protocols, Apple should bring an EU antitrust complaint against Google (yeah, and not its proxies) and Android.
You know that Android users -- especially post-COVID where no one wants to touch a frikkin' POS device -- would FLOCK to ApplePay, and Apple would collect a couple of pennies on every transaction, i.e., many billions of dollars.
Let's see how long these stupid complaints last.
You don't know how secure enclave works on Android devices, do you?
Why don’t you tell us, O Knowledgeable One?
Apple Pay and Google Pay are equally secure Anant. Both operate in the same manner. Re: Pixel's specifically, they've included the Google designed Titan hardware chip "secure enclave" for a few years now, essentially the same as Apple's "secure enclave", so it's also used as an ultra-secure and separate storage area for certain other very private data.
You have absolutely no data/proof to make this claim other than “they both have a security chip therefore they’re equal”.
The sad thing about this is that it doesn't matter if Apple is technically guilty or not. This is more about people in the European Union attacking American companies due to the in ability of EU companies to compete. It is rather pathetic and frankly the type of stuff that can lead to WW3
No, not the people of Europe. Why would they care?
It's some company or companies pushing for this so that they get a piece of the pie Apple created -- and using government to get there. It's not a new tactic.
I fail to see what antitrust theory the EU is touting in its argument. Does Apple have a monopoly in the smartphone market? No. Do they have market share anywhere near what Windows had on PC software or Google has in search or Facebook has in social media? No.
So basically, what the EU is saying is if you sell a product so desirable that you are able to attract the most lucrative customers you need to allow other companies access to those customers, through your infrastructure that costs money to build and maintain, for free.
I generally think the EU is better at antitrust compared to the billionaire-friendly approach of the US, but not in this case.
By the way, 30% mark up sounds draconian to the uninformed but that's not remarkable in retail. And Spotify is a leech company that makes its money by underpaying artists (in cahoots with the record labels).
Apple doesn't own my iPhone. I do. They made it, and they sold it to me (indirectly), but now it's mine. Being it is a computing device, I should be able to run whatever software ANY developer chooses to write for it. So, should I choose to want to use Samsung Pay (for instance) on my iPhone, Samsung should be able to write an app that allows it to use NFC and all the great hardware in the iPhone. As a developer, lets say I write apps and sell them to iPhone users. I'd like to put up a website and sell my product online. Isn't that how EVERYONE sells things now? But I can't, because iOS does not allow iPhone users to install software unless it comes from their App Store. My ONLY choice then, is to pay Apple for the privilege of them distributing my app at a cost of up to 30% (keeping in mind I could distribute it myself from my website).
Those scenarios (and many more, like the inability of software companies to gain access to certain hardware in the iPhone, hence no network scanners, WIFI utilities, etc.), I guess is what the EU is looking at.
Agreed that most (if not all) iPhone users are happy getting their goods from ONLY the App Store, I can see why some developers would like SOME choice in the matter.
I own a software company which develops iOS and Android apps (and other things). I've done business with the EU commission, so I know a little how the EU commission thinks and operates.
1) The EU commission is looking at this from the app developer perspective, not from the end user perspective. So claims that there is no case because Apple has only 25% market share or that the consumer can always buy an Android phone, are not relevant. It is the market share of iOS from the app developer perspective that counts. And as most app developer companies develop for both iOS and Android, so the marketshare is more in the magnitude of 80% to 90%.
2) The EU looks to the App Store as a separate service unrelated to the hardware business of Apple. Which means there must be a level playing field for third party apps and for Apple apps. The EU does not mind that Apple imposes severe technical requirements But the way Apple operates the App Store (the only distribution channel for iOS apps with predefined 15%-30% cut, and a lot of very one sided business rules) raises a lot eyebrows in the EU. Knowing the EU, Apple will not have a fighting chance if it does not loosen the business rules of the App store
3) "Why don't you develop on Android if you don't like the App store rules" is not argument that the EU is sensitive for. A lot of apps only make sense if they are available on all platforms. My company is making an election app that is used at general assemblies of companies and large non profit organizations. This apps makes only sense if all attendees (iPhone and Android users) can vote.
4) It is not so clear for Apple Pay. I do see that financial institution who want to make banking app that uses the NFC chip, have a harder time on iOS than on Android, but for me Apple cuts itself with this approach. I've done some IT consulting work with a bank, and in terms of an integrated banking service, its offer on Android is miles ahead to the iOS version. That is the reason that I always use my Android phone and not my iPhone for the banking services.
I fail to see what antitrust theory the EU is touting in its argument. Does Apple have a monopoly in the smartphone market? No. Do they have market share anywhere near what Windows had on PC software or Google has in search or Facebook has in social media? No.
So basically, what the EU is saying is if you sell a product so desirable that you are able to attract the most lucrative customers you need to allow other companies access to those customers, through your infrastructure that costs money to build and maintain, for free.
I generally think the EU is better at antitrust compared to the billionaire-friendly approach of the US, but not in this case.
By the way, 30% mark up sounds draconian to the uninformed but that's not remarkable in retail. And Spotify is a leech company that makes its money by underpaying artists (in cahoots with the record labels).
Apple doesn't own my iPhone. I do. They made it, and they sold it to me (indirectly), but now it's mine. Being it is a computing device, I should be able to run whatever software ANY developer chooses to write for it. So, should I choose to want to use Samsung Pay (for instance) on my iPhone, Samsung should be able to write an app that allows it to use NFC and all the great hardware in the iPhone. As a developer, lets say I write apps and sell them to iPhone users. I'd like to put up a website and sell my product online. Isn't that how EVERYONE sells things now? But I can't, because iOS does not allow iPhone users to install software unless it comes from their App Store. My ONLY choice then, is to pay Apple for the privilege of them distributing my app at a cost of up to 30% (keeping in mind I could distribute it myself from my website).
Those scenarios (and many more, like the inability of software companies to gain access to certain hardware in the iPhone, hence no network scanners, WIFI utilities, etc.), I guess is what the EU is looking at.
Agreed that most (if not all) iPhone users are happy getting their goods from ONLY the App Store, I can see why some developers would like SOME choice in the matter.
Why would you buy anything knowing (or not bothering to research before buying) with restrictions you oppose? No one has the luxury of buying some and dictating the terms of usage which you agreed to with EULA and knew. I'll assume for the benefit of your intelligence that you knew nothing about how things worked, but if you purchased another phone it is done right ignorance.
As for your business acumen it is questionable as you knew the developer rules going in. Trying to force someone to change it after the fact is self-serving and pretentious. The world does not revolve around you and we as consumers nor Apple as a company can help you when you knew your ONLY choice was the App Store.
I'll that without the App Store know one would even know or care about your products except for a handful of loyal customers. For everyone else they would rather go through the App Store because it is a frictionless purchase.
The EU is on life support anyone with England leaving. I fully expect Germany and France to bail as the rest of the countries are just anchors on their economy.
The EU is on life support anyone with England leaving. I fully expect Germany and France to bail as the rest of the countries are just anchors on their economy.
I've been hearing that from EU haters for decades now....
Comments
So basically, what the EU is saying is if you sell a product so desirable that you are able to attract the most lucrative customers you need to allow other companies access to those customers, through your infrastructure that costs money to build and maintain, for free.
I generally think the EU is better at antitrust compared to the billionaire-friendly approach of the US, but not in this case.
By the way, 30% mark up sounds draconian to the uninformed but that's not remarkable in retail. And Spotify is a leech company that makes its money by underpaying artists (in cahoots with the record labels).
Spotify is going to run out of money and investors at some point and the case will no longer matter.
Those scenarios (and many more, like the inability of software companies to gain access to certain hardware in the iPhone, hence no network scanners, WIFI utilities, etc.), I guess is what the EU is looking at.
Agreed that most (if not all) iPhone users are happy getting their goods from ONLY the App Store, I can see why some developers would like SOME choice in the matter.
As for your business acumen it is questionable as you knew the developer rules going in. Trying to force someone to change it after the fact is self-serving and pretentious. The world does not revolve around you and we as consumers nor Apple as a company can help you when you knew your ONLY choice was the App Store.
I'll that without the App Store know one would even know or care about your products except for a handful of loyal customers. For everyone else they would rather go through the App Store because it is a frictionless purchase.
The EU is on life support anyone with England leaving. I fully expect Germany and France to bail as the rest of the countries are just anchors on their economy.
I've been hearing that from EU haters for decades now....