Elizabeth Warren confirms Apple is on her big tech breakup list

1246789

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 172
    viclauyycviclauyyc Posts: 376member
    Speaking at SXSW, presidential candidate and Senator Elizabeth Warren explicitly called out Apple's App Store as one example of what would need to be split away from the company to comply with her big tech breakup plan, if Apple wanted to continue to distribute its own apps and services.




    After Warren announced her plan on Friday, more details have emerged regarding specifics of the plan. Speaking at SXSW on Saturday, Warren confirmed that Apple was on the list for breakup, and discussed the matter in some detail.

    "Apple, you've got to break it apart from their App Store. It's got to be one or the other," Warren said when specifically asked about Apple. "Either they run the platform or they play in the store. They don't get to do both at the same time. So it's the same notion.

    When Nilay Patel from The Verge reminded Warren that control of the App Store is how Apple keeps the iPhone secure, Warren danced around the question.
    Well, are they in competition with others who are developing the products? That's the problem all the way through this, and it's it's what you have to keep looking for.

    If you run a platform where others come to sell, then you don't get to sell your own items on the platform because you have two comparative advantages. One, you've sucked up information about every buyer and every seller before you've made a decision about what you're going to to sell. And second, you have the capacity -- because you run the platform -- to prefer your product over anyone else's product. It gives an enormous comparative advantage to the platform.
    Neither Apple, nor Google, Facebook, or Amazon have commented on the matter as of yet. At present, it isn't clear if Warren is going to float the regulatory idea now, or wait until after the 2020 election has concluded.

    While Warren didn't call out Apple by name in her initial announcement about the plan on March 8, Apple very clearly was included in the parameters for break-up.
    Companies with an annual global revenue of $25 billion or more and that offer to the public an online marketplace, an exchange, or a platform for connecting third parties would be designated as "platform utilities."

    These companies would be prohibited from owning both the platform utility and any participants on that platform. Platform utilities would be required to meet a standard of fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory dealing with users. Platform utilities would not be allowed to transfer or share data with third parties.
    In Saturday's interview with The Verge, Warren reiterated her reminders that Microsoft was forced to loosen control on web browsers, and breakups of monopolies by AT&T, J.P. Morgan, and Standard Oil were instrumental in establishing the modern business landscape.
    The US government is really big too. Why not break it into 50 states?

    Since when Apple has monopoly power on anything? Maybe the good old Apple 1.

    i am rather left. But these idea is rather stupid.
    mwhitewatto_cobrabshankdanhsarthos
  • Reply 62 of 172
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,581member
    jblank said:

    bells said:
    Getting bold these Lefties. 
    First set of naming calling. Don’t address the argument just throw out a label.
    That wasn't a label, it's a description (accurate) of where they are politically.
    Well, actually, that's the definition of a label.
  • Reply 63 of 172
    Commonsense65Commonsense65 Posts: 3unconfirmed, member
    Elizabeth Warren=No signs of intelligent life!
    watto_cobramacseekerdanhsarthos
  • Reply 64 of 172
    joogabahjoogabah Posts: 118member
    Communist here.  Don’t break up Apple.  Its model is one of the best examples of effective planning under capitalism.  Democrats aren’t communist.  They’re opportunists who speak lefty to prevent the nation from going communist (which would look something like total automation + the end of social hierarchies and is closer than you’d think).  We need Apple to get us there.  

    Is Warren influenced by Apple’s competitors?  Her plan wouldn’t help the working class. 
    bshank
  • Reply 65 of 172
    jblank said:
    jblank said:
    jblank said:
    jblank said:
    Dial back the wide brushes a little bit, folks.
    What wide brushes? Liawatha and her ilk are attempting to fundamentally destroy one of the greatest companies in history, they deserve maximum criticism. These leftists are trying to destroy the American economic system and in my opinion, it's not painting with a broad brush to call them out for it.

    She shouldn't have taken a DNA test, she needed a CAT-scan.
    The wide brushes that already got pruned from this thread. If your comment remains, it is on the correct side of the line.

    You just registered, and that's fantastic. At the bottom of every thread we have forum rules conveniently posted, and we do enforce them.
    That's fine, but calling a spade a spade isn't a "wide brush". None of my comments were removed so I guess you weren't addressing me. My mistake, I thought you were.
    It might be worth a look-up on where your analogy came from.
    ???
    Yeah, don't worry about it. I had a relevant thought about empire building, but lost it.
    No, I'd like to hear what you had to say, seriously.  
    Try reading some Ta Nehisi Coates. 
  • Reply 66 of 172
    NotsofastNotsofast Posts: 440member
    This is just part of the mad race to pander to the far left among a field of far left politicians.  Stay tuned as they try and outdo each other.  It's astonishing that they think these and the other proposals are where the party's base is.  I guess time will tell if things have really gotten that crazy. 

    Problem is that the media won't push her enough on it. You can see how antiseptic it would be if we had an unbiased group of journalists who asked tough objective questions and then pushed politicians to answer them, regardless of party. Here we see how Warren immediately started to fold on the question of what her proposal would do for security.  Other questions should include:  

    "Why would any company in the future take the risks and spend billions developing the platforms if they can't benefit from them?  "

    "If this is ruled Constitutional, and if the country swings toward governmental control of this degree, what else will she decide to break up? For example, Amazon has spent a couple decades and many billions of dollars building its platform where it gets massive data on consumers buying habits, etc., and where it promotes its products.  Will she order Amazon to sell its on line platform or stop selling products on it?

    Will any journalists call her out on her grossly inaccurate comparison of actual monopolies like oil, etc., where consumers had to have the product and had no other options, to situations like the App store where you don't have to purchase an iPhone and if fact the vast majority of the world chooses one of the many other competitors phones; where Apple has only a few of the millions of apps, where the overwhelming majority of the revenue goes to someone other than Apple; where Apple's biggest competitors are able to push their products to the detriment of Apple, e.g., Google Maps, Amazon Kindle, Netflix, etc.?


    edited March 10 mwhitewatto_cobrasarthos
  • Reply 67 of 172
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,441member
    The rage against Capitalism has been going on for decades now in education, revisionist history, and media propaganda. Young people are attracted to the siren call of Socialism because it promises them the moon. No more student loans to pay off, free healthcare, free college, guaranteed employment, the list goes on. Who wouldn’t be supportive of stuff like that until you sit down and think how it would be implemented? Warren wants the government to have absolute, total control over the economy, the society, the way we think. And the thing about that kind of mentality is that, once entrenched, there is no tolerance for dissent. We’ve seen what happens over and over again in history when governments control everything.
    mwhitedirecthackermacseekerapplesnorangeswatto_cobraelijahgcat52sarthos
  • Reply 68 of 172
    netmagenetmage Posts: 290member
    Well that certainly lays out an easy path to getting large tech companies’ contributions to your campaign against her.
    edited March 10 mwhitemacseekerwatto_cobrasarthos
  • Reply 69 of 172
    After more than a decade of a walled garden, it is time for Apple to try something new on iOS. Be it a professional mode or an expert mode or simply a well supported method to side-load apps, Apple should find a way to open up iOS to third party app stores and other types of apps that are currently not allowed even if it means that users are making the choice to take on additional risk. That's how it works on Mac OS and Windows. iOS would still be more secure than those operating systems. Most restrictions that Apple places on apps have nothing to do with security and everything to do with Apple's business. For example, Apple does not provide a real WiFi SDK. This is done to prevent users from scanning nearby networks. That is something Apple feels you should not do even though it is perfectly legal and only sees what is being broadcast on public airwaves with unencrypted data. Apple also does not think that users should be able to take time lapse photos with the screen turned off to save power. This, again, was done to limit the ability of users to take photos secretly. Notice that these restrictions are on users not developers. Developers can do anything they want but the control comes in via the App Store and limits what users can do. If breaking up Apple gives real freedom and responsibility as a choice for users, it will be a good thing.
  • Reply 70 of 172
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,200member
    I want a capable product set not yet another choice of less capable products.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 71 of 172
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,453member
    “Easy” way around this, make Apple an British (or EU) company.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 72 of 172
    bells said:
    Getting bold these Lefties. 
    First set of naming calling. Don’t address the argument just throw out a label.
    Is it inaccurate? Warren is a registered Democrat, which is BY DEFINITION to the left of the political spectrum. Additionally, her policy’s place her even further to the left among her fellow Democrats. Taking your statement literally, the first part is accurate. S/he is calling them by their rightful name.
    edited March 10 pulseimageswatto_cobramacseeker
  • Reply 73 of 172
    GranWill said:
    So I guess what she is saying is that Walmart will not be able to sell its own products in the Walmart stores either.
    Publix won’t be able to sell their store brand cereals so the consumer will be protected by paying MORE for Kelloggs and General Mills brands. lol
    pulseimageswatto_cobra
  • Reply 74 of 172
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,222member
    All these companies deserve what this woman is proposing due to running a socialist agenda. 
    I think it’s quite a funny, and very predictable just deserts.
    Capitalist companies promoting their own demise, real smart.
    edited March 10
  • Reply 75 of 172
    Actually, Warren's objections are to the way Microsoft used to run its software business back in the 1990s.  Remember the old adage that Microsoft software developers used to adopt:  DOS isn't done til Lotus won't run.  But I don't see any evidence of Apple using its software platform or its App Store to compete unfairly.

    watto_cobrasarthos
  • Reply 76 of 172
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,222member
    I actually think google and Facebook need splitting up (or some kind of corrective measure) because they are legitimate monopolies. Apple doesn’t fall into that category though
    watto_cobramacseeker
  • Reply 77 of 172
    ivanhivanh Posts: 391member
    Not only App Store, iOS and macOS should be spin off from iPhone, iPad and Mac. So, hardware is hardware, software is software, service is service.
  • Reply 78 of 172
    I find it very suspicious that Warren will put legislation forward to restrict Google, Apple and Amazon when it comes to making money but isn't even slightly bothered by Twitter, Facebook and YouTube being so powerful they can sway elections with their platforms. Censorship is alive and thriving on these platforms, but since it so obviously benefits the leftist authoritarians (Modern Social Democrats), Warren and others in her socialist clubhouse simply ignore it. 

    I'm no supporter of regulation but I could at very least understand an arguement in support of regulating social media platforms that restrict free speech. 
    Regulating app store platforms may just be the straw that breaks this camel's back  
    watto_cobramacseeker
  • Reply 79 of 172
    wonkothesanewonkothesane Posts: 1,404member
    “Warren, you’ve got to break her away from politics. It’s one way or the other.” comes to mind. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 80 of 172
    HyperealityHypereality Posts: 44unconfirmed, member
    Ah, socialism raising it's head in the US now.  Remember that although its never worked, the reason is that everyone else "just didn't do it right yet".

    My favourite quote about socialism came from Margaret Thatcher. 

    "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
    unbeliever2watto_cobramacseekerbeowulfschmidtsarthosCommonsense65
Sign In or Register to comment.