There has to be a system of checks and balances. The idea that Apple can do whatever it wants with its own platform isn’t good enough. That is just a copout and a way to circumvent fairness, openness, and possibly even the law.
If you want to have a platform and pretend to make it available to everyone, it has to actually be available to everyone, without various anti competitive practices that prevent any one particular company or group or political ideology from exposure. Let the market handle it, not the whims of a few people in Cupertino.
Apple owns the building. Don't like the terms, you're more than welcome to go elsewhere.
There’s a laugh. Probably be a good idea to stop selling to Russia altogether if this nonsense is allowed.
The Russian speaking market is about 170 million people, or about the 8th largest in the world, so that sounds like a good idea to give up. Apple recently complied with Russian law and moved servers into Russia to accommodate this market.
One of the legislations that will fly in the face of Apple is that in Russia LGBT material is not allowed to be presented/promoted to minors, so their criteria for filtering for children will be different.
McDonald's has a monopoly over the products it sells in its stores! Oh no!
If only Apple apps were available in the App Store, this would be a reasonable analogy.
So, Pepsi should sue McDonalds for not allowing its cola to be sold in its 'restaurant'? (McDonald's doesn't make Coke, so why aren't they being forced/sued into providing whatever cola brand I want? And add RC cola for me, too)
And no, Apple does not "pretend to make it available to everyone" - why should it?
There has to be a system of checks and balances. The idea that Apple can do whatever it wants with its own platform isn’t good enough. That is just a copout and a way to circumvent fairness, openness, and possibly even the law.
If you want to have a platform and pretend to make it available to everyone, it has to actually be available to everyone, without various anti competitive practices that prevent any one particular company or group or political ideology from exposure. Let the market handle it, not the whims of a few people in Cupertino.
Clearly there's an issue if Apple lets an app be developed and used for several years, and then disallows it when they make their own version. If Apple wants to be both a major platform owner and a participant, they should follow some basic rules about "platform neutrality". It's true Apple isn't technically a monopoly, but they do have a 45% market share of smartphones in the US, and an effective monopoly on the high end of the market.
I personally find some Apple policies obnoxious: ones that discourage big media companies from selling directly on iOS. If a media company is big enough and popular enough that having their stuff helps sell iPhones, Apple shouldn't be taking a large cut. Not being able to buy digital media in the Kindle app or the Netflix app sucks.
I think people are still confused why Apple is called a monopolist. Apple is not a monopolist from the point of view of the consumer. There are plenty of (awful) choices. But when you are developer and want to develop an application for the iOS platform you have no choice but go through the iOS App Store, this might be even good for consumers but it is a monopoly for developers. The same is also true for Android.
This is different on macOS, you have the Mac App Store but you also can distribute software for macOS outside of the Mac App Store, so the developer has a choice how to distribute their new software.
There has to be a system of checks and balances. The idea that Apple can do whatever it wants with its own platform isn’t good enough. That is just a copout and a way to circumvent fairness, openness, and possibly even the law.
If you want to have a platform and pretend to make it available to everyone, it has to actually be available to everyone, without various anti competitive practices that prevent any one particular company or group or political ideology from exposure. Let the market handle it, not the whims of a few people in Cupertino.
Clearly there's an issue if Apple lets an app be developed and used for several years, and then disallows it when they make their own version. If Apple wants to be both a major platform owner and a participant, they should follow some basic rules about "platform neutrality". It's true Apple isn't technically a monopoly, but they do have a 45% market share of smartphones in the US, and an effective monopoly on the high end of the market.
I personally find some Apple policies obnoxious: ones that discourage big media companies from selling directly on iOS. If a media company is big enough and popular enough that having their stuff helps sell iPhones, Apple shouldn't be taking a large cut. Not being able to buy digital media in the Kindle app or the Netflix app sucks.
Consider the possibility the developer decided to use undocumented APIs after being on the App Store for years. When Apple decided to not allow the app on the App Store the developer decided to not tell the truth. Instead the developer chose to file an antitrust lawsuit and go public with misleading information. The noise of monopoly gets louder and louder and louder until by a few in an attempt to destroy something good a lot of people enjoy.
Are you really thinking big media is helping people buy iPhones? I don’t see big media breaking Google’s Play Store rules and flocking to sell directly to Android users. Time Warner has never offered me a free iPhone in return for subscribing to HBO. Disney has never offered me a free iPad for subscribing to ESPN. I do see people complaining when a media company chooses to not create an app or chooses to create a mediocre app for iPhone/iPad.
You and others claim you want the freedom to do whatever you want yet you choose to not buy Android products. Instead you choose to buy Apple products then complain.
Netflix could drop its App Store app and return to pushing DVDs if it is unhappy with Apple’s rules. When Netflix was transitioning to digital, Netflix was all about Apple. When trying to meet Wall Street’s unsustainable financial expectations, Netflix decided Apple was a financial hindrance.
There has to be a system of checks and balances. The idea that Apple can do whatever it wants with its own platform isn’t good enough. That is just a copout and a way to circumvent fairness, openness, and possibly even the law.
If you want to have a platform and pretend to make it available to everyone, it has to actually be available to everyone, without various anti competitive practices that prevent any one particular company or group or political ideology from exposure. Let the market handle it, not the whims of a few people in Cupertino.
What bullshit! If you don’t like the policies, just get android / develop for android. Apple owns the OS and the App Store so you need to play by their rules. They didn’t have to let any third party apps on their system! And they have lots of apps in their store that compete with their own so that argument doesn’t hold water.
That was the argument Microsoft used with IE and blocking Netscape. They lost that battle legally even if Netscape went the way of the dodo bird.
I didn't know Kapernsky Lab is from Russia. I used to get nagged from Parallel Desktop to buy Kapernsky Lab for protection. Glad I didn't get it.
Yes I never have trusted them for that very reason. The other thing that I discovered was how many other antivirus packages were using Kapernsky data, scanning tools, and databases. It seems less prevelent now, but for awhile it was tough to find one that didn’t. In this case, I honestly suspect the Kremlin wants to reign in Apple and Apple devices in Russia. Hence the complaint from an “independant” Russian company to the “independant” Russian courts.
I didn't know Kapernsky Lab is from Russia. I used to get nagged from Parallel Desktop to buy Kapernsky Lab for protection. Glad I didn't get it.
Yes I never have trusted them for that very reason. The other thing that I discovered was how many other antivirus packages were using Kapernsky data, scanning tools, and databases. It seems less prevelent now, but for awhile it was tough to find one that didn’t. In this case, I honestly suspect the Kremlin wants to reign in Apple and Apple devices in Russia. Hence the complaint from an “independant” Russian company to the “independant” Russian courts.
I don't think even the Russian government claims the national court is independent.
EDIT:I am wrong. They do claim to be sorta independent.
The market is handling it. Android is "winning", remember? Don't like Apple rules, don't play in their yard.
... and Apple have to play in the yard of the law.
Please elaborate how exactly Apple is breaking the law here ? Such silly BS.
Nonsense thinking like this is why there are so many frivolous lawsuits today. Just because you someone doesn’t like a policy or rule they will sue, or insinuate that a law has been broken so that a lawsuit seems reasonable.
The market is handling it. Android is "winning", remember? Don't like Apple rules, don't play in their yard.
... and Apple have to play in the yard of the law.
Please elaborate how exactly Apple is breaking the law here ? Such silly BS.
Nonsense thinking like this is why there are so many frivolous lawsuits today. Just because you someone doesn’t like a policy or rule they will sue, or insinuate that a law has been broken so that a lawsuit seems reasonable.
There's simply been a complaint filed. If there's no evidence of law(s) being broken then the Russian authorities will decline to pursue it. In any event it's not up to some forum poster to explain how the details of Russian antitrust rules may or may not be applicable. That's the "silly BS".
Geesh, can't have an adult conversation here without someone (and sometimes several someones) demanding that the person they disagree with must morph into an attorney, or government official, or an Apple executive and if they can't do it then they must be wrong.
Geesh, can't have an adult conversation here without someone (and sometimes several someones) demanding that the person they disagree with must morph into an attorney, or government official, or an Apple executive and if they can't do it then they must be wrong.
...or, instantly be labeled a "troll" because you don't support EVERYTHING that Apple does!
McDonald's has a monopoly over the products it sells in its stores! Oh no!
The rules are the same for everyone, they just want to bypass what makes iOS secure to install their Russian spyware.
Cry to Trump, he's the only one who listens to Putin's orders.
Yeah! It’s not fair that a McDonalds marketplace closes off all competition from other burgers. If I want a Whopper I should be able to get one at McDonalds too damn it!!!
Given how the EU is fining and treating Google for tailoring advertising on their own search engine to their interests, the winds are blowing against these companies. They'll come after Apple one way or another here.
BTW, the argument of if you don't like buy Android doesn't fly. Just like Microsoft couldn't argue go but Mac in the IE vs Netscape legal battle.
McDonald's has a monopoly over the products it sells in its stores! Oh no!
If only Apple apps were available in the App Store, this would be a reasonable analogy.
So, Pepsi should sue McDonalds for not allowing its cola to be sold in its 'restaurant'? (McDonald's doesn't make Coke, so why aren't they being forced/sued into providing whatever cola brand I want? And add RC cola for me, too)
And no, Apple does not "pretend to make it available to everyone" - why should it?
None of these are examples of monopolies, which is what the case is about.
I also didnt say say anything about apple “pretending to make it available to everyone”. Perhaps you ought to re-read my post?
Comments
Kasper is just pissed because we don’t need their fake anti-virus software or private-API junkware.
Apple recently complied with Russian law and moved servers into Russia to accommodate this market.
One of the legislations that will fly in the face of Apple is that in Russia LGBT material is not allowed to be presented/promoted to minors, so their criteria for filtering for children will be different.
So, Pepsi should sue McDonalds for not allowing its cola to be sold in its 'restaurant'? (McDonald's doesn't make Coke, so why aren't they being forced/sued into providing whatever cola brand I want? And add RC cola for me, too)
And no, Apple does not "pretend to make it available to everyone" - why should it?
Try and explain why you think it is irrelevant.
The physical Apple store doesn't sell Microsoft or Google hardware.
What makes the online App store so special in your view?
I personally find some Apple policies obnoxious: ones that discourage big media companies from selling directly on iOS. If a media company is big enough and popular enough that having their stuff helps sell iPhones, Apple shouldn't be taking a large cut. Not being able to buy digital media in the Kindle app or the Netflix app sucks.
This is different on macOS, you have the Mac App Store but you also can distribute software for macOS outside of the Mac App Store, so the developer has a choice how to distribute their new software.
Are you really thinking big media is helping people buy iPhones? I don’t see big media breaking Google’s Play Store rules and flocking to sell directly to Android users. Time Warner has never offered me a free iPhone in return for subscribing to HBO. Disney has never offered me a free iPad for subscribing to ESPN. I do see people complaining when a media company chooses to not create an app or chooses to create a mediocre app for iPhone/iPad.
You and others claim you want the freedom to do whatever you want yet you choose to not buy Android products. Instead you choose to buy Apple products then complain.
Netflix could drop its App Store app and return to pushing DVDs if it is unhappy with Apple’s rules. When Netflix was transitioning to digital, Netflix was all about Apple. When trying to meet Wall Street’s unsustainable financial expectations, Netflix decided Apple was a financial hindrance.
In this case, I honestly suspect the Kremlin wants to reign in Apple and Apple devices in Russia. Hence the complaint from an “independant” Russian company to the “independant” Russian courts.
EDIT:I am wrong. They do claim to be sorta independent.
Nonsense thinking like this is why there are so many frivolous lawsuits today. Just because you someone doesn’t like a policy or rule they will sue, or insinuate that a law has been broken so that a lawsuit seems reasonable.
Geesh, can't have an adult conversation here without someone (and sometimes several someones) demanding that the person they disagree with must morph into an attorney, or government official, or an Apple executive and if they can't do it then they must be wrong.
BTW, the argument of if you don't like buy Android doesn't fly. Just like Microsoft couldn't argue go but Mac in the IE vs Netscape legal battle.
I also didnt say say anything about apple “pretending to make it available to everyone”. Perhaps you ought to re-read my post?