gatorguy said: 36 months ago there were NO ongoing antitrust cases involving the App Store or Google Play that I'm aware of. Now there's a plethora of them, and across several continents and countries. You may like to believe that there's been no change and Apple is still firmly in control of their ecosystem. I mean it's theirs, right? I would beg to differ as do regulatory agencies around the world.
Again, being subject to regulations doesn't mean you can't have control of your own store or your own operating system. It just means you don't have carte blanche. I already provided the legal example of BlueMail, where the ability to sell your app across a wide variety of operating systems and hardware platforms renders the anti-trust claims moot. And what about Epic's lawsuit? It largely went down in flames, with the only "win" being a fairly flimsy one regarding anti-steering policy. The odds of that part of the ruling being overturned on appeal are not that low.
I've said this a dozen times before, so I'm tired of repeating it, and my opponents are probably tired of arguing it with me, but Apple should allow users to install Android on iPhones (but NOT provide any support or any online services for it, because that would be up to Google.) This would get at least some of the regulators off Apple's back, because then users could get any app they wanted installed (that Google permits.) But if this still wasn't enough, and regulators weren't satisfied with this choice being handed to users, then Apple should stop selling iPhones in any jurisdiction/country which Apple deems "is hindering iOS security or the user experience."
Good point and a good idea.
Except:
These entities and people would STILL hold Apple responsible and use both legislative and judicial means to force them to support "their platform". These suits are mostly manipulating the judicial system into supporting their greed -- and nothing Apple can do will change that or stop it.
Does anyone still doubt that the AppStore model won't survive as currently done? All the "It's Apple's platform and Apple's rules" comments here over the past couple of years won't make one iota of difference. It's gonna change at both Google and Apple. And they will both still be ridiculously profitable after the changes that are being forced on them.
Ridiculous comment. OF COURSE the "Apple's platform" and "Apple's rules" make a difference. Apple did create iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Apple did create the App Store for iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. IMO, the legitimate issue per the App Store is NOT whether Apple can have control or make the rules, but more about whether Apple is living up to their public statements about how the App Store rules are applied. Are they really being enforced equally? Do certain developers get exceptions while others do not? Those kinds of questions make sense, but the stuff about "should Apple be allowed to have control of their own operating system or their own store" is ridiculous.
If Apple is the only one permitted to make and enforce the rules on "their platform" then regulators can't force changes on them. Yet they have, South Korea, Japan, and Dutch regulators so far for example, in addition to a US District Court ruling. Definitively it's not just Apple's store to regulate as they see fit, just as Google's Play Store is not Google's alone to rule over.
Generally, equating government regulations to Apple's rules is a false equivalency. While there may sometimes be some overlap, generally they serve different goals and purposes.
What I don't understand is country like India talk about anti-competitiveness but first India needs to fix so many Indian companies are literally monopoly for years in it's own country. India may want to look into it first. App ask for compensation for investing so much in IOS and App store.
I've said this a dozen times before, so I'm tired of repeating it, and my opponents are probably tired of arguing it with me, but Apple should allow users to install Android on iPhones (but NOT provide any support or any online services for it, because that would be up to Google.) This would get at least some of the regulators off Apple's back, because then users could get any app they wanted installed (that Google permits.) But if this still wasn't enough, and regulators weren't satisfied with this choice being handed to users, then Apple should stop selling iPhones in any jurisdiction/country which Apple deems "is hindering iOS security or the user experience."
Good point and a good idea.
Except:
These entities and people would STILL hold Apple responsible and use both legislative and judicial means to force them to support "their platform". These suits are mostly manipulating the judicial system into supporting their greed -- and nothing Apple can do will change that or stop it.
App installation is not an anti-trust issue. Why? Because app developers are not limited to selling their software on iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. For example, game developers can sell the same game on an iPhone, an Android phone, Windows/Mac, Linux, and Sony/MS/Nintendo consoles. There's no rational argument to be made that Apple has control over the app market in a way that would rise to the anti-trust level.
Does anyone still doubt that the AppStore model won't survive as currently done? All the "It's Apple's platform and Apple's rules" comments here over the past couple of years won't make one iota of difference. It's gonna change at both Google and Apple. And they will both still be ridiculously profitable after the changes that are being forced on them.
Ridiculous comment. OF COURSE the "Apple's platform" and "Apple's rules" make a difference. Apple did create iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Apple did create the App Store for iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. IMO, the legitimate issue per the App Store is NOT whether Apple can have control or make the rules, but more about whether Apple is living up to their public statements about how the App Store rules are applied. Are they really being enforced equally? Do certain developers get exceptions while others do not? Those kinds of questions make sense, but the stuff about "should Apple be allowed to have control of their own operating system or their own store" is ridiculous.
In life the big people/companies ie the (RICH) get further ahead by being flavored (see Google-Apple) 15 billion per year paid to Apple, and the free, subscriptions Apps by the big boys are slowly killing most of small companies. Apple making Keynote-Pages-Numbers free pulled the rug out from under many small to medium sized companies (in word processing in particular).
I guess this person has never heard of Libreoffice which along with its variants or about GraphicConverter which are still being updated today and are insanely old (1999 and 1992 respectively) There was no "rug" to pull out from under them by Keynote-Pages-Numbers going free as OpenOffice (what LibreOffice forked from) predates all of them. Only a totally ignorant consumer or one that thinks they "need" some obscure feature (that in reality they rarely use) would get a commercial word processing program when a free option has been around for 21 years. And one of the nicknames of GraphicConverter is "poorman's Photoshop"
I've said this a dozen times before, so I'm tired of repeating it, and my opponents are probably tired of arguing it with me, but Apple should allow users to install Android on iPhones (but NOT provide any support or any online services for it, because that would be up to Google.) This would get at least some of the regulators off Apple's back, because then users could get any app they wanted installed (that Google permits.) But if this still wasn't enough, and regulators weren't satisfied with this choice being handed to users, then Apple should stop selling iPhones in any jurisdiction/country which Apple deems "is hindering iOS security or the user experience."
Good point and a good idea.
Except:
These entities and people would STILL hold Apple responsible and use both legislative and judicial means to force them to support "their platform". These suits are mostly manipulating the judicial system into supporting their greed -- and nothing Apple can do will change that or stop it.
App installation is not an anti-trust issue. Why? Because app developers are not limited to selling their software on iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. For example, game developers can sell the same game on an iPhone, an Android phone, Windows/Mac, Linux, and Sony/MS/Nintendo consoles. There's no rational argument to be made that Apple has control over the app market in a way that would rise to the anti-trust level.
"App installation is not an anti-trust issue."
If you change that "not" to "shouldn't be" I would 100% agree. The rest of your post I do agree with 100%.
But, as I said, organizations and people are misusing the legislative and judicial processes for their own advantage. Just because you're innocent doesn't mean you can't be sued or prosecuted.
Does anyone still doubt that the AppStore model won't survive as currently done? All the "It's Apple's platform and Apple's rules" comments here over the past couple of years won't make one iota of difference. It's gonna change at both Google and Apple. And they will both still be ridiculously profitable after the changes that are being forced on them.
Ridiculous comment. OF COURSE the "Apple's platform" and "Apple's rules" make a difference. Apple did create iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Apple did create the App Store for iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. IMO, the legitimate issue per the App Store is NOT whether Apple can have control or make the rules, but more about whether Apple is living up to their public statements about how the App Store rules are applied. Are they really being enforced equally? Do certain developers get exceptions while others do not? Those kinds of questions make sense, but the stuff about "should Apple be allowed to have control of their own operating system or their own store" is ridiculous.
In life the big people/companies ie the (RICH) get further ahead by being flavored (see Google-Apple) 15 billion per year paid to Apple, and the free, subscriptions Apps by the big boys are slowly killing most of small companies. Apple making Keynote-Pages-Numbers free pulled the rug out from under many small to medium sized companies (in word processing in particular).
I guess this person has never heard of Libreoffice which along with its variants or about GraphicConverter which are still being updated today and are insanely old (1999 and 1992 respectively) There was no "rug" to pull out from under them by Keynote-Pages-Numbers going free as OpenOffice (what LibreOffice forked from) predates all of them. Only a totally ignorant consumer or one that thinks they "need" some obscure feature (that in reality they rarely use) would get a commercial word processing program when a free option has been around for 21 years. And one of the nicknames of GraphicConverter is "poorman's Photoshop"
LibreOffice is a Microsoft office clone is worthless (it’s birthplace is Linux and it shows), its claim to fame is similar to Gimp on a Mac which is also worthless both have a U.I. From 1997…
Fools. Trying to protect local digital payments startups.
At this point, it's hard to escape the feeling that India will be a global economic also-ran for a good while longer...
Fools? Yeh, pretty much...
But not for protecting "local digital payment startups": India has been hampered by being a predominantly cash based society -- which means it fails to collect many taxes (So it can't do the things it needs to do to catch up to the rest of modern Asia).
It sees digital payment systems as a way out of that mess. But then, Apple already supplies the best digital payment system on the planet -- so yeh, they are fools.
Does anyone still doubt that the AppStore model won't survive as currently done? All the "It's Apple's platform and Apple's rules" comments here over the past couple of years won't make one iota of difference. It's gonna change at both Google and Apple. And they will both still be ridiculously profitable after the changes that are being forced on them.
Ridiculous comment. OF COURSE the "Apple's platform" and "Apple's rules" make a difference. Apple did create iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Apple did create the App Store for iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. IMO, the legitimate issue per the App Store is NOT whether Apple can have control or make the rules, but more about whether Apple is living up to their public statements about how the App Store rules are applied. Are they really being enforced equally? Do certain developers get exceptions while others do not? Those kinds of questions make sense, but the stuff about "should Apple be allowed to have control of their own operating system or their own store" is ridiculous.
In life the big people/companies ie the (RICH) get further ahead by being flavored (see Google-Apple) 15 billion per year paid to Apple, and the free, subscriptions Apps by the big boys are slowly killing most of small companies. Apple making Keynote-Pages-Numbers free pulled the rug out from under many small to medium sized companies (in word processing in particular).
I guess this person has never heard of Libreoffice which along with its variants or about GraphicConverter which are still being updated today and are insanely old (1999 and 1992 respectively) There was no "rug" to pull out from under them by Keynote-Pages-Numbers going free as OpenOffice (what LibreOffice forked from) predates all of them. Only a totally ignorant consumer or one that thinks they "need" some obscure feature (that in reality they rarely use) would get a commercial word processing program when a free option has been around for 21 years. And one of the nicknames of GraphicConverter is "poorman's Photoshop"
LibreOffice is a Microsoft office clone is worthless (it’s birthplace is Linux and it shows), its claim to fame is similar to Gimp on a Mac which is also worthless both have a U.I. From 1997…
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. LibreOffice vs. Microsoft Office: How Does It Measure Up? takes look at both and shows that you can select what your UI is in LibreOffice. Best of yet you don't have to worry about Microsoft going 360 again and forcing you to pay a yearly fee. As for GIMP there are ways to make it look just like Photoshop. Besides I didn't mention GIMP but rather GraphicConverter which I notice you avoided like crazy.
Fools. Trying to protect local digital payments startups.
At this point, it's hard to escape the feeling that India will be a global economic also-ran for a good while longer...
Fools? Yeh, pretty much...
But not for protecting "local digital payment startups": India has been hampered by being a predominantly cash based society -- which means it fails to collect many taxes (So it can't do the things it needs to do to catch up to the rest of modern Asia).
It sees digital payment systems as a way out of that mess. But then, Apple already supplies the best digital payment system on the planet -- so yeh, they are fools.
I remember back in the mid 70's, when India detonated their first nuclear bomb and there as an editorial cartoon commemorating the historic event. At the time, India was the second country in Asia to possess a nuclear weapon. The other at the time was China.
The cartoon showed a caricature of a starving boy on the streets of New Delhi and holding an empty rice bowl begging. And there was a hand over the bowl with India written on it, dropping in an atomic bomb (in the form of a mushroom cloud).
And this was how Kevin Durant described his trip to the Taj Mahal (during an NBA exhibition) just 5 years ago.
“Yeah. As I was driving up to the Taj Mahal, like I said, I thought that this would be holy ground, super protected, very very clean. And as I’m driving up, it’s like, s—, this used to remind me of some neighborhoods I would ride through as a kid. Mud in the middle of the street, houses were not finished but there were people living in them. No doors. No windows. The cows in the street, stray dogs and then, boom, Taj Mahal, one of the seven wonders of the world. It’s like holy s—, this was built 500 years ago and everyone comes here. It’s just an eye-opener,” he said."
Who's to say that India would use the tax money collected, for the better of its citizens that needs it the most? Not the India is doing any worst than other countries with their tax revenue.
Fools. Trying to protect local digital payments startups.
At this point, it's hard to escape the feeling that India will be a global economic also-ran for a good while longer...
Fools? Yeh, pretty much...
But not for protecting "local digital payment startups": India has been hampered by being a predominantly cash based society -- which means it fails to collect many taxes (So it can't do the things it needs to do to catch up to the rest of modern Asia).
It sees digital payment systems as a way out of that mess. But then, Apple already supplies the best digital payment system on the planet -- so yeh, they are fools.
I remember back in the mid 70's, when India detonated their first nuclear bomb and there as an editorial cartoon commemorating the historic event. At the time, India was the second country in Asia to possess a nuclear weapon. The other at the time was China.
The cartoon showed a caricature of a starving boy on the streets of New Delhi and holding an empty rice bowl begging. And there was a hand over the bowl with India written on it, dropping in an atomic bomb (in the form of a mushroom cloud).
And this was how Kevin Durant described his trip to the Taj Mahal (during an NBA exhibition) just 5 years ago.
“Yeah. As I was driving up to the Taj Mahal, like I said, I thought that this would be holy ground, super protected, very very clean. And as I’m driving up, it’s like, s—, this used to remind me of some neighborhoods I would ride through as a kid. Mud in the middle of the street, houses were not finished but there were people living in them. No doors. No windows. The cows in the street, stray dogs and then, boom, Taj Mahal, one of the seven wonders of the world. It’s like holy s—, this was built 500 years ago and everyone comes here. It’s just an eye-opener,” he said."
Who's to say that India would use the tax money collected, for the better of its citizens that needs it the most? Not the India is doing any worst than other countries with their tax revenue.
All good points!
But, without tax revenue, their government stands no chance of improving the nation's circumstances and they will continue operating on a primitive cash & barter, under-the-table system.
But then we get to your main point: That even with adequate revenue, corruption is so endemic, that they would likely screw it up anyway.
Comments
Generally, equating government regulations to Apple's rules is a false equivalency. While there may sometimes be some overlap, generally they serve different goals and purposes.
The cartoon showed a caricature of a starving boy on the streets of New Delhi and holding an empty rice bowl begging. And there was a hand over the bowl with India written on it, dropping in an atomic bomb (in the form of a mushroom cloud).
And this was how Kevin Durant described his trip to the Taj Mahal (during an NBA exhibition) just 5 years ago.
“Yeah. As I was driving up to the Taj Mahal, like I said, I thought that this would be holy ground, super protected, very very clean. And as I’m driving up, it’s like, s—, this used to remind me of some neighborhoods I would ride through as a kid. Mud in the middle of the street, houses were not finished but there were people living in them. No doors. No windows. The cows in the street, stray dogs and then, boom, Taj Mahal, one of the seven wonders of the world. It’s like holy s—, this was built 500 years ago and everyone comes here. It’s just an eye-opener,” he said."
https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/india-is-20-years-behind-in-terms-of-knowledge-kevin-durant-shocking-revelations-after-visit-to-taj-mahal-4792159/
Who's to say that India would use the tax money collected, for the better of its citizens that needs it the most? Not the India is doing any worst than other countries with their tax revenue.