Apple is much too successful - we need to stop it now! -- Microsoft
Microsoft is pretty pathetic, and Apple's privacy terms rankle Microsoft's nerves. Too bad Windows doesn't have the same privacy safeguards - with Windows attempting to force everything through Edge.
Microsoft runs their own closed ecosystem with XBox, so it's a lot of Microsoft calling the kettle black.
The real monopoly is in the enterprise software realm where Microsoft keeps boosting prices for their good enough software.
What really pisses off Microsoft is that they don't have access to Apple Silicon ARM processors, so Windows ARM will run faster on Apple hardware than on their OEMs - or indeed on their own surface machines.
Microsoft has a point here. In the 90s it was so successful it almost killed Apple. On the other hand, Steve Jobs resurrected Apple without having to stop Microsoft.
Worth noting Microsoft invested in Apple in the 90's. Apple may owe Microsoft to a degree.
$150M and Microsoft made easy money off of the return. The reason that MS agreed to provide the $150M and MS Office for 5 years, was that MS had been caught using some of Apple's Quicktime IP.
What Apple owes is a tip of the hat to MS for keeping its corpulent ass focused on x86, killing its chances of success in mobile.
The thing with Apple is they've gotten big enough that their gatekeeping is becoming a problem. I don't like the idea that long term all things tech in the US comes from and is dictated by Apple.
The thing with Apple is they've gotten big enough that their gatekeeping is becoming a problem. I don't like the idea that long term all things tech in the US comes from and is dictated by Apple.
And yet Epic can't actually provide any evidence of a "problem" for Fortnite. They were free to pick and choose which sections of the gaming market would have access to Fortnite. They chose Playstation, Xbox, Windows PCs, iOS/Android. They monetized the game in the same way on all of those platforms: virtual currency that would require a commission payment if purchased in-app OR no commission requirement if purchased online or in a retail store.
The thing with Apple is they've gotten big enough that their gatekeeping is becoming a problem. I don't like the idea that long term all things tech in the US comes from and is dictated by Apple.
And yet Epic can't actually provide any evidence of a "problem" for Fortnite. They were free to pick and choose which sections of the gaming market would have access to Fortnite. They chose Playstation, Xbox, Windows PCs, iOS/Android. They monetized the game in the same way on all of those platforms: virtual currency that would require a commission payment if purchased in-app OR no commission requirement if purchased online or in a retail store.
For the record just because a lot of companies are doing the same thing doesn't make it right. Devs may put up with being forced to give platforms money for services they could get elsewhere but it doesn't mean they should.
Spotify completely misrepresented its own financial position to the EU. They spent a lot of time complaining about Apple's 30% commission, then their own financial records showed that less than 1% of their iOS subscribers were subject to Apple's commission AND that the commission they were subject to was 15%, not 30%.
99% of their subscription business on iOS didn't involve Apple making a cent. That hardly seems unreasonable.
Spotify completely misrepresented its own financial position to the EU. They spent a lot of time complaining about Apple's 30% commission, then their own financial records showed that less than 1% of their iOS subscribers were subject to Apple's commission AND that the commission they were subject to was 15%, not 30%.
99% of their subscription business on iOS didn't involve Apple making a cent. That hardly seems unreasonable.
Spotify doesn't need Apple's IAP infrastructure and shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
Netflix agreed. That's why they pulled support for IAP.
Microsoft has short term memory problem with there tainted monopolistic antitrust behavior for over 2 decades. For that reason, Microsoft needs to be stopped buying Activation Blizzard video game maker. You don't want Microsoft with XBOX and video games maker becomes monopoly to show antitrust behavior. How about that ?
And MS is right! Let’s also open up all of Microsoft’s stores to 3rd parties! I wanna be able to sell my crappy games on Xbox without giving them money!!
Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows!! Microsoft, police yourselves!
Microsoft doesn't put the same controls on Windows that Apple puts on their platforms.
For one you can install whatever you want on their devices. For another they allow third party payments for when you do use their store.
I can install anything in my Mac too, including Windows!! Can’t do that on a windows machine.
And they allow 3rd party payments and stores? Heck I’m setting up shop on Xbox selling crappy games then.
The thing with Apple is they've gotten big enough that their gatekeeping is becoming a problem. I don't like the idea that long term all things tech in the US comes from and is dictated by Apple.
The U.S. allows knockoff devices to be sold. For example, you can get a knockoff iPhone from some Chinese manufacturer if you hate Apple so much.
And MS is right! Let’s also open up all of Microsoft’s stores to 3rd parties! I wanna be able to sell my crappy games on Xbox without giving them money!!
Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows!! Microsoft, police yourselves!
Microsoft doesn't put the same controls on Windows that Apple puts on their platforms.
For one you can install whatever you want on their devices. For another they allow third party payments for when you do use their store.
I can install anything in my Mac too, including Windows!! Can’t do that on a windows machine.
And they allow 3rd party payments and stores? Heck I’m setting up shop on Xbox selling crappy games then.
You can install whatever you want on Windows that is technically supported. Microsoft won't stop you.
Microsoft has opened their store up to 3rd party purchases. They'll allow 3rd party stores and cut their fees. They're making a lot more concessions.
brian.on.android said: Microsoft has opened their store up to 3rd party purchases. They'll allow 3rd party stores and cut their fees. They're making a lot more concessions.
brian.on.android said: Spotify doesn't need Apple's IAP infrastructure and shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
Netflix agreed. That's why they pulled support for IAP.
None of which supports the idea that Apple is unreasonably restraining anyone's trade. Spotify, Netflix, and Amazon Kindle have all been quite successful with people paying for products/services on the web while still distributing their apps through the App Store. That shouldn't be possible if Apple had antitrust level control.
The thing with Apple is they've gotten big enough that their gatekeeping is becoming a problem. I don't like the idea that long term all things tech in the US comes from and is dictated by Apple.
And yet Epic can't actually provide any evidence of a "problem" for Fortnite. They were free to pick and choose which sections of the gaming market would have access to Fortnite. They chose Playstation, Xbox, Windows PCs, iOS/Android. They monetized the game in the same way on all of those platforms: virtual currency that would require a commission payment if purchased in-app OR no commission requirement if purchased online or in a retail store.
Fortnite is a game, they are primarily in the game market.
Apple does not have a monopoly over the game market and sufficient alternatives exist.
brian.on.android said: Spotify doesn't need Apple's IAP infrastructure and shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
Netflix agreed. That's why they pulled support for IAP.
None of which supports the idea that Apple is unreasonably restraining anyone's trade. Spotify, Netflix, and Amazon Kindle have all been quite successful with people paying for products/services on the web while still distributing their apps through the App Store. That shouldn't be possible if Apple had antitrust level control.
Apple just knows they'd be screwed if they chased Netflix off the App Store.
Apple has clearly shown that they will force developers to implement in-app purchases for a service being sold through their website if they don't have enough money to fight back, but Netflix and Amazon would put up one hell of a fight.
In the case of WordPress, that backfired because the app never sold anything in the first place.
brian.on.android said: Spotify doesn't need Apple's IAP infrastructure and shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
Netflix agreed. That's why they pulled support for IAP.
None of which supports the idea that Apple is unreasonably restraining anyone's trade. Spotify, Netflix, and Amazon Kindle have all been quite successful with people paying for products/services on the web while still distributing their apps through the App Store. That shouldn't be possible if Apple had antitrust level control.
So you think Apple is reasonably restraining trade? How far does Apple have to go with their rules before anything needs to be done? Do we need to see smaller businesses go under? How many products were non starter due to iOS restrictions?
brian.on.android said: So you think Apple is reasonably restraining trade? How far does Apple have to go with their rules before anything needs to be done?
Technically ANY business contract is a restraint of trade because the contract puts conditions in place that wouldn't otherwise be there without the contract. That's why the "unreasonable" part is necessary per the Sherman Antitrust Act. Epic is trying to claim the judge in the first trial misinterpreted the Sherman Antitrust Act and Microsoft is saying they agree with that position.
But as I have pointed out, it's hard to find anything unreasonable per Fortnite. Epic made gigantic sums of money on video game consoles and Windows PCs with Fortnite, then later did a port to iOS/Android that was still lucrative for them but much smaller in terms of revenue. The monetization of the game on iOS/Android was identical to consoles/PCs. That just doesn't fit with the claim that Apple is exerting monopoly control and forcing unreasonable restraint of trade.
Apple is much too successful - we need to stop it now! -- Microsoft
Microsoft is pretty pathetic, and Apple's privacy terms rankle Microsoft's nerves. Too bad Windows doesn't have the same privacy safeguards - with Windows attempting to force everything through Edge.
Microsoft runs their own closed ecosystem with XBox, so it's a lot of Microsoft calling the kettle black.
The real monopoly is in the enterprise software realm where Microsoft keeps boosting prices for their good enough software.
What really pisses off Microsoft is that they don't have access to Apple Silicon ARM processors, so Windows ARM will run faster on Apple hardware than on their OEMs - or indeed on their own surface machines.
Microsoft has a point here. In the 90s it was so successful it almost killed Apple. On the other hand, Steve Jobs resurrected Apple without having to stop Microsoft.
Worth noting Microsoft invested in Apple in the 90's. Apple may owe Microsoft to a degree.
Microsoft bought $150M worth of AAPL at around $20 a share. They were non-voting shares and if I recall, did not split in 2000 (Microsoft sold them all before the second split in 2005). At the time Apple had no debt and rumored to had had about $1B in cash. Apple did not financially need the $150M investment.
What Jobs needed was time to get Apple back on track and he did not want to have to the spend the time and resources to fight Microsoft in court over Microsoft stealing QuickTime technology. A case that Apple was sure to win. So he made an offer to Microsoft to settle by having them invest in AAPL. This ended the lawsuit so Jobs can concentrate on Apple Computer, not the lawsuit. Plus by Microsoft showing confidence to invest $150M in Apple, it gave AAPL investors confidence to not sell and other investors to buy AAPL Thus bolstering AAPL share price until Jobs can release the iMac. Jobs could had ask for $150M in cash and Microsoft would had probably settled. Apple had that strong of a case. But Apple didn't need the money.
If Microsoft had held on to those shares, they would be worth close to $1.5B today, even without the splits along the way. Instead Microsoft "only" made about $350M profit with their investment. (If they had gotten the splits, their shares would be worth about $170B today.)
On a side note. Steven Jobs himself boosted his role in saving Apple by claiming Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy when he took over and only had enough cash to last another quarter or two. But he was using a quarter where Apple lost over $600M. Apple was not losing $600M every quarter. That quarter was an anomaly. Apple was only losing about $100M to $200M a quarter at the time. So Apple could have lasted another year or even two, with just cash on hand. $150M wouldn't even cover what Apple was losing in a quarter. So how did Microsoft $150M investment save Apple?
What's next? Are you going to tell us the fable about how Apple wouldn't be here today, if they hadn't "stolen" PARC technology?
Are their alternative Xbox stores? Can I side load games onto my Xbox?
Sideloading: Yes, you can, indeed! You boot into developer mode. All the games you bought through the Xbox interface for Windows Store are nowhere to be seen, that’s the catch, the sacrifice you make. Reboot into normal mode and the games return. I guess it’s a dual-boot setup, but unlike PCs I can’t just fire up a partition manager to look at things, unless I open up the Xbox, take out the HDD, etc, and void the warranty. I have an Xbox One S (Xbox One generation — not the 2020 Xbox Series S version).
That video showcases Series S, but my old One S uses the same thing, just older hardware.
Regarding alt Xbox stores: no, only developer mode. I can make my own Unity game and execute the code directly on the console (except I’m a hobby Swift programmer without any game programming or 3D animation experience)
Comments
What Apple owes is a tip of the hat to MS for keeping its corpulent ass focused on x86, killing its chances of success in mobile.
For the record just because a lot of companies are doing the same thing doesn't make it right. Devs may put up with being forced to give platforms money for services they could get elsewhere but it doesn't mean they should.
99% of their subscription business on iOS didn't involve Apple making a cent. That hardly seems unreasonable.
Netflix agreed. That's why they pulled support for IAP.
And they allow 3rd party payments and stores? Heck I’m setting up shop on Xbox selling crappy games then.
Microsoft has opened their store up to 3rd party purchases. They'll allow 3rd party stores and cut their fees. They're making a lot more concessions.
https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-will-not-take-a-cut-from-developers-using-third-party-payment-systems-in-apps/
Apple does not have a monopoly over the game market and sufficient alternatives exist.
Apple has clearly shown that they will force developers to implement in-app purchases for a service being sold through their website if they don't have enough money to fight back, but Netflix and Amazon would put up one hell of a fight.
In the case of WordPress, that backfired because the app never sold anything in the first place.
WordPress claims Apple cut off updates to its completely free app because it wants 30 percent - The Verge
But as I have pointed out, it's hard to find anything unreasonable per Fortnite. Epic made gigantic sums of money on video game consoles and Windows PCs with Fortnite, then later did a port to iOS/Android that was still lucrative for them but much smaller in terms of revenue. The monetization of the game on iOS/Android was identical to consoles/PCs. That just doesn't fit with the claim that Apple is exerting monopoly control and forcing unreasonable restraint of trade.
What Jobs needed was time to get Apple back on track and he did not want to have to the spend the time and resources to fight Microsoft in court over Microsoft stealing QuickTime technology. A case that Apple was sure to win. So he made an offer to Microsoft to settle by having them invest in AAPL. This ended the lawsuit so Jobs can concentrate on Apple Computer, not the lawsuit. Plus by Microsoft showing confidence to invest $150M in Apple, it gave AAPL investors confidence to not sell and other investors to buy AAPL Thus bolstering AAPL share price until Jobs can release the iMac. Jobs could had ask for $150M in cash and Microsoft would had probably settled. Apple had that strong of a case. But Apple didn't need the money.
If Microsoft had held on to those shares, they would be worth close to $1.5B today, even without the splits along the way. Instead Microsoft "only" made about $350M profit with their investment. (If they had gotten the splits, their shares would be worth about $170B today.)
On a side note. Steven Jobs himself boosted his role in saving Apple by claiming Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy when he took over and only had enough cash to last another quarter or two. But he was using a quarter where Apple lost over $600M. Apple was not losing $600M every quarter. That quarter was an anomaly. Apple was only losing about $100M to $200M a quarter at the time. So Apple could have lasted another year or even two, with just cash on hand. $150M wouldn't even cover what Apple was losing in a quarter. So how did Microsoft $150M investment save Apple?
What's next? Are you going to tell us the fable about how Apple wouldn't be here today, if they hadn't "stolen" PARC technology?
Thanks to this, you have videos like these showing you how to enjoy excellent retro emulation without modding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGAjhjp8dnI
Regarding alt Xbox stores: no, only developer mode. I can make my own Unity game and execute the code directly on the console (except I’m a hobby Swift programmer without any game programming or 3D animation experience)