quote: “Competitors aren't happy with Apple's iPhone dominance.”
correct quote should be: ”Competitors aren't happy with Apple's CUSTOMERS THAT BUYING THIER PRODUCTS GIVES THE COMPANY iPhone dominance… OVER THEIR OWN PRODUCTS!”
We the customers choose iPhones over other cellphones… We choose what Apple made. We made Apple what it is… (at lest in the bank!)
Steve Jobs used to say: “We want to develop the best products to our customers. If we succeed they buy the devices… and we can come back tomorrow to keep working!”
It's quite disturbing when governments feel they can decide how a company can or can not develop its business model or run its business internally. Especially when their claims are based on a false assumption - that Apple is an entire market (rather than a participant in a larger market). Apple is as much a "monopoly" as BMW, Mercedes or Tesla is. Each of them "owns" their respective businesses, but are only part of larger marketplaces - not the marketplace itself. Just because iOS is successful doesn't mean it's the monopolistic entity for the "application marketplace" (which comprises dollars spent across all devices). If they wish to define iOS as a marketplace, then that logic would need to be applied to every business that owns 100% - of it's own business!
Why in the world would ANY company invest in innovation if they were forced to give those innovations away freely to competitors, or at a cost far below a required return on investment and to detriment of profitability?
App Store, Wallet, Messages and other technologies are core parts of their ecosystem strategy and are part of their intellectual assets which they solely bore the cost of development (and continue to solely bear ongoing costs to develop, maintain, and support). So now, simply force them to give access to others? For what?
If end users don't like Apple's limitations or exclusions, or don't like the synthesized ecosystem, or their overall business model and cost to live in it, they will decide to go elsewhere. But in fact, users have decided - the success of Apple proves that they love and appreciate the semi-wall garden model, and the handful of complainers are the some app developers who, one way or another, want a free or low cost ride on the coattails of Apple.
This is a suit brought by the government, ostensibly for the people, that the people in fact never clamored for nor wants, and it will harm they very things that attracted them to Apple if it were successful. Astounding...
Popcorn ready! It is about time the US stepped up and filed this case. Concerned about safety? Only download from the official Apple Store. Your iPhone should be like your Mac - download what you want from where you want and accept that there are risks to doing so if you go outside the Mac App Store.
Just to cite one issue in the suit: Apple is accused of denigrating SMS messages with a déclassé, lower-contrast, green color to make them harder to read and to make people think of non-iPhone devices as inferior. (a) If Apple was doing that, would it even be a crime; (b) that coloration is only for outgoing messages that you typed yourself, so you already know what they say; and (c) Apple's been using that exact, outgoing, color scheme for SMS since the very first iPhone in 2007 when Apple's messages didn't even do any other kind of messaging.
I sincerely hope Apple's lawyers plan to patiently go through things like this with the jury. The DOJ lawyers that filed this case either are very poorly informed, or they're intentionally dishonest and hope they can score with a poorly informed jury, just for the sake of scoring at all against a big, rich company, for no actually good reason.
Not voting for either idiot for president this year!!!
Amazon is more of a Monopoly threat, then Apple or Google. How many mom and Pop shops have been closed because of Walmart and Amazon and other big box stores. buying products from Apple or Google or 7-Eleven is a consumers choice.
Amazon is already being sued by the FTC on antitrust grounds. I don't think anyone here complained about it, and if so I've missed it. Google is also being sued on antitrust grounds, and almost no one here voiced an opinion calling it unfair. Did everyone think the regulators would ignore the biggest and most assertive digital market mover of them all when other big techs were already being put under the microscope?
Really, this shouldn't come as any surprise. Whether the US succeeds on any of the antitrust claims remains to be seen, but the filing that involves far more than the App Store was expected sooner rather than later if anyone was paying attention.
Apple threw in its lot with the ruling class in 2017. It abandoned its traditional liberal values that Jobs talked about in favor of state censorship. Now that same ruling class is trying to exact an even greater pound of flesh from Apple. Evil always eats its own.
Having said all that, they opened themselves up to this by their heavy handed approach to the iPhone in favor of their own control and profits at the expense of their customers. The locked down iPhone is awful for consumers. The commenters on this site love for Apple blinds them to their own self-interest. It is in your interest not to be beholden to Apple for what apps are allowed on your phone. Period. It is a small form of tyranny. It is a shame it will take state power to force them to do the right thing, but there it is.
You understand there are hundreds (thousands) of smartphone options that are not Apple, right? You have an odd definition of tyranny if the means to escape from tyranny are as easy as sitting in your stained briefs on the couch, going online and ordering one of those hundreds (thousands) of non-Apple smartphones. Nobody is beholden to Apple.
So, after so many years of being called a walled garden (and derided by the then more popular Android crap users), many here voluntarily joined that garden experience. Then, jealous others sue to get access to the garden. Now, it's a monopoly. Just wonderful!
Oh my god, is it possible to overdose on schadenfreude! LOL!
Total joke of a lawsuit, coming from a totally corrupt department. The points are so weak, as others have pointed out — it’s as if they worked off notes from 2019 and didn’t bother to see if anything changed. And regarding the 30% — besides being an industry standard rate, they have been consistent with it since 2008 and have only reduced it under certain circumstances — regardless, many of the apps do not pay the fee.
1. We are an Apple household. 2. We are happy with the walled garden as I think it provides greater protection. 3. I am only paying for 2 apps on my iPhone so the cost is negligible.
No surprise Apple you can't be a vertical computer company (hardware/software you must HP or Dell and nothing else......And your ecosystem must be free to all who want to use it at their discretion.
Not voting for either idiot for president this year!!!
Amazon is more of a Monopoly threat, then Apple or Google. How many mom and Pop shops have been closed because of Walmart and Amazon and other big box stores. buying products from Apple or Google or 7-Eleven is a consumers choice.
Amazon is already being sued by the FTC on antitrust grounds. I don't think anyone here complained about it, and if so I've missed it. Google is also being sued on antitrust grounds, and almost no one here voiced an opinion calling it unfair. Did everyone think the regulators would ignore the biggest and most assertive digital market mover of them all when other big techs were already being put under the microscope?
Really, this shouldn't come as any surprise. Whether the US succeeds on any of the antitrust claims remains to be seen, but the filing that involves far more than the App Store was expected sooner rather than later if anyone was paying attention.
I’m aware of the existing antitrust cases against Amazon and Google. Again, I feel like Google is a choice. You don’t have to use their products. There’s always being another search options because these are ecosystems however, Amazon has uses dominance to actually hurt competitors and I feel like that case should proceed. Amazon has deliberately lower prices On products that they sell to undercut the competition.
Apple does compete when it comes to AirTags and Apple Music and videos streaming services however, again that’s a choice. in addition products like Tile can use existing API’s to integrate the location services into Apple ecosystem. To me Apple Music probably has the most unfair advantage, however Spotify is the most dominant music streaming service in the United States and the European Union.
Microsoft is not in the mobile field because of bad management decisions. I actually liked windows mobile, but unfortunately, he’s not here anymore.
So, after so many years of being called a walled garden (and derided by the then more popular Android crap users), many here voluntarily joined that garden experience. Then, jealous others sue to get access to the garden. Now, it's a monopoly. Just wonderful!
Oh my god, is it possible to overdose on schadenfreude! LOL!
Apple has risen and fallen, learned from its past failures, resurrected into the most successful company in the world snd consistently applied smart, proven, profitable principles to remain successful year after year, thriving during personal computing downturns, pandemics, inflation, etc due to its diligence and refusal to chase fads in order to be “first.”
Apple has held true to one core principle since its resurrection: “build the best products and services on earth.” They haven’t chases being the biggest, just the best. And it has worked out in both ways.
Apple builds the best products, services, platforms, etc. not only providing the best experiences for users, but also developers, content providers, etc. and guess what? They charge accordingly. Beyond that, these charges are in line with the rest of the industry.
The DOJ is just looking to control. Americans have it too good right now. Gotta mess it up a bit.
And anyone who thinks the current American government is doing this in a vacuum (EU ETC.) is kidding themselves.
Huge mistake from the current admin that will have destructive consequences for every business for a long time to come if not rectified by smarter, fairer people.
Ridiculous. This is the kind of thing that needs to go all the way to the supreme court. Apple may need to sue the DOJ. CRAZY TIMES.
They want access to everyone’s phones. This is about the fact that this government is having such a difficult time controlling their narrative and they want more access to be able to control it. Yes, I’m talking about the genocide in Gaza. It’s making clear to everyone the myth that the US as global peacekeeper is just that when the reality is that we are still colonizing the world and we’re the global bullies.
“ The Department of Justice says that Apple has violated section two of the Sherman antitrust act, in five ways.
Restrictions on the App Store applied to "super apps," and in doing so, limiting the growth of apps for third parties -lie.
Cloud streaming services are limited by Apple, specifically game-streaming services - actually true.
Excluding cross-platform messaging apps, forcing people to continue to buy iPhones to maintain messaging - total lie. Plenty of cross-platform messaging apps.
Diminishing the functionality of non-Apple smartwatches, by limiting access to software and hardware features -lie. Apple doesn’t diminish anything. They aren’t in the business of opening their secret code to competitors. It’s up to the smartwatch maker to create their own tech. Not rely on Apple’s. Apples business model is not windows or android, where it’s a license model with third parties.
Limiting digital wallets, and preventing use of the near-field communications to third-parties‘ - lie. Google pay, cash, Venmo, etc. all work great without NFC. The tech is a risky maneuver and has been exploited and abused. If Apple wants to lock it down to prevent abuse, then good. Just because a platform exists doesn’t mean you get access to everything. It’s not like there aren’t other platforms to go to if you don’t like it.
There is no monopoly. Apple has zero monopoly. If there were no competition from Google, Microsoft, Spotify, pandora, Samsung, Disney plus, Netflix, Amazon, etc. then ok. But it’s not the case. And no, saying Apple “has a monopoly on Apple” doesn’t fit the definition. Everyone has a monopoly on themselves in that case.
I don’t see Ford having to give away its tech to GM, etc. I don’t see Amazon making ANY CONCESSIONS WHATSOEVER. It seems the advocates for privacy and security are the ones getting hit. Or… the only advocate in tech.
doj has hated the fact that they don’t have crate Blanche access to Apple customers’ data 24/7. So they’re pulling an EU in order to try to get there. All this is. Was wondering where the eu got the idea it would be ok to do what they’ve done.
Comments
quote: “Competitors aren't happy with Apple's iPhone dominance.”
correct quote should be:
”Competitors aren't happy with Apple's CUSTOMERS THAT BUYING THIER PRODUCTS GIVES THE COMPANY iPhone dominance… OVER THEIR OWN PRODUCTS!”
We the customers choose iPhones over other cellphones… We choose what Apple made. We made Apple what it is… (at lest in the bank!)
Steve Jobs used to say: “We want to develop the best products to our customers. If we succeed they buy the devices… and we can come back tomorrow to keep working!”
Why in the world would ANY company invest in innovation if they were forced to give those innovations away freely to competitors, or at a cost far below a required return on investment and to detriment of profitability?
App Store, Wallet, Messages and other technologies are core parts of their ecosystem strategy and are part of their intellectual assets which they solely bore the cost of development (and continue to solely bear ongoing costs to develop, maintain, and support). So now, simply force them to give access to others? For what?
If end users don't like Apple's limitations or exclusions, or don't like the synthesized ecosystem, or their overall business model and cost to live in it, they will decide to go elsewhere. But in fact, users have decided - the success of Apple proves that they love and appreciate the semi-wall garden model, and the handful of complainers are the some app developers who, one way or another, want a free or low cost ride on the coattails of Apple.
This is a suit brought by the government, ostensibly for the people, that the people in fact never clamored for nor wants, and it will harm they very things that attracted them to Apple if it were successful. Astounding...
I sincerely hope Apple's lawyers plan to patiently go through things like this with the jury. The DOJ lawyers that filed this case either are very poorly informed, or they're intentionally dishonest and hope they can score with a poorly informed jury, just for the sake of scoring at all against a big, rich company, for no actually good reason.
Really, this shouldn't come as any surprise. Whether the US succeeds on any of the antitrust claims remains to be seen, but the filing that involves far more than the App Store was expected sooner rather than later if anyone was paying attention.
Backhanded attempt by the Justice Department to gain access to private APIs to crack iPhones.
2. We are happy with the walled garden as I think it provides greater protection.
3. I am only paying for 2 apps on my iPhone so the cost is negligible.
Microsoft is not in the mobile field because of bad management decisions. I actually liked windows mobile, but unfortunately, he’s not here anymore.
Apple has held true to one core principle since its resurrection: “build the best products and services on earth.” They haven’t chases being the biggest, just the best. And it has worked out in both ways.