avon b7

ArianneFeldry said:

crowley said:

radarthekat said:

tehabe said:

urahara said:

tehabe said:

When it comes to distribution of applications for iOS Apple is a monopolist. You can't buy applications anywhere else. On the other hand, Spotify is not a monopolist, there are many music streaming services on the market, including Apple Music who are competing with Spotify. And currently i it is doubtful if you could charge more than $10 per month for music streaming.

When it comes to sell Big Mac in the McDonalds, it is a monopolist. By your logic.
By 'correct' logic - McDonalds is the owner. Apple is the owner of their platform. It has absolutely nothing to do with monopoly. 

You didn't get my point. There is no other way for Spotify to get there application on an iOS device than Apple's App Store. That is the monopoly part. This is also true for the Play Store on Android. Even though you could side load applications on Android, it is off by default and not recommended, so the Play Store is the only store for applications on Android and therefor a monopoly.

McDonald's is not a monopoly because there are other fast food chains and restaurants on the market. it would be different for example, if McDonald's had an exclusive contract with a mall and would be the only store on the food court.

Fraid not, as kids would say.  Your argument about McDonald’s plays out like this...  Hot dog shack (a fictional small restaurant) sees that MacDonalds has a huge number of customers attracted to their restaurants, and so goes to McD’s management and says, “how can we sell our dogs to your huge customer base, inside your stores?”  And McD’s says, “just pay us 30% and you’re in.”

So for a while Hot Dog Shack does that and everyone is happy.  But then one day MacDonald’s decides to start selling hot dogs too.  Now HDS is pissed, and they want the government to step in and demand equal access.  After all, MacDonald’s doesn’t have a 30% surcharge to make up when selling their own dogs.  

But here’s the rub.  For all the food sold inside the MacDonald’s restaurants, MacDonald’s is doing the marketing spend to pull in those customers.  HDS might do its own marketing, to promote its own locations, but it doesn’t have to do any marketing to tell customers to come to a MacDonald’s, because plenty are already there, drawn in by MacDonald’s marketing efforts, which MacDonald’s pays for 100%. 

So by demanding equal access, HDS is basically asking to have their kiosks selling their products in MacDonald’s restaurants without paying the 30% tariff that supports MacDonald’s rents, insurance, marketing, upkeep, etc. 

Do you know what MacDonald’s is gonna do?  Kick HDS out.  Bye bye.  I do wonder whether Apple has in its contract the ability to eject any app, for any reason or purpose it sees fit, from its platform.  Bye bye, we no longer wish to do business with you! 

Ugh, I hate these analogies that spin out of control.  You are missing one notable thing however, hardware.  The apps sold in the App Store can only run on Apple hardware, therefore a symbiotic relationship has developed, apps drive sales of hardware, and hardware drive sales of apps.  And since Apple make the majority of their money from hardware, and the app store is effectively the only way to get apps on that hardware, the situation with the app store is far more complicated than fast food. 

Even if Spotify aren't able to make anything of this legally, I think Apple are treating their developer community pretty badly here.  Time to shape up.

Developers are being treated badly? Developers are being treated like gods today, especially when compared to how they're treated when they had to sell their products in a box at stores. Even then, if you are a developer that makes an application for free, you're treated like royalty. You pay the developer fee to Apple, then you get access to hundreds of milions of people, you don't have to pay bandwidth costs or hosting to push the application out to customers, you don't have to worry about security concerns with hosting the application, you don't have to set up some review system or integrate one into your site. Then if you want to add an in app purchases to allow customers to support you, you don't have to set up a payment processor, you don't have to get your customers to input any payment information, you don't have to worry about international pricing or taxes, they just click on a button and pay.

M68000 said:

Although cameras are important - is there starting to be too much being done with cameras on phones? At the rate we are going it will get like men’s razors with 5 blades or more where the idea is “it has more so therefore it has to be better”.   I prefer a real dslr camera for real photography.   

iOS_Guy80 said:

gatorguy said:

iOS_Guy80 said:

I do not understand. Is Apple being accused of doing something illegal or do people simply have a issue with the business model? 

Pretty much yes, "something illegal". Spotify (not the only one but the first one to go formal) is accusing Apple of illegally restraining competition via their business model combined with platform control. 
https://timetoplayfair.com/facts/

If you build a product and services at a published price with rules/guidelines how is that illegal? If you want to play you have to pay.