- avon b7
- Last Active
Cook didn't deal with the App Store monopoly issue. He skirted it.
The question is not that Apple offers this or that and users can get content that Apple doesn't offer via a web browser.
The question is that there is no other App Store and Apple is therefore the only one taking a cut, deciding what the cut is and deciding what is allowed and what isn't. On top of that, it is competing in the store with its own apps. The proportion of those apps is irrelevant.
Maybe he had a beer too many but if these are his arguments, they don't hold much water.
I'm somewhat divided on this. Streaming is a young industry that is now becoming commercially widespread in certain markets but is already oversaturated. There is far too much content out there already, making the subscription itself, and not the specific content, the final goal. The avalanche of content won't stop coming any time soon and quantity isn't the same as quality. I think subscribers could grow tired of subscribing and fall back on what they already know which could be services with large back catalogues of tried and trusted content.
Jumping into a saturated market is going to be hard and free subscriptions or low cost initial subscriptions don't last forever. Pumping money into the business makes sense to gain traction but if things don't stabilise over time and the investments are the same (or increase) you have to ponder how far you are willing to go.
The good news is that 6 billion is loose change for Apple and all content created will retain some value years down the line and there is a long term return to be had if you free it up to other providers at some point.
In an oversaturated market with huge subscriber fragmentation, blockbuster revenue earners like Friends or Big Bang Theory etc would have a hard time today gaining such a huge following.
Convergence would appear to be the only way to stabilise things and convergence comes at a price. If Apple is willing to put more big money on the table it could end up with a huge chunk of the pie.
I think the risk is worth it, as things stand today but it needs time to get a real foothold.
AppleExposed said:CheeseFreeze said:There is still anti competition going on by Apple.They should be sued for having taken years to have third parties integrate Siri into music apps - a category they blocked.
Secondly they should be sued for the fact you still need to say “on Spotify”, because leaving it out - the “default” - is still Apple Music.iOS should include an option to set the defaults for music, navigation and other categories, so that Siri can take that setting as the ‘default’.
Apple could do whatever the F they want with their products and inventions. Spotify should be grateful Apple even allowed them into the Siri ecosystem.
If you don't like it, code a Siri knockoff for Spotify and hope it's successful.
It definitely can't do 'whatever it wants' especially if that could be construed as anti competitive behaviour.
If definitely shouldn't be necessary to stipulate Spotify on every request.
rob53 said:I guess the US could do the same thing to France and other EU companies, force them to include 30% of US created whatever for them to be able to sell in the US. Now I just have to think about what French items I actually purchase. Lets also force France to set aside 16% of the sale of their wine (what else?) in the US for developing American wineries. Let's just be fair.
I'm normally against quotas as they only guarantee quantity and not quality but I do understand they are a necessary evil in some cases and this is one area.
Using English as a first language gives us many advantages that we take for granted. In the past, you would hear people in foreign countries ask the natives 'do you speak English'? Now, more often than not, people in Europe just speak English and almost 'expect' the other person to be able to speak it. That's great on some levels as communication barriers are being reduced but on another level it can be seen as a cultural threat, as language often isn't just a simple vehicle for communication, it often comes attached to a certain way of living.
It can also create certain conflicts. The major studios will often dub films into Spanish for example (for countrywide release in Spain) but not into the the Spanish regional languages as they say the cost/benefit ratio isn't favourable to them when everybody understands Spanish. That is a perfectly logical viewpoint but the Catalan government for example will take issue with that stance as they think Catalans should be able to see the film dubbed into Catalan on the same terms as the Spanish version (equal screenings, same prices etc) and things quickly snowball out of control and you realise that the subject has to be tackled in some way.
To give you a possible U.S angle on the situation, imagine a few decades from now, we suddenly realise that Spanish starts to nudge English aside as a preferred language. The government would definitely take measures to protect the main native language of the country.
With the release of the iPhone X I suggested this same solution but with existing technology. It meant taking the notch elements out of the screen and placing them in a tiny hump (like the Pismo curves) at the top of the phone. If the elements can be miniaturised to eliminate the hump, it's another way to succeed in getting them out of the screen.
I've always loved the Pismo curves, though (but hated the clamshell shape).