kharvel

maestro64 said:

Overall this is a complicated matter and definitely beyond what current laws had in mind when written.

First, if Apple is considers themselves a distributor that also means they are free to set the price of a product as they see fit. In a typical distributor model, a company who makes a product sells a product to a distributor, at that point they have no say so over the price a distributor sell the product to anyone else. This is also mostly true even in direct to consumer type of transactions. If you agree to have a store like Walmart carry and sell your product, you do not always have any say over the price Walmart will sell your product to the public.

This also the reason Apple never really like the big box retail model, it did not allow them to control the selling price. Once Apple establish their market dominance they were able to set the selling price in all channels of sale. Retailer can not discount Apple products without getting Apple's approval.

The other challenge with retail and distribution models is the fact that everyone who touches the product gets to make a profit off the product. This is the piece most consumers do not want to realize. In this case the people suing Apple is claiming since Apple controls the distribution they get to set the price, well that true anywhere in the world someone is always setting and controlling the price and someone is always making a profits. Apple 30% they make is not too unusual in the retail space. Retails and distributors target between a 25% to 35% markup on product they sell. Apple is not making any more than any other retailer.

There is no rule that says that there has to be more than one App store for software that runs on apples product. Plus most apps can not be bough in android. The only issue if you have the App for ios you can not simply transfer it to an android phone and via verse and the Developer will make you buy it again. Add in the fact that you do not really own an application, its on loan to you until they decide they no longer want to license and support your app on your product.

These folks are essentially arguing that there should be others stores like an Amazon who has proven they will give away products at loose to make a sale as competitor to Apple, and because this does not exist, apple is keeping pricing artificial high

chuckjaymoore said:

Take the Alex Jones Info Wars app for instance. Apple doesn't want Info Wars in the app store for hate speech. This is an example of why Apple should allow developers to host their apps from their website. If I want to download Info Wars, I should be allowed to download it from infowars.com if App doesn't like the app. This is what I call a violation of the Antitrust Act.

rob53 said:

I never said it was a mesh network, I simply said it acts similarly in that the same SSID can be used over a greater range. I set up my first extended network years ago but noticed the halving of speed. Therefore, later on I used the hardwired connection and tests show I had my full strength signal throughout my house. Wireless connections are always subject to reception issues, especially when the signal has to go through metal, water, and brick or when competing for WiFi channels. 5GHz also has shorter range than 2.4GHz, which suffers from a lower maximum speed. Hardwiring the devices together will always give a stronger signal, just like hardwiring computers using ethernet cables. 

For the majority of home users, it doesn't really matter which way you go as long as you can set things up easily and have it consistently work.