tehabe
About
- Username
- tehabe
- Joined
- Visits
- 22
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 177
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 70
Reactions
-
Apple's App Store policies again under fire as Kaspersky Lab files Russian antitrust compl...
I think people are still confused why Apple is called a monopolist. Apple is not a monopolist from the point of view of the consumer. There are plenty of (awful) choices. But when you are developer and want to develop an application for the iOS platform you have no choice but go through the iOS App Store, this might be even good for consumers but it is a monopoly for developers. The same is also true for Android.
This is different on macOS, you have the Mac App Store but you also can distribute software for macOS outside of the Mac App Store, so the developer has a choice how to distribute their new software.
-
Spotify says Apple a 'monopolist' in escalating war of words
On a German news site Spotify also mentions that Apple once used push notification to advertise their music service. Something no 3rd party developer is allowed to do. The statement by Apple is ridiculous, they don't even mention that they run a competitor to Spotify. I mean there are a lot of weird rules on the iOS App Store, for example, that the Chrome browser has an age restriction to 17, while every iPhone/iOS comes with a browser. Or that those 3rd party browsers can't use their own rendering engine but have to use an API from iOS.
-
Spotify says Apple a 'monopolist' in escalating war of words
Sorry, you either didn't understand my argument or you don't understand how monopolies work. The McDonald's argument is completely BS. The analogy is more like this. HDS want to be in this huge mall, but the mall owner also has a hot dog business and put it in the mall. But while HDS has to include rent and other costs in the price for their hot dogs, the Mal hot dogs store does not. The result is, that the Mal hot dogs are cheaper. And this is unfair business practices. The fix could be, that the Mall hot dog store has to also calculate the rent and costs even though they not paying them.radarthekat said:
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.”tehabe said:
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.urahara said:
When it comes to sell Big Mac in the McDonalds, it is a monopolist. By your logic.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.
By 'correct' logic - McDonalds is the owner. Apple is the owner of their platform. It has absolutely nothing to do with 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.
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!
Your last paragraph is also an indicator that the App Store is a monopoly, Apple runs the only App Store for iOS and if they can reject any application for any reason, you are as developer essentially dependent on Apple. -
Spotify says Apple a 'monopolist' in escalating war of words
The example is wrong. Because the grocery store is not the only one in the area. The App Store is the only app store on iOS. Also different on the Mac, the Mac App Store is not the only way to sell software to Mac users, therefore the Mac App Store is not a monopoly. It is not hard to understand.urahara said:
Some one has given already the example with the grocery store. If you want to sell your good sat grocery store you pay the slot fees. And there is no other way for your to sell in this store. The store is the monopolist? No. They are the owners.tehabe said:
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.urahara said:
When it comes to sell Big Mac in the McDonalds, it is a monopolist. By your logic.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.
By 'correct' logic - McDonalds is the owner. Apple is the owner of their platform. It has absolutely nothing to do with 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.
You are confusing the terms.
Btw, who the owner of the store is, is unimportant. Completely beside the point.
