gc_uk

22july2013 said:

gc_uk said:

Anilu_777 said:

Google, Microsoft and all the others ALSO charge 30% fees. How is it highway robbery for Apple and not the rest?!

Those other companies don't force a developer to only use their App Stores.  If someone started a store that didn't charge those fees developers could choose to list their software on that store instead.  Your argument points more to a cartel than anything else.

According to Epic, Google is forcing users to use only the Google Play store by "making it too difficult" to get software from other stores. So have you been ranting against Epic, to be consistent? And that's not even the clearest case of other companies forcing developers to use a single store.

I thought the discussion was about Apple. Any other goalposts you want to move?

qwerty52 said:

2. You can buy accessories for your Apple devices everywhere, not only in the AppStore 

Please give one example of software you can buy for an Apple mobile device outside the Apple App Store.

Anilu_777 said:

Google, Microsoft and all the others ALSO charge 30% fees. How is it highway robbery for Apple and not the rest?!

Those other companies don't force a developer to only use their App Stores.  If someone started a store that didn't charge those fees developers could choose to list their software on that store instead.  Your argument points more to a cartel than anything else.

ericesque said:

Forcing Apple to allow competing stores on iOS is not as terrible as many are making it out to be. 

I prefer the peace of mind I get from downloading apps from the App Store. If other stores are made available I will simply not download apps from them. If a developer wants to reach me as a user they will need to submit their app to the App Store. 

Exactly, and if other stores existed then other people would have the choice to download from those stores, and you can choose to download from the Apple App Store.

Rayz2016 said:

gc_uk said:

Is this the same as Apple fighting against not including power adaptors when it’s not necessary?

It would be obvious that Apple’s own code calls a defined API. Why is it such a big deal to open up the API to other vendors?

Not sure what power adapters has to do with anything. This is a security issue, power adapters are a green issue.

If you followed the story I was referencing, Apple accused the EU of stifling innovation because of the mandate for all manufacturers to use the same power standards and not include chargers where they weren't required.  Then Apple quietly started opting to leave out chargers.  Seems they are just complaining at everything the EU opens an investigation into.

Rayz2016 said:

What the EU, in their finite wisdom, is looking at is allowing direct access to the NFC hardware, so the banks can implement their own banking solutions and their own NFC security protocols. 

Are you SURE that's what the EU are asking for?  At the moment they aren't asking for anything.  it's merely an investigation into whether there's anti-competitive behaviour.  If they mandate access then that also doesn't mean access to the hardware, just that all providers should have the same access to the API.

Rayz2016 said:

In my opinion, you'd be mad to use any banking system that went direct to the NFC without Apple's security mechanism.

Great, you shouldn't use those banking systems then.  Why should you get a say over how everyone else does?