thrang

Lost in all this is that in-app renewals second-year onward are charged only 15% (as of 2016), correct? I don't seem to see this mentioned by Spotify or others.

Should Nordstroms be prevented from selling their own clothing lines because they also sell Ralph Lauren and Calvin Klein? Should a local deli not be permitted to sell food they make because they also sell packaged goods from Pepsi and Pepperidge Farms? You could have an near-endless list of examples...

Further, if she is talking specifically about app competition, Apple gives many of their apps away for free anyway.

In a an alternative reality, what if Apple never supported third party apps, and only developed their own? Would she be clamoring that this was unfair and Apple should open avenues for third parties to sell?

Along with her lack of understanding regarding the benefits of a walled garden approach (that users and developers can choose to support of not), this is a clear example of why this type of philosophy should not be supported regardless of candidate.

While I respect that true monopolistic endeavors should be monitored closely for abuse in the marketplace, Warren's position here reveals a complete mis-read of the larger competitive landscape and wants to limit success (if Apple wasn't as successful with the same exact model, she would care less).

To even think of meddling with any company's non-monopolistic effort to be successful, especially with the enthusiastic support of its free-will user base, is breathtakingly mystifying. She knows nothing of the business model, operational, support, and marketing costs, short and long term considerations, risk factors etc. of any of these businesses. The fact is users and developers may choose to leave Apple, or conversely, Android ecospheres to jump to the other if they become "fed-up."

This is pure pandering.

I can't even tell what the risk is from a daily use perspective...

wood1208 said:

Stop this baseless talk. I would not even consider fold-able iPhone for next few years if the price is what it is. Has to come down under $1500.

I doubt Apple would even consider a foldable iPhone until a number of technical hurdles overcome. The current foldables just launched stumble directly into those hurdles. For Apple, it needs to fold flat. It needs to be relatively thin. And there cannot be a whiff of a crease.

Five years is a neat number...perhaps this was the plan all along...

I think the idea of creating these hybrid retail/public/destination spaces was a good one, but many locations don't have the space or panache to deserve one. I do tend to agree that the merging of sales, support, and training delivery on the floor real estate got messy when things got busy. The successful store are paradoxically a victim of their own success. They tend to be so busy its hard not to feel herded around, but a return to areas/sections in the stores, even if subtle, would help people naturally organize and regulate.