3 ms·
Apple is simply imposing such onerous terms that no OEMs can sell iOS. But because (as a result of this anti-competetive behaviour) their market share in the OS
by brainwad 8y ago
Apple is simply imposing such onerous terms that no OEMs can sell iOS. But because (as a result of this anti-competetive behaviour) their market share in the OS market is low, it doesn't break the law.
- delecti 8y agoNot selling something isn't "such onerous terms". They're allowed to not sell their software for others to use.
- brainwad 8y agoThen why isn't Google allowed to not sell their software to others to use? Google doesn't want to let Amazon have the Play Store without following conditions, they should have that right.
- delecti 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)
- brainwad 8y agoI am arguing there is no real difference between tying, and not selling to 3rd parties at all and only using your product in a vertically integrated business. Vertical integration amounts to tying with extremely onerous requirements that only the selling company (i.e. Apple) can meet.
- delecti 8y agoI think it would be difficult to implement that argument without a weird slippery slope of forcing SAAS companies to sell their cloud infrastructure.