4 ms·

I've been thinking about this case a lot as it compares to the investment industry and it's troubling. Apple is the "market maker" here, not unlike the NYSE or

I've been thinking about this case a lot as it compares to the investment industry and it's troubling. Apple is the "market maker" here, not unlike the NYSE or NASDAQ and they certainly add value to the consumer and the developer by facilitating sales for devs and offering some level of protection for the customer. Apple of course deserves to be compensated for that value-add. On the other hand, Apple has built this "walled garden", which is another way of saying monopoly, and that comes at a cost to both the consumer (higher prices) and innovation (devs spend time/effort/energy complying with Apple's app store policies). I'm not terribly familiar with the case law but I do know that NYSE has had at least a handful of similar antitrust cases in the past. I'm not sure if the cases were getting at transaction costs but the crux of every antitrust suit is generally that XYZ action by a monopoly leads to unjustifiably higher prices. It occurred to me that as a result of this case Apple might change their pricing structure to align with the pricing strategy stock exchanges typically use. That is, a nominal transaction fee that covers only the cost of the transaction but then charges the companies an annual "listing fee." That would be awful for innovation, small developers, and by extensions, consumers who would then having fewer apps to choose from. I suppose thats just a long way of me saying that I fear the Plaintiffs may actually hurt consumers more in the long run.

jakelazaroff 8y ago
> It occurred to me that as a result of this case Apple might change their pricing structure to align with the pricing strategy stock exchanges typically use. That is, a nominal transaction fee that covers only the cost of the transaction but then charges the companies an annual "listing fee." FWIW, Apple already charges an annual fee of $99 to enroll in their Developer Program, which is required to list apps on the App Store: https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/ https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/
- kevin_b_er 8y ago
  Plus the mandatory cost of an Apple computer.
scarface74 8y ago
devs spend time/effort/energy complying with Apple's app store policies). And that’s a good thing. Nintendo figured out in the 80s that crap devalues your platform and they had to approve what games were allowed to run on it. They saw what happened to Atari. I’ll download basically anything on my iPhone because I know an app can’t do much damage - unlike a Windows computer or a Mac.
- kyleandrew 8y ago
  I absolutely agree from a consumer perspective. From the developer side though I'm certain that there are some app store policies dev's have to comply with that benefit neither consumer nor developer and are solely in Apple's interest. I guess it's just interesting to me because Apple is both the market and the market regulator here. Continuing with my stock exchange analogy Apple plays the role of NYSE and the SEC. The nature of wearing both hats means there are going to be conflicts of interest and Apple has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders, not to their consumers. I see both sides but struggle to see a solution that doesn't leave app store customers worse off.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- lostgame 8y ago
  Macs are much less so these days. The numerous security constraints that have evolved over time make running insecure software, or even a lot of third party software, a bit of a pain in the arse.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    And that’s a good thing. The average user is more secure and the advanced user can jump through a few hoops.
- tokyodude 8y ago
  The App store is completely full of crap. It's easily 99% crap. 20000 new game apps come out a month. 19900 of them are crap. 90 are mildly interesting, 10 are maybe ok at most. Apple is in no way copying Nintendo here. There are 2 million apps. There were less than 1000 apps for Atari. Not being able to do damage as nothing to do with the store. It has to do with whether or not iOS's sandbox is secure.

jakelazaroff 8y ago

> It occurred to me that as a result of this case Apple might change their pricing structure to align with the pricing strategy stock exchanges typically use. That is, a nominal transaction fee that covers only the cost of the transaction but then charges the companies an annual "listing fee." FWIW, Apple already charges an annual fee of $99 to enroll in their Developer Program, which is required to list apps on the App Store: https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/ https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/

kevin_b_er 8y ago
Plus the mandatory cost of an Apple computer.

scarface74 8y ago

devs spend time/effort/energy complying with Apple's app store policies). And that’s a good thing. Nintendo figured out in the 80s that crap devalues your platform and they had to approve what games were allowed to run on it. They saw what happened to Atari. I’ll download basically anything on my iPhone because I know an app can’t do much damage - unlike a Windows computer or a Mac.

kyleandrew 8y ago
I absolutely agree from a consumer perspective. From the developer side though I'm certain that there are some app store policies dev's have to comply with that benefit neither consumer nor developer and are solely in Apple's interest. I guess it's just interesting to me because Apple is both the market and the market regulator here. Continuing with my stock exchange analogy Apple plays the role of NYSE and the SEC. The nature of wearing both hats means there are going to be conflicts of interest and Apple has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders, not to their consumers. I see both sides but struggle to see a solution that doesn't leave app store customers worse off.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
lostgame 8y ago
Macs are much less so these days. The numerous security constraints that have evolved over time make running insecure software, or even a lot of third party software, a bit of a pain in the arse.
- scarface74 8y ago
  And that’s a good thing. The average user is more secure and the advanced user can jump through a few hoops.
tokyodude 8y ago
The App store is completely full of crap. It's easily 99% crap. 20000 new game apps come out a month. 19900 of them are crap. 90 are mildly interesting, 10 are maybe ok at most. Apple is in no way copying Nintendo here. There are 2 million apps. There were less than 1000 apps for Atari. Not being able to do damage as nothing to do with the store. It has to do with whether or not iOS's sandbox is secure.