9 ms·

Apple's previously demonstrated their vindictiveness in the official iOS developer guidelines 5 years ago - 'If you run to the press and trash us, it never hel

Apple's previously demonstrated their vindictiveness in the official iOS developer guidelines 5 years ago - 'If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps.' https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer...

ouid 7y ago
these guidelines are pretty good evidence in and of themselves why Apple should not be in charge of this marketplace.
- bogwog 7y ago
  These giant walled gardens should seriously be regulated. One company should not have complete control over an entire industry like this.
  - pg_is_a_butt 7y ago
    You're right, no one should be allowed to innovate or create new markets. All that is to be created has been. When the government isn't busy investigating each other, maybe they'll find 10 minutes on a tuesday to think about progress.
  - pcroh 7y ago
    Apple doesn't even have 50% of market share in any country, how are they in "complete control" of anything?
    - ouid 7y ago
      They are in complete control of the programs that you can install on your iphone, and take 30% of all transactions that occur through that marketplace. Are you a lawyer for apple?
      - saganus 7y ago
        I think the point is that there are other app stores in other platforms, so monopoly rules don't apply. Their app store is their monopoly, sure, but if you don't want to use Apple products you are not barred from using other cellphones and app stores. This is different than, e.g. saying that there is a monopoly with the electricity provider. If you don't want to use company A for that, you have absolutely no access to electricity at all. The question is instead, I think, if after some size, companies wield so much power that they should be regulated as if they were monopolies, just because of the sheer amount of people that depends on their services. But that's a whole other can of worms and a different discussion than "Apple is a monopoly" I.e. the term "monopoly" has a very specific legal definition which is not met by whatever behavior Apple is having. Does that make it ok? not necessarily and the nuance is debatable. But the fact is that as per the current definition, it's not a monopoly.
        a1369209993 7y ago
        > the electricity provider I think the point is that there are other electricity providers in other areas, so monopoly rules don't apply. Their electric service is their monopoly, sure, but if you don't want to use company A electricity you are not barred from buying a house somewhere else, with a different electric service. This is different than, e.g. saying that there is a monopoly with the app store. If you don't want to use Apple for that, you have absolutely no access to iPhone software at all.
        DaiPlusPlus 7y ago
        Another analogy might be that Comcast don’t have a monopoly on Internet service in an area because you can always use dial-up or tether through your phone.
        saganus 7y ago
        For me at least, I think the effort and expense of buying a house and moving elsewhere is quite a bit higher than using another phone/app store. However I do understand that for a lot of people, moving from Apple to Android (and vice versa) is not as easy or straightforward to do, and thus why perhaps the discussion should be about regulating those companies that hold so much power, as if they were a monopoly. That doesn't make them a monopoly by current definitions though.
    - soylentgraham 7y ago
      Pretty sure they have more than 50% of the paying market. Nobody ever claims they get more revenue on android than IOS
  - jmull 7y ago
    Apple doesn't have control over any industry, does it?
dkonofalski 7y ago
How is that vindictive? It's true. What is the press going to do to help with an approval? That almost always should be a last resort.
- benologist 7y ago
  First of all Apple earned the criticism that led to this rule. In what universe do we not have the right to denounce dumb shit corporations do? They simply have no right to quash free speech. This is exactly what being vindictive is. In the buildup to this rule Apple was wrong, inconsistent and sometimes just ridiculous in their app rejections. Calling broad attention to their problems, like their keyboard issues, is the only way they choose to listen. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=funniest%20apple%20app%20rejectionS https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=funniest%20apple%20app...
  - novok 7y ago
    You have every right to say whatever you want about any organization or person, but they don't have to keep on working with you. Apple is taking it from a relationship standpoint. If someone trash talks you in public and your opinion of them has gone down, you have every right to stop interacting with them. Now saying they have market power and should not being able to do that, well that is the domain of different regulations.
  - klyrs 7y ago
    > They simply have no right to quash free speech. They haven't quashed free speech. They've built a consequence to speech into their developer agreement, as an exercise of their freedom of association. If you're in a bar and you trashtalk the waitstaff to their faces, it's fully within their rights to eject you. You're free to stand on the sidewalk outside of the bar and continue to exercise your rights. Just as OP is free to speak about their experiences with Apple. But Apple, and the bar, have no obligation to maintain a business relationship with anybody.
    - dkonofalski 7y ago

ouid 7y ago

these guidelines are pretty good evidence in and of themselves why Apple should not be in charge of this marketplace.

bogwog 7y ago
These giant walled gardens should seriously be regulated. One company should not have complete control over an entire industry like this.
- pg_is_a_butt 7y ago
  You're right, no one should be allowed to innovate or create new markets. All that is to be created has been. When the government isn't busy investigating each other, maybe they'll find 10 minutes on a tuesday to think about progress.
- pcroh 7y ago
  Apple doesn't even have 50% of market share in any country, how are they in "complete control" of anything?
  - ouid 7y ago
    They are in complete control of the programs that you can install on your iphone, and take 30% of all transactions that occur through that marketplace. Are you a lawyer for apple?
    - saganus 7y ago
      I think the point is that there are other app stores in other platforms, so monopoly rules don't apply. Their app store is their monopoly, sure, but if you don't want to use Apple products you are not barred from using other cellphones and app stores. This is different than, e.g. saying that there is a monopoly with the electricity provider. If you don't want to use company A for that, you have absolutely no access to electricity at all. The question is instead, I think, if after some size, companies wield so much power that they should be regulated as if they were monopolies, just because of the sheer amount of people that depends on their services. But that's a whole other can of worms and a different discussion than "Apple is a monopoly" I.e. the term "monopoly" has a very specific legal definition which is not met by whatever behavior Apple is having. Does that make it ok? not necessarily and the nuance is debatable. But the fact is that as per the current definition, it's not a monopoly.
      - a1369209993 7y ago
        > the electricity provider I think the point is that there are other electricity providers in other areas, so monopoly rules don't apply. Their electric service is their monopoly, sure, but if you don't want to use company A electricity you are not barred from buying a house somewhere else, with a different electric service. This is different than, e.g. saying that there is a monopoly with the app store. If you don't want to use Apple for that, you have absolutely no access to iPhone software at all.
        DaiPlusPlus 7y ago
        Another analogy might be that Comcast don’t have a monopoly on Internet service in an area because you can always use dial-up or tether through your phone.
        saganus 7y ago
        For me at least, I think the effort and expense of buying a house and moving elsewhere is quite a bit higher than using another phone/app store. However I do understand that for a lot of people, moving from Apple to Android (and vice versa) is not as easy or straightforward to do, and thus why perhaps the discussion should be about regulating those companies that hold so much power, as if they were a monopoly. That doesn't make them a monopoly by current definitions though.
  - soylentgraham 7y ago
    Pretty sure they have more than 50% of the paying market. Nobody ever claims they get more revenue on android than IOS
- jmull 7y ago
  Apple doesn't have control over any industry, does it?

dkonofalski 7y ago

How is that vindictive? It's true. What is the press going to do to help with an approval? That almost always should be a last resort.

benologist 7y ago
First of all Apple earned the criticism that led to this rule. In what universe do we not have the right to denounce dumb shit corporations do? They simply have no right to quash free speech. This is exactly what being vindictive is. In the buildup to this rule Apple was wrong, inconsistent and sometimes just ridiculous in their app rejections. Calling broad attention to their problems, like their keyboard issues, is the only way they choose to listen. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=funniest%20apple%20app%20rejectionS https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=funniest%20apple%20app...
- novok 7y ago
  You have every right to say whatever you want about any organization or person, but they don't have to keep on working with you. Apple is taking it from a relationship standpoint. If someone trash talks you in public and your opinion of them has gone down, you have every right to stop interacting with them. Now saying they have market power and should not being able to do that, well that is the domain of different regulations.
- klyrs 7y ago
  > They simply have no right to quash free speech. They haven't quashed free speech. They've built a consequence to speech into their developer agreement, as an exercise of their freedom of association. If you're in a bar and you trashtalk the waitstaff to their faces, it's fully within their rights to eject you. You're free to stand on the sidewalk outside of the bar and continue to exercise your rights. Just as OP is free to speak about their experiences with Apple. But Apple, and the bar, have no obligation to maintain a business relationship with anybody.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago