6 ms·

How is the apple app store not the definition of a monopoly? Is there an competing app store on iphones that Epic could be using?

ghshephard 6y ago
I think the argument is, you can always go use an Android phone if you don't like the iPhone. Apple has a monopoly on its app-store the same way Amazon has a monopoly on what (and how) it sells on AWS for services.
ardy42 6y ago
> How is the apple app store not the definition of a monopoly? Is there an competing app store on iphones that Epic could be using? I think it's all about how you define the market. Is the market for "apps on the iPhone" or "computer software in general"? Apple has monopoly control of the former but not the latter.
- snapetom 6y ago
  This. Antitrust lawsuits almost always focus on what exactly the market is that the players play in. "Monopoly" is a highly technical economic and legal term that is scrutinized on a case-by-case basis. It is not the broad stroke that the public likes to use.
untog 6y ago
Because the iPhone is not a monopoly. Apparently Apple has 58% of the smartphone market in the US so it's not really all that comparable to Microsoft back in the day. So if you don't like the App Store, you can switch to Android. (I personally don't agree with this viewpoint but it's how it is viewed by many. For one, I've spent $X on iOS apps, if I switch platforms I lose all of those apps. Feels unfair!)
jaegerpicker 6y ago
There are a ton of competing app stores, the fact that you can't access them on an iPhone means nothing. Apple made a platform, they have every right to set the rules. Don't like it go somewhere else there are plenty of other choices.
- kevingadd 6y ago
  "Apple made a platform, they have every right to set the rules. Don't like it go somewhere else there are plenty of other choices." is not necessarily sound reasoning here. US telecoms were broken up as a monopoly even though they made the platform and had every right to set the rules. "go somewhere else" implies buying a new phone, potentially under contract, and smartphones aren't cheap.
  - jaegerpicker 6y ago
    US Telecoms were broken up also because they offered little choice to the customer. Ma bell owned the vast majority of them and owned the lines making it hard to impossible to offer other services. Apple isn't even the most popular smart phone. Nothing forces you to use Apple.
    - etimberg 6y ago
      Nothing forces you to use Apple, but you are forced to use Apple's app store.
      - jaegerpicker 6y ago
        In what way? If I don't want to use or develop for the app store ... I just don't, I build for Google Play or the Web. Nothing forces me to use Apple Hardware and if I want to use Apple Hardware I have to agree to the terms.
        etimberg 6y ago
        If you are a user of an iPhone you cannot get an app from elsewhere. If I develop an app and sell if for $4.99 on the app store (price based on projections of downloads, how much apple takes, etc needed to make my money back). However I could offer the same app for $3.99 on an appstore that took a more reasonable percentage cut and get more downloads since lots of users are price sensitive. From this perspective, it looks like a textbook case where prices are higher for consumers due to the lack of competition. Even if one builds for the web, apple only allows a single browser engine which is their own. They unilaterally can decide what to implement and what features to add or remove.
btbuilder 6y ago
Apple has something like ~40% of US market share of smart phones. Therefore it is not a monopoly even if within that market share they have complete control with app store.
- kevingadd 6y ago
  Monopoly status is not as simple as 'do you have 51%'
- ss3000 6y ago
  That's only the difference between a monopoly vs duopoly though, and as far as the app developer is concerned I'm not sure it makes much of a difference. Reality is anyone releasing a for-profit app aiming for mass appeal can't afford to ignore either the Android or iOS ecosystem. They have to release for both, so there's no real competition involved.
littlecranky67 6y ago
Why is everyone so obsessed with the non-monopoly status? At least in the EU, antitrust cases don't require a monopoly, it is enough if burdens for market entrance are imposed, or cost for market entrace is too high (and especially purposely set too high by companies to prevent competition). Is this something specific to the US?

ghshephard 6y ago

I think the argument is, you can always go use an Android phone if you don't like the iPhone. Apple has a monopoly on its app-store the same way Amazon has a monopoly on what (and how) it sells on AWS for services.

ardy42 6y ago

> How is the apple app store not the definition of a monopoly? Is there an competing app store on iphones that Epic could be using? I think it's all about how you define the market. Is the market for "apps on the iPhone" or "computer software in general"? Apple has monopoly control of the former but not the latter.

snapetom 6y ago
This. Antitrust lawsuits almost always focus on what exactly the market is that the players play in. "Monopoly" is a highly technical economic and legal term that is scrutinized on a case-by-case basis. It is not the broad stroke that the public likes to use.

untog 6y ago

Because the iPhone is not a monopoly. Apparently Apple has 58% of the smartphone market in the US so it's not really all that comparable to Microsoft back in the day. So if you don't like the App Store, you can switch to Android. (I personally don't agree with this viewpoint but it's how it is viewed by many. For one, I've spent $X on iOS apps, if I switch platforms I lose all of those apps. Feels unfair!)

jaegerpicker 6y ago

There are a ton of competing app stores, the fact that you can't access them on an iPhone means nothing. Apple made a platform, they have every right to set the rules. Don't like it go somewhere else there are plenty of other choices.

kevingadd 6y ago
"Apple made a platform, they have every right to set the rules. Don't like it go somewhere else there are plenty of other choices." is not necessarily sound reasoning here. US telecoms were broken up as a monopoly even though they made the platform and had every right to set the rules. "go somewhere else" implies buying a new phone, potentially under contract, and smartphones aren't cheap.
- jaegerpicker 6y ago
  US Telecoms were broken up also because they offered little choice to the customer. Ma bell owned the vast majority of them and owned the lines making it hard to impossible to offer other services. Apple isn't even the most popular smart phone. Nothing forces you to use Apple.
  - etimberg 6y ago
    Nothing forces you to use Apple, but you are forced to use Apple's app store.
    - jaegerpicker 6y ago
      In what way? If I don't want to use or develop for the app store ... I just don't, I build for Google Play or the Web. Nothing forces me to use Apple Hardware and if I want to use Apple Hardware I have to agree to the terms.
      - etimberg 6y ago
        If you are a user of an iPhone you cannot get an app from elsewhere. If I develop an app and sell if for $4.99 on the app store (price based on projections of downloads, how much apple takes, etc needed to make my money back). However I could offer the same app for $3.99 on an appstore that took a more reasonable percentage cut and get more downloads since lots of users are price sensitive. From this perspective, it looks like a textbook case where prices are higher for consumers due to the lack of competition. Even if one builds for the web, apple only allows a single browser engine which is their own. They unilaterally can decide what to implement and what features to add or remove.

btbuilder 6y ago

Apple has something like ~40% of US market share of smart phones. Therefore it is not a monopoly even if within that market share they have complete control with app store.

kevingadd 6y ago
Monopoly status is not as simple as 'do you have 51%'
ss3000 6y ago
That's only the difference between a monopoly vs duopoly though, and as far as the app developer is concerned I'm not sure it makes much of a difference. Reality is anyone releasing a for-profit app aiming for mass appeal can't afford to ignore either the Android or iOS ecosystem. They have to release for both, so there's no real competition involved.

littlecranky67 6y ago

Why is everyone so obsessed with the non-monopoly status? At least in the EU, antitrust cases don't require a monopoly, it is enough if burdens for market entrance are imposed, or cost for market entrace is too high (and especially purposely set too high by companies to prevent competition). Is this something specific to the US?