3 ms·

Wow - HN reliably comes out with just incredible legal analysis, and not in a good way. Apple delivers products that are supported FAR far longer than android.

Wow - HN reliably comes out with just incredible legal analysis, and not in a good way. Apple delivers products that are supported FAR far longer than android. Yes, they charge everyone a premium for this. One reason people don't mind their kids / grandparents etc using apple is precisely because apple takes care of things. Let's be 100% clear here - once apple allows random apps to bill you in random ways the endless scams will be here in days. Seriously - even for subscriptions most providers you find out thing renewed after the fact when you get your statement, then have to remember to fight the auto-renew. Apple (at least for me) sends me out an email IN ADVANCE telling me what will renew. Next, cancelling autorenews often requires phone calls. Ie, you can only cancel 90 days in advance, but have to cancel by renewal date and while you can sign up online you can't cancel online. Apple, in the same email they send me, tells me how to cancel. I hope folks pushing scam apps get bitten HARD for their crappy behavior. And the idea of apple as monopoly (22% market share in phones, even less in computers) seems a total stretch. However, because of all these policies, they might have a monpoply on very long term supported high quality devices that behave how you expect. They even cracked down on the scam battery replacements on resale (ie, folks would put cheapo third party batteries in that made it look like battery life was good that would die in months). Again lots of complaints from HN folks, but for average users this helped them avoid the scammers.

basch 6y ago
My spidey sense is screaming poes law. It's like every overly simplistic argument in one post, and no replies. Kudos to the author for encapsulating all the arguments that dont need to take place again and grouping them in one tree.
- donor20 6y ago
  Huh? If you can't engage the discussion don't engage. "Your spidy sense is screaming"... ? "Kudos for encapsulating all the arguments that don't need to take place...". I feel like folks don't have a feel for that the history of anti-trust action has been used for. In many cases you have clear to very clear anti-competitive behavior. Move in next door, sell at a big loss, drive out competition, then restore pricing. So you take and establish market power through predetory behavior. What's challenging about the case with apple is that they have always run their own app store, and the success of that store has attracted both users and developers. They have had the same terms for a very long time. The normal anti-competitive type behavior would be to do no fee for developers if they signed exclusive agreements, then after you had 80% of market you'd switch terms and no one could fight it. Google did this with things like maps, super cheap for developers, no one else could compete, then it was 4x the price (I forget now) and we had to wait a bit for others to catchup so we had alternatives. My cable company did this (we had a wireless provider show up, prices dropped overnight to keep them out, then when they left some areas that were harder to serve cable co raised right back up.) There is an alternative in the market here too, a well funded one. Google has an app store. Samsung has an app store. Carriers preload apps that cannot be removed to "help" their customers. Some companies build in basically backdoors to android so they can load all sorts of apps after the fact (mostly advertising). Apple does not allow any of that - they are FAMOUS for wanting control. They don't allow the carriers to preload bloatware and never have allowed it. They don't allow them to do their own auto-updating apps or app stores. They support their phones for incredibly long periods compared to much of their competition (some android phones SHIP with software 2 years old and literally never get an update). When you buy and apple you are guaranteed not to get this stuff - and some people like that. Does this make it illegal? It a long way from a standard anti-trust case. They've never had anyone else competing with them to take share. They were also the first with the glass face smartphone so this was their market, their actual market share in segment has been going DOWN not up a long time despite the laughter of their competitors when they introduced the iphone. So, is there a commercial reason for them to behave this way - sure. I'm curious - why post slams on HN rather than discussing the topic? Just don't reply.
  - basch 6y ago
    I'm not slamming it, it honestly reads like parody to me. Maybe it's not, hence invoking Poe's law. If it was meant in earnest I mean no disrespect, and I'm glad people can use the comment section to debate the points.
vmception 6y ago
so are you intentionally ignoring every possible alternative or are you just that dense don't worry the state will handle it
- donor20 6y ago
  I have more confidence in Apple delivering privacy and security, a reliable product maintained over time that is not backdoored then I do in DHS or whatever other agency they'll put in charge of their app store. So "Don't worry the state will handle it" is not re-assuring AT ALL.
  - vmception 6y ago
    the state handling it means antitrust breakup. not whatever other thing that first came to your mind because of your particular relationship with the state.
lostmyoldone 6y ago
Copyright on macOS, and patents makes Apple phones the products of a company with a legal monopoly. Are they an illegal monopoly in the US? Well, that's trickier. There are several reasons for and against. There are lots of phone brands, hundreds worldwide depending on how you count, and Apple are the are the largest phone and tablet brand with almost 50% of the US market. Only Samsung is even close when it comes to phones, but afaik they have nowhere near the same profit margins. Whether they are monopolistic or not, both Apple and Google has shown clear monopolistic behavior regarding their respective app stores, with Apple seemingly the more egregious.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

basch 6y ago

My spidey sense is screaming poes law. It's like every overly simplistic argument in one post, and no replies. Kudos to the author for encapsulating all the arguments that dont need to take place again and grouping them in one tree.

donor20 6y ago
Huh? If you can't engage the discussion don't engage. "Your spidy sense is screaming"... ? "Kudos for encapsulating all the arguments that don't need to take place...". I feel like folks don't have a feel for that the history of anti-trust action has been used for. In many cases you have clear to very clear anti-competitive behavior. Move in next door, sell at a big loss, drive out competition, then restore pricing. So you take and establish market power through predetory behavior. What's challenging about the case with apple is that they have always run their own app store, and the success of that store has attracted both users and developers. They have had the same terms for a very long time. The normal anti-competitive type behavior would be to do no fee for developers if they signed exclusive agreements, then after you had 80% of market you'd switch terms and no one could fight it. Google did this with things like maps, super cheap for developers, no one else could compete, then it was 4x the price (I forget now) and we had to wait a bit for others to catchup so we had alternatives. My cable company did this (we had a wireless provider show up, prices dropped overnight to keep them out, then when they left some areas that were harder to serve cable co raised right back up.) There is an alternative in the market here too, a well funded one. Google has an app store. Samsung has an app store. Carriers preload apps that cannot be removed to "help" their customers. Some companies build in basically backdoors to android so they can load all sorts of apps after the fact (mostly advertising). Apple does not allow any of that - they are FAMOUS for wanting control. They don't allow the carriers to preload bloatware and never have allowed it. They don't allow them to do their own auto-updating apps or app stores. They support their phones for incredibly long periods compared to much of their competition (some android phones SHIP with software 2 years old and literally never get an update). When you buy and apple you are guaranteed not to get this stuff - and some people like that. Does this make it illegal? It a long way from a standard anti-trust case. They've never had anyone else competing with them to take share. They were also the first with the glass face smartphone so this was their market, their actual market share in segment has been going DOWN not up a long time despite the laughter of their competitors when they introduced the iphone. So, is there a commercial reason for them to behave this way - sure. I'm curious - why post slams on HN rather than discussing the topic? Just don't reply.
- basch 6y ago
  I'm not slamming it, it honestly reads like parody to me. Maybe it's not, hence invoking Poe's law. If it was meant in earnest I mean no disrespect, and I'm glad people can use the comment section to debate the points.

vmception 6y ago

so are you intentionally ignoring every possible alternative or are you just that dense don't worry the state will handle it

donor20 6y ago
I have more confidence in Apple delivering privacy and security, a reliable product maintained over time that is not backdoored then I do in DHS or whatever other agency they'll put in charge of their app store. So "Don't worry the state will handle it" is not re-assuring AT ALL.
- vmception 6y ago
  the state handling it means antitrust breakup. not whatever other thing that first came to your mind because of your particular relationship with the state.

lostmyoldone 6y ago

Copyright on macOS, and patents makes Apple phones the products of a company with a legal monopoly. Are they an illegal monopoly in the US? Well, that's trickier. There are several reasons for and against. There are lots of phone brands, hundreds worldwide depending on how you count, and Apple are the are the largest phone and tablet brand with almost 50% of the US market. Only Samsung is even close when it comes to phones, but afaik they have nowhere near the same profit margins. Whether they are monopolistic or not, both Apple and Google has shown clear monopolistic behavior regarding their respective app stores, with Apple seemingly the more egregious.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]