4 ms·
Beyond a certain market share, that argument doesn't hold anymore. That's where anti-trust comes in. Which market share definition, you ask? IMHO it is the def
by tsycho 6y ago
Beyond a certain market share, that argument doesn't hold anymore. That's where anti-trust comes in.
Which market share definition, you ask? IMHO it is the definition that defines decision making for app developers, on whether they can skip the Apple platform or not.
So Apple's percentage of global smartphones doesn't matter, what matters is:
- Apple's 2/3 share of app store revenues.
- Apple's share of users in rich, developed markets such as US, Europe and Japan, which (source: ben-evans.com) varies between ~50-70%.
It is unaffordable for app developers to skip the Apple platform, since that's where the majority of paying users are. And as a result, they should fall under anti-trust laws that protect small players.
- scarface74 6y agoWhich market share definition, you ask? IMHO it is the definition that defines decision making for app developers, on whether they can skip the Apple platform or not. How many game developers will skip either Sony or MS unless they are paid for exclusives? Why can’t Google and all of the Android manufacturers convince people with money that they should buy Android phones?
- redwall_hp 6y agoAnd from a user perspective, there is vendor lock-in and a strong network effect keeping them on a platform. "Don't like being abused? Switch to a different platform, necessitating a $500+ hardware investment" is utter insanity. A phone is the average person's primary general computing device. Controlling what software they're "allowed" to run on it is wholly unacceptable, regardless of which laws are convenient to fix that issue.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]