3 ms·

I encourage you to improve your discourse, but I’ll participate anyways. My argument is that Apple has significant market power, on iOS devices. There is no de

I encourage you to improve your discourse, but I’ll participate anyways. My argument is that Apple has significant market power, on iOS devices. There is no denying that. In fact it is a feature for me as a customer to pool my buying power into a “customer’s union” of sorts. I also agree that Apple has built a large barrier to entry, i.e. it has built trust with customers like me. I truly believe you’ve never tried both Android and iOS in earnest, or else you’d feel similarly. However, Apple has no monopoly on the devices market. I play Fortnite on my PS4 and always have. Additionally, Apple has overall increased competition rather than hamper it. That said, I would like to see Apple compensate applications when it replaces poorer quality apps with better in-house versions, even though it doesn’t need to. It would be a sincere set back for the entire economy if Apple was forced to sideload applications on iOS. That said, as I have previously agreed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24419752 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24419752

stale2002 6y ago
> However, Apple has no monopoly on the devices market A monopoly is not required for anti-trust law to apply. Instead, only significant market power. And the "market" in this case will likely be defined as the smartphone market in the USA, of which Apple has ~50%. Having 50% of a duopoly is within the realm of when anti-trust law applies, as a singular monopoly is not required for anti-trust law to apply (as defined by section 2 of the sherman act).
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  I'm curious, how many years have you, - used an iPhone as your primary device? - used an Android as your primary device? - played Fortnite, and on what device? For me it was 6 years of Android before switching to an iPhone for the last 4 years. I've been playing a lot of Fortnite (less during the waterworld season) on a PS4 over the last 11 months. Edit: Especially because you're arguing for sideloading and Android already allows that, yet Epic is still suing Google. I ask because when you keep saying you're arguing "for customers" and "pro-competition", that Epic is just requesting a "basic right" (which they don't seem to be given the Google lawsuit). I'm just wondering what background experience you have with all of these different companies and platforms that helps you judge what is best "for competition and the customer".
  - stale2002 6y ago
    So then you have no response then, on my comment regarding anti-trust law it seems. It is well established that a participant does not have to be a singular monopoly, in a market, in order for anti-trust law to apply. And in this case, Apple has ~50% of the smartphone market, in the USA, which is enough that anti-trust law can apply. > yet Epic is still suing Google Google also has large amounts of market power. Anti-trust law applies to them as well, given that they argueably have large amounts of control over the other 50% of the US smartphone market (even if it is a bit less direct of a control, as compared to Apple which is vertically integrated, and controls both the hardware and software. But sure, the case is less clear cut with Google, if you want to make that argument.)
    - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
      I no longer find this discussion productive. I respect the process of learning for you and me, but the last few comments have had no new information. It doesn't seem like you have the right experience with these different companies/platforms/technologies for me to learn anything new. As such its no longer worth our time. > So then you have no response then, on my comment regarding anti-trust law it seems. Ok, sure. You win!
      - stale2002 6y ago
        > but the last few comments have had no new information. Well yeah, you just ignored the things that I said, multiple times.
        yazaddaruvala 6y ago
        ... we are not lawyers! We cannot make productive arguments about anti-trust law! I have done my best to respond to you respectfully and with my best ability. I have previously responded to your specific questions with, “If then yes. But it seems unlikely” and “It’ll be more productive for us to wait for the results of the lawsuit.”, etc. Are you willing to answer the questions I asked?

stale2002 6y ago

> However, Apple has no monopoly on the devices market A monopoly is not required for anti-trust law to apply. Instead, only significant market power. And the "market" in this case will likely be defined as the smartphone market in the USA, of which Apple has ~50%. Having 50% of a duopoly is within the realm of when anti-trust law applies, as a singular monopoly is not required for anti-trust law to apply (as defined by section 2 of the sherman act).

yazaddaruvala 6y ago
I'm curious, how many years have you, - used an iPhone as your primary device? - used an Android as your primary device? - played Fortnite, and on what device? For me it was 6 years of Android before switching to an iPhone for the last 4 years. I've been playing a lot of Fortnite (less during the waterworld season) on a PS4 over the last 11 months. Edit: Especially because you're arguing for sideloading and Android already allows that, yet Epic is still suing Google. I ask because when you keep saying you're arguing "for customers" and "pro-competition", that Epic is just requesting a "basic right" (which they don't seem to be given the Google lawsuit). I'm just wondering what background experience you have with all of these different companies and platforms that helps you judge what is best "for competition and the customer".
- stale2002 6y ago
  So then you have no response then, on my comment regarding anti-trust law it seems. It is well established that a participant does not have to be a singular monopoly, in a market, in order for anti-trust law to apply. And in this case, Apple has ~50% of the smartphone market, in the USA, which is enough that anti-trust law can apply. > yet Epic is still suing Google Google also has large amounts of market power. Anti-trust law applies to them as well, given that they argueably have large amounts of control over the other 50% of the US smartphone market (even if it is a bit less direct of a control, as compared to Apple which is vertically integrated, and controls both the hardware and software. But sure, the case is less clear cut with Google, if you want to make that argument.)
  - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
    I no longer find this discussion productive. I respect the process of learning for you and me, but the last few comments have had no new information. It doesn't seem like you have the right experience with these different companies/platforms/technologies for me to learn anything new. As such its no longer worth our time. > So then you have no response then, on my comment regarding anti-trust law it seems. Ok, sure. You win!
    - stale2002 6y ago
      > but the last few comments have had no new information. Well yeah, you just ignored the things that I said, multiple times.
      - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
        ... we are not lawyers! We cannot make productive arguments about anti-trust law! I have done my best to respond to you respectfully and with my best ability. I have previously responded to your specific questions with, “If then yes. But it seems unlikely” and “It’ll be more productive for us to wait for the results of the lawsuit.”, etc. Are you willing to answer the questions I asked?