3 ms·

Yeah, unfortunately this is fairly typical for Apple to not follow their own guidelines for their own apps that generate revenue for them (Google pays Apple for

Yeah, unfortunately this is fairly typical for Apple to not follow their own guidelines for their own apps that generate revenue for them (Google pays Apple for Safari search traffic). I'm hoping antitrust action focuses on this double standard.

echelon 5y ago
Apple shouldn't be allowed to develop a web browser or have an app store. Google shouldn't be allowed to have a web browser, and its ads business should be split off from search. They creep into synergies slowly, but it reaches really deep. These companies have become grocery stores and movie production companies! Apple is now rumored to be building cars. In a decade they'll be cleaning our teeth and selling us our homes. They tell us to dance to their beat or get cut off. Pay their 30% on our measly margins. Enough is enough. They can't soak into every aspect of our lives.
- justapassenger 5y ago
  They should be allowed to develop anything they want. What they shouldn’t be allowed to do is to abuse their control of the platforms they own, to give them unfair advantage over competition.
  - svachalek 5y ago
    The definition of "abuse" is slippery and companies can stay far ahead of the judges. The classic solution for this is to separate the incentives, let different companies compete for users rather than having a single company leverage its strength from product to product to product. Then users can decide what is "abuse" for themselves.
    - justapassenger 5y ago
      Everything in the law is slippery. Law isn’t built to be interpreted by simple if-else statements, but by humans, with taking lots of nuance, context and intention into the account. Also - there’s a tons of ways you can abuse position when you own the platforms. It could be by pushing your products, by giving specific partners preferential access, unequal enforcement of rules, discriminatory rules, etc, etc. That’s why broad terms like abuse exist in the context of the law, so you don’t have to list every single possible bad behavior and let judges decide. Is that perfect? No. But I’d argue it’s better than your proposal.
  - freediver 5y ago
    This. I consider pretty much everything Apple does a fair game except for one thing - access to private APIs for their own products, same products that then compete on the market with the products from developers invited with the expectation to build on the same platform. This single-handly invalidates the entire WWDC effort. If you want to make sure you have best products then do it through superior product, design and engineering craftsmanship. Don't 'cheat'! It just does not feel right and it is mind-boggling why is this the case. One thing is to have a say on what the app store fee is and 30% is fine, this is your cost of distribution that you accept. But the existence of private APIs means that whatever you do on their platform comes with a risk of them building a better, more-integrated product simply because they have access to platform features you don't. This is an incredibly bad position to be in as a developer on Apple platform developing any kind of serious product, let alone a competitor for existing Apple products (like we are doing, crazy enough to be building a Safari alternative). Apple, open same APIs your consumer apps have and make it a fair game. This will spark innovation, creativity and different ways of doing same things. It is exactly what you should be thriving for as a leader in the industry.
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  > In a decade they'll be cleaning our teeth and selling us our homes. Good. I am not very happy with my teeth cleaning or home buying options at the moment.
  - kibwen 5y ago
    Good news, you'll be extremely happy to hear that your iTeeth can only chew Apple-branded produce, and that the electrical outlets in your iHome have all been replaced with Thunderbolt connectors.
    - Bud 5y ago
      Um, except Apple has actually been, throughout its history, more aggressive in supporting universal standards, and not less. First to implement WiFi in a mainstream consumer computer, first in pushing USB-A in place of legacy connectors, first to push Thunderbolt 1 and make it universal, first to push Thunderbolt 2 and 3 as well. Based on your invective about Thunderbolt, you appear to have Thunderbolt and Lightning confused. Thunderbolt is a universal standard; its development was led by Intel. Lightning, of course, is the ubiquitous iPhone connector that Apple was forced to develop because at the time, there wasn't anything around that satisfied all the requirements, and arguably, there still isn't. No, micro-USB isn't it, and no, USB-C isn't it either. You might want to find a different party line to use when griping about Apple. This one is highly ineffective and isn't even accurate.
- labster 5y ago
  That’s a little too extreme. They should just suspend the developer of Safari from posting to the App Store until Safari follows the Apple Human Interface Guidelines. If you treat it like every other app, then it’s all fair.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

echelon 5y ago

Apple shouldn't be allowed to develop a web browser or have an app store. Google shouldn't be allowed to have a web browser, and its ads business should be split off from search. They creep into synergies slowly, but it reaches really deep. These companies have become grocery stores and movie production companies! Apple is now rumored to be building cars. In a decade they'll be cleaning our teeth and selling us our homes. They tell us to dance to their beat or get cut off. Pay their 30% on our measly margins. Enough is enough. They can't soak into every aspect of our lives.

justapassenger 5y ago
They should be allowed to develop anything they want. What they shouldn’t be allowed to do is to abuse their control of the platforms they own, to give them unfair advantage over competition.
- svachalek 5y ago
  The definition of "abuse" is slippery and companies can stay far ahead of the judges. The classic solution for this is to separate the incentives, let different companies compete for users rather than having a single company leverage its strength from product to product to product. Then users can decide what is "abuse" for themselves.
  - justapassenger 5y ago
    Everything in the law is slippery. Law isn’t built to be interpreted by simple if-else statements, but by humans, with taking lots of nuance, context and intention into the account. Also - there’s a tons of ways you can abuse position when you own the platforms. It could be by pushing your products, by giving specific partners preferential access, unequal enforcement of rules, discriminatory rules, etc, etc. That’s why broad terms like abuse exist in the context of the law, so you don’t have to list every single possible bad behavior and let judges decide. Is that perfect? No. But I’d argue it’s better than your proposal.
- freediver 5y ago
  This. I consider pretty much everything Apple does a fair game except for one thing - access to private APIs for their own products, same products that then compete on the market with the products from developers invited with the expectation to build on the same platform. This single-handly invalidates the entire WWDC effort. If you want to make sure you have best products then do it through superior product, design and engineering craftsmanship. Don't 'cheat'! It just does not feel right and it is mind-boggling why is this the case. One thing is to have a say on what the app store fee is and 30% is fine, this is your cost of distribution that you accept. But the existence of private APIs means that whatever you do on their platform comes with a risk of them building a better, more-integrated product simply because they have access to platform features you don't. This is an incredibly bad position to be in as a developer on Apple platform developing any kind of serious product, let alone a competitor for existing Apple products (like we are doing, crazy enough to be building a Safari alternative). Apple, open same APIs your consumer apps have and make it a fair game. This will spark innovation, creativity and different ways of doing same things. It is exactly what you should be thriving for as a leader in the industry.
MattGaiser 5y ago
> In a decade they'll be cleaning our teeth and selling us our homes. Good. I am not very happy with my teeth cleaning or home buying options at the moment.
- kibwen 5y ago
  Good news, you'll be extremely happy to hear that your iTeeth can only chew Apple-branded produce, and that the electrical outlets in your iHome have all been replaced with Thunderbolt connectors.
  - Bud 5y ago
    Um, except Apple has actually been, throughout its history, more aggressive in supporting universal standards, and not less. First to implement WiFi in a mainstream consumer computer, first in pushing USB-A in place of legacy connectors, first to push Thunderbolt 1 and make it universal, first to push Thunderbolt 2 and 3 as well. Based on your invective about Thunderbolt, you appear to have Thunderbolt and Lightning confused. Thunderbolt is a universal standard; its development was led by Intel. Lightning, of course, is the ubiquitous iPhone connector that Apple was forced to develop because at the time, there wasn't anything around that satisfied all the requirements, and arguably, there still isn't. No, micro-USB isn't it, and no, USB-C isn't it either. You might want to find a different party line to use when griping about Apple. This one is highly ineffective and isn't even accurate.
labster 5y ago
That’s a little too extreme. They should just suspend the developer of Safari from posting to the App Store until Safari follows the Apple Human Interface Guidelines. If you treat it like every other app, then it’s all fair.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]