5 ms·

The key difference is that Apple iOS covers more than half of the general computing market in the US. Keep in mind that to many of the younger generation, smar

The key difference is that Apple iOS covers more than half of the general computing market in the US. Keep in mind that to many of the younger generation, smartphones are their singular computing device.

olliej 5y ago
They can switch to Android. The App Store protections are part of the platform value proposition. Please don't respond with "they don't have to install third party store" nonsense, because for many people if (say) google docs puts itself in its own store they will have no choice.
- warning26 5y ago
  Microsoft really should have used this defense back in the 90s. What, you don't like Internet Explorer? Apple exists, buy a Mac! Or better yet, delete Windows and install Linux! See, there's no monopolistic behavior at all, provided that number of competitors is greater than zero!
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    > Microsoft really should have used this defense back in the 90s. They did. They were pointing to MacOS and Sun Solaris and all of them as supposed competitors, even though they didn't run on the same hardware as Windows did and apps for Windows didn't run on them. The court didn't buy it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ThatPlayer 5y ago
  And in the same way 'they can switch to Android', people could switch to any other Office suite on iOS. If you truly believe that people are choosing Apple for the "App Store protections", then why would they move off? Every third party app store would fail instantly. It's because other app stores are providing better value or better apps? Well that's why Apple preventing other app stores is anti-competitive. If someone picks Apple over Android is being of value and therefore should be allowed, how is someone picking Google Docs over every other Apple App Store office suite not also because of value?
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  Hold on, you can use your iOS apps that you paid for on Android now? And access iCloud? And use iMessage? Oh wait, you mean give up all that stuff to 'switch to android'. To most people that like suggesting that they learn how to write with their left hand by cutting off their right hand; Not even close to tenable.
- kaba0 5y ago
  They could be free to put sideloading behind 10 warning/error flags, in which case google docs would be effectively forced to use the still de facto AppStore. Yet I still get the opportunity to install whatever program I want to on a device I payed a huge sum of money. And no, switching between 2 things is not consumer choice, so with all due respect, saying switching to android is disrespectful.
broknbottle 5y ago
That’s not because Apple used its market position to stifle competition. It’s because Google could never figure out a messaging solution. People want a reliable and consistent experience. Not forced to switch to some half baked attempt that is nothing more than padding for some dudes promo doc
- root_axis 5y ago
  > That’s not because Apple used its market position to stifle competition Of course they did, all the big tech firms do but Apple is perhaps the most egregious. Whenever Apple acquires a company it shuts that company down and integrates all the IP and talent into the Apple walled garden (e.g. Dark Sky), by comparison many of the other big firms are often happy to let their acquisitions remain available to users of all platforms e.g. Instagram, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Github etc.
  - kgc 5y ago
    If you buy a company shouldn't you be able to do what you want with it?
    - root_axis 5y ago
      Yes. That's beside the point however.
    - ThatPlayer 5y ago
      When you've got huge market power, not necessarily: > In general, any business — even a monopolist — may choose its business partners. However, under certain circumstances, there may be limits on this freedom for a firm with market power. https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/refusal-deal https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
    - kaba0 5y ago
      Within the boundaries of the law, which should (ideally) be modified based on arising new problems in the benefit of people. Also, this starts getting into the “temporarily embarrassed billionaire” mindset, which is a really bad lens to view politics through.

olliej 5y ago

They can switch to Android. The App Store protections are part of the platform value proposition. Please don't respond with "they don't have to install third party store" nonsense, because for many people if (say) google docs puts itself in its own store they will have no choice.

warning26 5y ago
Microsoft really should have used this defense back in the 90s. What, you don't like Internet Explorer? Apple exists, buy a Mac! Or better yet, delete Windows and install Linux! See, there's no monopolistic behavior at all, provided that number of competitors is greater than zero!
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  > Microsoft really should have used this defense back in the 90s. They did. They were pointing to MacOS and Sun Solaris and all of them as supposed competitors, even though they didn't run on the same hardware as Windows did and apps for Windows didn't run on them. The court didn't buy it.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ThatPlayer 5y ago
And in the same way 'they can switch to Android', people could switch to any other Office suite on iOS. If you truly believe that people are choosing Apple for the "App Store protections", then why would they move off? Every third party app store would fail instantly. It's because other app stores are providing better value or better apps? Well that's why Apple preventing other app stores is anti-competitive. If someone picks Apple over Android is being of value and therefore should be allowed, how is someone picking Google Docs over every other Apple App Store office suite not also because of value?
genocidicbunny 5y ago
Hold on, you can use your iOS apps that you paid for on Android now? And access iCloud? And use iMessage? Oh wait, you mean give up all that stuff to 'switch to android'. To most people that like suggesting that they learn how to write with their left hand by cutting off their right hand; Not even close to tenable.
kaba0 5y ago
They could be free to put sideloading behind 10 warning/error flags, in which case google docs would be effectively forced to use the still de facto AppStore. Yet I still get the opportunity to install whatever program I want to on a device I payed a huge sum of money. And no, switching between 2 things is not consumer choice, so with all due respect, saying switching to android is disrespectful.

broknbottle 5y ago

That’s not because Apple used its market position to stifle competition. It’s because Google could never figure out a messaging solution. People want a reliable and consistent experience. Not forced to switch to some half baked attempt that is nothing more than padding for some dudes promo doc

root_axis 5y ago
> That’s not because Apple used its market position to stifle competition Of course they did, all the big tech firms do but Apple is perhaps the most egregious. Whenever Apple acquires a company it shuts that company down and integrates all the IP and talent into the Apple walled garden (e.g. Dark Sky), by comparison many of the other big firms are often happy to let their acquisitions remain available to users of all platforms e.g. Instagram, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Github etc.
- kgc 5y ago
  If you buy a company shouldn't you be able to do what you want with it?
  - root_axis 5y ago
    Yes. That's beside the point however.
  - ThatPlayer 5y ago
    When you've got huge market power, not necessarily: > In general, any business — even a monopolist — may choose its business partners. However, under certain circumstances, there may be limits on this freedom for a firm with market power. https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/refusal-deal https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
  - kaba0 5y ago
    Within the boundaries of the law, which should (ideally) be modified based on arising new problems in the benefit of people. Also, this starts getting into the “temporarily embarrassed billionaire” mindset, which is a really bad lens to view politics through.