5 ms·

If we are sure people like so much apple services and integration, should be no problem at all to have alternatives not even directly managed by apple (so that

by yulaow 5y ago

If we are sure people like so much apple services and integration, should be no problem at all to have alternatives not even directly managed by apple (so that it won't cost anything to apple to support it, except for opening some "store api"), still most users would keep using only the integrated apple services... or not? Maybe users would like them even more!

thegrimmest 5y ago
The point here is that Apple itself should be able to choose when and how and to whom it open the Apple Store. It should not be compelled to do so by anyone but its own directors and shareholders. If someone wants to sell phones that don't have this limitation, they are free to seek investment and build them.
- pixl97 5y ago
  There are two different things here. First is the Apple Store, and you are correct you have no right to have your application on it. Second is the hardware device I paid money for and exists in my pocket. There is no reasonable right that Apple says "Only we can put a program on it, and you will have no ability to run your own programs on it" We live in a world where hardware makers of all kinds think we own them a permanent rent. It is a poor and expensive path to let them continue.
  - thegrimmest 5y ago
    You can indeed do whatever you want with your iPhone. You can throw it in a blender if it pleases you. That doesn't mean Apple is obligated to make it easy for you. Apple has sold you a device with a given hardware/software configuration, just like Samsung when they sell you a washing machine. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.
    - paulryanrogers 5y ago
      For right to repair reasons maybe you should have such a right over a washer or tractor or printer
- commoner 5y ago
  It's not reasonable to expect other app stores to build their own mobile operating systems, which is why there is momentum among lawmakers in the U.S. to pass a bill that protects the right of users to use alternative app stores and sideload apps.[1] It is unjust for Apple to use its market power in the U.S. smartphone industry (57% market share in Q4 2021)[2] to force users and developers to endure the effects of a 15-30% fee (offset by a 17.6-42.9% price increase) on the majority of revenue generated by app developers, a fee that would not survive a market where multiple app stores were able to compete for iOS users. Apple's market share is different in the Netherlands, but strong regulations in one major market are all it takes to punch a hole in Apple's monopoly/duopoly position. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30195167 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30195167 [2] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/q4-2021-us-smartphone-market/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/q4-2021-us-smartphone-m...
  - thegrimmest 5y ago
    I don't think it's reasonable for U.S. lawmakers to have an opinion on what Apple's competition should or should not be expected to do in order to compete with Apple. As I've said previously, if Apple was able to build it's own phone and OS in order to compete with RIM, and Google built its own phone and OS to compete with Apple, there's no reason why sufficient market pressure wouldn't attract the investment required to do it again. Regulation is simply forcing the situation when this pressure doesn't seem to exist. If users cared that much, they would buy Android. They don't. And since they don't, it's completely unjust for their representatives to apply force.
    - commoner 5y ago
      U.S. lawmakers are elected by U.S. citizens to represent their interests, which are not necessarily aligned with Apple's interests. In the case of Apple abusing its monopoly/duopoly power to extract higher fees from developers that are ultimately paid by users, these interests are not aligned. Lawmakers in any country have an obligation to introduce measures that prevent private companies from denying people the option of taking actions (such as sideloading) that would serve their interests, even if they would be counter to Apple's interests. Monopolies and uncompetitive markets (such as the mobile app store duopoly in many regions) result in deadweight loss,* which hinders the growth of the economy at large. Lawmakers in any country would do well to increase their country's economic efficiency by limiting the ability of companies with high market power to distort the market. Uncompetitive markets are not free markets. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss

by yulaow 5y ago

thegrimmest 5y ago

The point here is that Apple itself should be able to choose when and how and to whom it open the Apple Store. It should not be compelled to do so by anyone but its own directors and shareholders. If someone wants to sell phones that don't have this limitation, they are free to seek investment and build them.

pixl97 5y ago
There are two different things here. First is the Apple Store, and you are correct you have no right to have your application on it. Second is the hardware device I paid money for and exists in my pocket. There is no reasonable right that Apple says "Only we can put a program on it, and you will have no ability to run your own programs on it" We live in a world where hardware makers of all kinds think we own them a permanent rent. It is a poor and expensive path to let them continue.
- thegrimmest 5y ago
  You can indeed do whatever you want with your iPhone. You can throw it in a blender if it pleases you. That doesn't mean Apple is obligated to make it easy for you. Apple has sold you a device with a given hardware/software configuration, just like Samsung when they sell you a washing machine. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.
  - paulryanrogers 5y ago
    For right to repair reasons maybe you should have such a right over a washer or tractor or printer
commoner 5y ago
It's not reasonable to expect other app stores to build their own mobile operating systems, which is why there is momentum among lawmakers in the U.S. to pass a bill that protects the right of users to use alternative app stores and sideload apps.[1] It is unjust for Apple to use its market power in the U.S. smartphone industry (57% market share in Q4 2021)[2] to force users and developers to endure the effects of a 15-30% fee (offset by a 17.6-42.9% price increase) on the majority of revenue generated by app developers, a fee that would not survive a market where multiple app stores were able to compete for iOS users. Apple's market share is different in the Netherlands, but strong regulations in one major market are all it takes to punch a hole in Apple's monopoly/duopoly position. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30195167 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30195167 [2] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/q4-2021-us-smartphone-market/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/q4-2021-us-smartphone-m...
- thegrimmest 5y ago
  I don't think it's reasonable for U.S. lawmakers to have an opinion on what Apple's competition should or should not be expected to do in order to compete with Apple. As I've said previously, if Apple was able to build it's own phone and OS in order to compete with RIM, and Google built its own phone and OS to compete with Apple, there's no reason why sufficient market pressure wouldn't attract the investment required to do it again. Regulation is simply forcing the situation when this pressure doesn't seem to exist. If users cared that much, they would buy Android. They don't. And since they don't, it's completely unjust for their representatives to apply force.
  - commoner 5y ago
    U.S. lawmakers are elected by U.S. citizens to represent their interests, which are not necessarily aligned with Apple's interests. In the case of Apple abusing its monopoly/duopoly power to extract higher fees from developers that are ultimately paid by users, these interests are not aligned. Lawmakers in any country have an obligation to introduce measures that prevent private companies from denying people the option of taking actions (such as sideloading) that would serve their interests, even if they would be counter to Apple's interests. Monopolies and uncompetitive markets (such as the mobile app store duopoly in many regions) result in deadweight loss,* which hinders the growth of the economy at large. Lawmakers in any country would do well to increase their country's economic efficiency by limiting the ability of companies with high market power to distort the market. Uncompetitive markets are not free markets. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss