4 ms·

You’re not using the word monopoly correctly. Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on their platform. They make a platform that’s part of a market. And they have a mi

You’re not using the word monopoly correctly. Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on their platform. They make a platform that’s part of a market. And they have a minority portion of that market. That’s like saying Folgers has a monopoly on Folgers coffee. The sentiment is kind of right, they are the only ones who make Folgers, but it’s not the right term as being an exclusive manufacturer is not a monopoly in terms of anti trust or this conversation.

spot5010 3y ago
I don’t know why you are getting downvoted. You’re right. Not justifying apples tactics though.
bogwog 3y ago
I'm not an expert on this in any way, but I've been following this Google case and have learned a few things. In antitrust lawsuits, a critical part is to define the "relevant market" over which a company is being accused of doing illegal anti-competitive things. This isn't straightforward or easy to define, but I do think it's very easy to make a strong argument that Apple has enough market power over some markets to justify enforcement action against them. > Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on their platform. They make a platform that’s part of a market. And they have a minority portion of that market. I don't think "a minority portion" means anything, since illegal activities are still illegal. I.e. collusion doesn't become legal just because you're a small company. And again, I think it'd be pretty easy to identify more than a few markets where Apple very clearly has an overwhelming market share.
- fallingknife 3y ago
  Can you name any of those markets? I can't think of any.
paulryanrogers 3y ago
Even by your broader definition it's a duopoly, with one whose taking 90+% of the profits in the smart phone market of the US.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  Who is taking the majority of the other 10%? Where in the definition of monopoly is taking profits a requirement? (Hint: it’s not. It’s about price control and market capture.)
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    What defines anti-trust is up the people. We can replace ineffective obfuscating thresholds like Nixon era "consumer harm" BS.
realusername 3y ago
It's not a "market" if there's no competition.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  How can a company not have a monopoly on their own proprietary product? Is Sony required to allow anyone to publish games to the PlayStation store? Is Comcast required to allow me to broadcast on their cables? The delusion about Apple’s “monopoly” has to ignore all precedent and legal definition of monopoly and hinge on not liking how they run their business. Then don’t do business with them. They have a minority share in phones, tablets, computers, and effectively every other market they’re in.
  - realusername 3y ago
    I'm not even talking about a monopoly but about competition and that's going to be very hard to argue that it exists. Antitrust lawsuits are about anticompetitive behavior, not literal monopolies and Apple defense seems pretty much impossible to make here.
qwytw 3y ago
> That’s like saying Folgers has a monopoly on Folgers coffee Not quite. We should apply a bit more nuance, yes iPhones and Android phones more or less can do the same things but they aren't entirely replaceable and not a commodity like coffee.
- Retric 3y ago
  Each coffee brand offers their own unique flavors, just as each tire manufacturer has their own trade offs, and each car … However, subtle flavor profile or minor product features isn’t enough to be considered a distinct market. The simple fact that people swap between Android phones and Apple phones without buying both means they are in completion. Making cellphone (edit: operating systems) a duopoly not a monopoly. Markets aren’t quite arbitrary but they are subject to debate. Someone considering buying a new 911 likely isn’t going to consider buying a base model Honda Civic as an equivalent good but a Lotus Emira might qualify.
  - jonhohle 3y ago
    You could say mobile operating systems may be a duopoly, but cellphones themselves are made by a dozen or more manufacturers. And the company that makes the most widely used mobile operating system is not Apple.
    - Retric 3y ago
      Sorry, yes cellphone operating systems is the market I was thinking of. But my point is you can slice and dice markets in multiple ways, however brands themselves don’t qualify as a market otherwise every brand would be a monopoly and the word stops being meaningful. It’s the expensive watch market not the Rolex watch market.
      - qwytw 3y ago
        I guess the thing is that there is much more to it to it than just a brand. If you're heavily invested into Apple's environment (spend a lot of money on apps, maybe media on iTunes etc. and/or you rely on their cloud services etc.) the cost for switching to Android is significant enough that you might be willing to tolerate some abuse from Apple's before you do that.
asah 3y ago
what color is that bike shed ? /s

spot5010 3y ago

I don’t know why you are getting downvoted. You’re right. Not justifying apples tactics though.

bogwog 3y ago

I'm not an expert on this in any way, but I've been following this Google case and have learned a few things. In antitrust lawsuits, a critical part is to define the "relevant market" over which a company is being accused of doing illegal anti-competitive things. This isn't straightforward or easy to define, but I do think it's very easy to make a strong argument that Apple has enough market power over some markets to justify enforcement action against them. > Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on their platform. They make a platform that’s part of a market. And they have a minority portion of that market. I don't think "a minority portion" means anything, since illegal activities are still illegal. I.e. collusion doesn't become legal just because you're a small company. And again, I think it'd be pretty easy to identify more than a few markets where Apple very clearly has an overwhelming market share.

fallingknife 3y ago
Can you name any of those markets? I can't think of any.

paulryanrogers 3y ago

Even by your broader definition it's a duopoly, with one whose taking 90+% of the profits in the smart phone market of the US.

jonhohle 3y ago
Who is taking the majority of the other 10%? Where in the definition of monopoly is taking profits a requirement? (Hint: it’s not. It’s about price control and market capture.)
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  What defines anti-trust is up the people. We can replace ineffective obfuscating thresholds like Nixon era "consumer harm" BS.

realusername 3y ago

It's not a "market" if there's no competition.

jonhohle 3y ago
How can a company not have a monopoly on their own proprietary product? Is Sony required to allow anyone to publish games to the PlayStation store? Is Comcast required to allow me to broadcast on their cables? The delusion about Apple’s “monopoly” has to ignore all precedent and legal definition of monopoly and hinge on not liking how they run their business. Then don’t do business with them. They have a minority share in phones, tablets, computers, and effectively every other market they’re in.
- realusername 3y ago
  I'm not even talking about a monopoly but about competition and that's going to be very hard to argue that it exists. Antitrust lawsuits are about anticompetitive behavior, not literal monopolies and Apple defense seems pretty much impossible to make here.

qwytw 3y ago

> That’s like saying Folgers has a monopoly on Folgers coffee Not quite. We should apply a bit more nuance, yes iPhones and Android phones more or less can do the same things but they aren't entirely replaceable and not a commodity like coffee.

Retric 3y ago
Each coffee brand offers their own unique flavors, just as each tire manufacturer has their own trade offs, and each car … However, subtle flavor profile or minor product features isn’t enough to be considered a distinct market. The simple fact that people swap between Android phones and Apple phones without buying both means they are in completion. Making cellphone (edit: operating systems) a duopoly not a monopoly. Markets aren’t quite arbitrary but they are subject to debate. Someone considering buying a new 911 likely isn’t going to consider buying a base model Honda Civic as an equivalent good but a Lotus Emira might qualify.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  You could say mobile operating systems may be a duopoly, but cellphones themselves are made by a dozen or more manufacturers. And the company that makes the most widely used mobile operating system is not Apple.
  - Retric 3y ago
    Sorry, yes cellphone operating systems is the market I was thinking of. But my point is you can slice and dice markets in multiple ways, however brands themselves don’t qualify as a market otherwise every brand would be a monopoly and the word stops being meaningful. It’s the expensive watch market not the Rolex watch market.
    - qwytw 3y ago
      I guess the thing is that there is much more to it to it than just a brand. If you're heavily invested into Apple's environment (spend a lot of money on apps, maybe media on iTunes etc. and/or you rely on their cloud services etc.) the cost for switching to Android is significant enough that you might be willing to tolerate some abuse from Apple's before you do that.

asah 3y ago

what color is that bike shed ? /s