3 ms·
There is always a customer experience reason. Every anticompetitive company that has ever existed has benefited from the customer experience of everything being
by wavemode 1y ago
There is always a customer experience reason. Every anticompetitive company that has ever existed has benefited from the customer experience of everything being in one place and coming from one company. Unfortunately, "my product benefits from being anticompetitive" is not a valid justification for anticompetitive practices.
- al_borland 1y agoI struggle to paint a company with a minority marketshare, after having first mover advantage, as anticompetitive. That said, their argument that the payment policies disproportionately impact apps trying to create sustainable business models that don’t monetize user data is a compelling one that I very much sympathize with. I’m a Proton subscriber, but I went through their website, just because I tend to do that for any service that isn’t exclusive to Apple or the App Store. The same is true for Kagi, another privacy focused service I subscribe to. I never thought about it, but maybe that’s my way of avoiding lock-in. If I ever leave iOS at some point, I don’t want to have to cancel and resubscribe to something that could cause a service interruption. I also want to make sure that the subscription is everywhere, not just on my Apple devices, and it’s tied to the email I choose.
- wavemode 1y agoAnticompetitive practices don't mean that you have a monopoly. In fact people often get this wrong - having a monopoly is not illegal in and of itself. What's illegal is using one's market position to prevent other companies from being able to compete in a market. Whether that market position is 100% or 10%, what matters is that it's significant enough for you to pressure other companies out of the market.