Apple's new policy is a step in the wrong direction.' Microsoft, Spotify, decry Apple's 'compliance' with new European app store rules

fdruid

Member
Aug 8, 2013
423
9
18
Visit site
Apple never fails to be consistently the bad guy and yet their users and fans put up with anything they do. In fact, Microsoft has more user friendly policies and still is shat on all the time by users and the press. This is bollocks.
I expect there to be another bout of legal actions against these creeps. They can't win so easily, when other companies get extensively harassed at their every move by regutors internationally.
 

fjtorres5591

Active member
May 16, 2023
213
56
28
Visit site
Politicians and bureacrats act as if they're smart.
They're not.
The constantly forget the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Apple knows this and uses those loopholes and consequences.
So it was only to be expected they would do something worse so they can claim they were "forced" and shift the blame.
So it's back to square one.

Trust scorpions to be scorpions.
 

naddy69

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
180
54
28
Visit site
"Apple never fails to be consistently the bad guy and yet their users and fans put up with anything they do."

Except for the "bad guy" bit, this is a VERY key point. First, Apple is not a "monopoly", regardless of what some people are claiming. You can't have a monopoly on your own product AND it is impossible to be a monopoly with 25% of the market. Apple is not a "bad guy".

Second, U.S. anti-trust laws exist to protect consumers. Not competitors. The only people complaining about Apple are competitors. Apple customers are happy. Extremely happy, in fact. And extremely loyal. Therefore, governments have no jurisdiction to force Apple to change anything. Because these changes are only wanted by competitors. These are the true bad guys.

As the judge said in the silly Epic Games case, "Being successful is not illegal". Competitors can whine all they want, but Apple has every right to do what it does.

Which the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed by refusing to even hear the case. Do you understand how important that was? That alone should tell you everything you need to know.

No one is forcing anyone to buy Apple products. There are TONS of choices in the phone/tablet/PC markets. No one is forcing companies to support Apple. If you want to make money by selling software/services/whatever to Apple's users, then you have to follow Apple's rules. If you don't like the rules then too bad. Sell your software/services/whatever to Android users and stop whining about Apple.

When Apple has 95% of the phone/tablet/PC market, THEN governments can force Apple to change. Until then, everyone just needs to Get Over It. Apple does not owe anyone anything.

Just because lots of people hate Apple (for whatever bizarre reasons), does not mean governments can force Apple to change so everyone will like Apple.

Regarding the EU, I love that Apple is giving them a big FU. Socialist countries trying to dictate what a hugely successful American company should do is just great theater. If these useless politicians/bureaucrats knew anything about running a successful company, they would be doing so. Instead of being useless, know-nothing politicians/bureaucrats.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Laura Knotek

Ron-F

Member
May 20, 2014
35
8
8
Visit site
I have a very unpopular take. Apple, Google, and all other platform holders should ask whatever they want to allow third party software in their devices. In the same way, Spotify -- that loves to complain against Apple -- can offer some micro pennies to artists for each time a song is played. You take the offer, or not.

Windows and macOS are open platforms, smartphones are not. It is a tradeoff, you gain security, you lose some openness. I am incredibly happy I convinced my octogenarian mother to give up a PC and use only an iPad. Also, I am worried that opening the platform would only help the big publishers, as it is certainly fair to allow Apple to charge for the use of their APIs, which may be advantageous to the big companies, but not so much to small developers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naddy69

Jez Corden

Staff member
Jan 29, 2013
272
59
28
Visit site
I have a very unpopular take. Apple, Google, and all other platform holders should ask whatever they want to allow third party software in their devices. In the same way, Spotify -- that loves to complain against Apple -- can offer some micro pennies to artists for each time a song is played. You take the offer, or not.

Windows and macOS are open platforms, smartphones are not. It is a tradeoff, you gain security, you lose some openness. I am incredibly happy I convinced my octogenarian mother to give up a PC and use only an iPad. Also, I am worried that opening the platform would only help the big publishers, as it is certainly fair to allow Apple to charge for the use of their APIs, which may be advantageous to the big companies, but not so much to small developers.
the problem with your argument is that Google does allow third-party stores and side-loading, without compromising "security." a lot of security is on the responsibility on the end user. if you download a random app from some random website it's kinda on you imo.

the reason spotify offers micropennies to artists is cus of the apple tax apple pays itself, then uses that money to pay artists a better rate on apple music - that's the literal definition of anti-competitive behavior.
 

fjtorres5591

Active member
May 16, 2023
213
56
28
Visit site
the problem with your argument is that Google does allow third-party stores and side-loading, without compromising "security." a lot of security is on the responsibility on the end user. if you download a random app from some random website it's kinda on you imo.

the reason spotify offers micropennies to artists is cus of the apple tax apple pays itself, then uses that money to pay artists a better rate on apple music - that's the literal definition of anti-competitive behavior.
Correct.
Monopolies aren't the only kind of illegal anti-competitive behavior...
...nor are all monopolies/extreme market share products anti-competitive.

As an example of the later is the SPACEX launch services business. Over 80% of the competed market in 2023. Not by blocking competitors nor under-cost pricing, but by a superior business/tech model. Context matters, not just raw numbers.

Apple was told to allow alternate pay systems--they put in a policy to make the alternatives non-viable via per-download charges. That is as much a blocking tactic as a total ban. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
 

naddy69

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
180
54
28
Visit site
"I am incredibly happy I convinced my octogenarian mother to give up a PC and use only an iPad."

We did exactly the same thing. They had a PC and could not figure it out. We then gave them iPhones. Now they both text us regularly. One is 80 the other is 92!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laura Knotek

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,252
Messages
2,243,523
Members
428,049
Latest member
velocityxs