9 ms·

We own this platform, (we built this platform), we make the rules I don't see the issue with this... it's not like they're exploiting an inherited platform lik

by zshrc 3y ago

We own this platform, (we built this platform), we make the rules I don't see the issue with this... it's not like they're exploiting an inherited platform like Oracle with (everything), IBM with Red Hat or Broadcom with VMware.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Would you also defend Microsoft of the 90's with the same argument for the similar issue? At least Microsoft had no way of stopping you selling apps for Windows but Apple is a next level of nefarious.
- zshrc 3y ago
  Microsoft didn't have competition in the 90s. Apple has plenty of competition, they've just built up a competitive advantage which is their fully-integrated platform. Googles been trying to build one on the Pixel for years and haven't come close to their success. Apples been doing this "next level of nefarious" since the App Store's introduction in iPhoneOS 3.0, and it's been fine up to this point, otherwise the platform (and consequentially the apps on these platform -- spotify) wouldn't have thrived the way it did.
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    >Apple has plenty of competition What competition? Apple has a 87% market share amongst US teenage population[1], Epic's core gamer market. It's basically a monopoly amongst their core demographic which will grow up to be adults with jobs and paycheck and guess what they'll buy? More Apple. With <13% market share Android isn't even in the race. [1] https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-stock-teens-iphone-e5e58147 https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-stock-teens-iphone-e5...
    - zshrc 3y ago
      But is anyone prohibited from going out and buying an Android? I see plenty of Samsung ads on TV. Does Apple stop you from downloading Signal and communicating with your Android friends that way? It's called "competitive advantage" in the US.
      - causal 3y ago
        I find it frustrating when people think something can't be a trust just because one can imagine hoops a consumer could jump through to find an alternative. Switching from iPhone to Android is onerous, and most users are locked into multi-year payments contracts for the device they have. A healthy competitive environment should have 10+ options. The fact that two massive corporations have the entire space locked up is not sufficiently competitive nor healthy for consumers.
        giantrobot 3y ago
        The previously existing competition should have competed rather than completely fucking up. Both Apple and Google started as complete underdogs in the phone market. Many current Android manufacturers used to built phones running their own platforms or Windows Mobile. Symbian, Windows Mobile, PalmOS, and BlackBerry all died not because Apple or Google somehow hamstrung them but because they sucked compared to what Apple and Google were selling.
        causal 3y ago
        I agree that would have been nice. But that is not the consumer's fault; it is however in the consumer's interest to have strong antitrust laws which restore a competitive environment.
        giantrobot 3y ago
        What anti-trust laws are going to restore a "competitive" environment? The competitors couldn't compete. They failed. They failed with a huge head start and incumbent advantage! Apple and Google were the underdogs. They made better products people wanted. Microsoft even tried a second (well, fourth) time and failed again! All these companies failed for their own issues and not any sort of action on Apple's part. No legislation is going to make a company fundamentally understand the smartphone market, consumer electronics, or help them understand effective operations. No law is going to help them avoid visits from the Good Idea Fairy or executive hubris to avoid stupid business decisions. You're not going to regulate your way into finding investors willing to put up the cash to make a realistic play in the current smartphone market.
- xtracto 3y ago
  I think what Apple is doing is more similar to Nintendo I the 80s with their "seal of quality". There where a couple of companies that circumvented their security mechanisms and went to court. Was that wrong of Nintendo? My opinion is that, as long as people keep buying and using it, Apple can do whatever they want in their platforms. They will change when most app devs coordinately delete their apps from the store, in a mass "strike" or when customers stop paying for their shitty phones.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    > They will change when most app devs coordinately delete their apps from the store, in a mass "strike" or when customers stop paying for their shitty phones. (Android user here.) Apple doesn't make shitty phones, far from it. Solid build quality, performance and stability across the board... there are very few Android devices that can compete with Apple and almost all come from Samsung.
- paulmd 3y ago
  > At least Microsoft had no way of stopping you selling apps for Windows what are you talking about? microsoft literally created and sold versions of windows that could only access apps sold through their own app store lmao microsoft also has the exact same policies as apple does on their own "platform", try selling an xbox app without doing it through microsoft's store they are possibly the worst example you could have given, and yet here you are doing the victory lap. cringe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39619432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39619432
- kjreact 3y ago
  Since Epic is fighting Apple, let’s overlook the fact it is charged by the FTC for using dark patterns to sell virtual costumes for billions; an interesting choice for a champion of consumer rights.
  - tristan957 3y ago
    How does that apply here?
- matwood 3y ago
  It's hard to compare anything else to MS in the 90's because Windows (and Excel) had 90%+ marketshare. MS was able to strong arm companies into doing what they wanted by threatening to withhold Windows licenses. The MS case and recently lost Google case are closer to each other than anything going on with Apple.
jessekv 3y ago
In the EU, the EU owns the platform and makes the rules (controls and regulates markets). The question is: which platform needs the other more?
- meindnoch 3y ago
  As an EU citizen, I would choose Apple without hesitation.
  - abhinavk 3y ago
    Are you in Stockholm?
    - meindnoch 3y ago
      No. Why?
      - Nevermark 3y ago
        Well, perhaps in Syndrome then?
_aavaa_ 3y ago
> We own this platform, (we built this platform), we make the rules I own my phone, I make the rules. If Apple doesn't want Epic on the App Store, fine. But their current level of control over what people can do with the devices they purchased and own is absurd and has nothing to do with market size.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  No no, you see the restrictions are there for YOUR protection. "Won't someone please think of the children?"
  - _aavaa_ 3y ago
    "Anytime someone puts a lock on something you own, against your wishes, and doesn't give you the key, they're not doing it for your benefit"
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      HN's collective opinion: "Hey, if you don't like Apple's walled garden, the you can giit out! [and move to Android]" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2bOXQibamM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2bOXQibamM
      - djmips 3y ago
        It's a variation on the temporarily embarassed millionaires. HN is full of temporarily embarassed walled garden magnates. The say I don't want oligopolies or walled gardens punished because one day I could own a walled garden money making machine!
  - blehn 3y ago
    You say that like someone who didn't have to periodically clean/erase/throw away their parents' malware-infested Windows machine (which was already bogged down by anti-virus software) in the early '00s. Not that I agree with every Apple policy, but it's hard to argue that their customers aren't generally more "protected" than they have been on other platforms. The fact that my mom can safely use an iPhone for 4-5 years with little to no support from me is incredible.

by zshrc 3y ago

FirmwareBurner 3y ago

Would you also defend Microsoft of the 90's with the same argument for the similar issue? At least Microsoft had no way of stopping you selling apps for Windows but Apple is a next level of nefarious.

zshrc 3y ago
Microsoft didn't have competition in the 90s. Apple has plenty of competition, they've just built up a competitive advantage which is their fully-integrated platform. Googles been trying to build one on the Pixel for years and haven't come close to their success. Apples been doing this "next level of nefarious" since the App Store's introduction in iPhoneOS 3.0, and it's been fine up to this point, otherwise the platform (and consequentially the apps on these platform -- spotify) wouldn't have thrived the way it did.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  >Apple has plenty of competition What competition? Apple has a 87% market share amongst US teenage population[1], Epic's core gamer market. It's basically a monopoly amongst their core demographic which will grow up to be adults with jobs and paycheck and guess what they'll buy? More Apple. With <13% market share Android isn't even in the race. [1] https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-stock-teens-iphone-e5e58147 https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-stock-teens-iphone-e5...
  - zshrc 3y ago
    But is anyone prohibited from going out and buying an Android? I see plenty of Samsung ads on TV. Does Apple stop you from downloading Signal and communicating with your Android friends that way? It's called "competitive advantage" in the US.
    - causal 3y ago
      I find it frustrating when people think something can't be a trust just because one can imagine hoops a consumer could jump through to find an alternative. Switching from iPhone to Android is onerous, and most users are locked into multi-year payments contracts for the device they have. A healthy competitive environment should have 10+ options. The fact that two massive corporations have the entire space locked up is not sufficiently competitive nor healthy for consumers.
      - giantrobot 3y ago
        The previously existing competition should have competed rather than completely fucking up. Both Apple and Google started as complete underdogs in the phone market. Many current Android manufacturers used to built phones running their own platforms or Windows Mobile. Symbian, Windows Mobile, PalmOS, and BlackBerry all died not because Apple or Google somehow hamstrung them but because they sucked compared to what Apple and Google were selling.
        causal 3y ago
        I agree that would have been nice. But that is not the consumer's fault; it is however in the consumer's interest to have strong antitrust laws which restore a competitive environment.
        giantrobot 3y ago
        What anti-trust laws are going to restore a "competitive" environment? The competitors couldn't compete. They failed. They failed with a huge head start and incumbent advantage! Apple and Google were the underdogs. They made better products people wanted. Microsoft even tried a second (well, fourth) time and failed again! All these companies failed for their own issues and not any sort of action on Apple's part. No legislation is going to make a company fundamentally understand the smartphone market, consumer electronics, or help them understand effective operations. No law is going to help them avoid visits from the Good Idea Fairy or executive hubris to avoid stupid business decisions. You're not going to regulate your way into finding investors willing to put up the cash to make a realistic play in the current smartphone market.
xtracto 3y ago
I think what Apple is doing is more similar to Nintendo I the 80s with their "seal of quality". There where a couple of companies that circumvented their security mechanisms and went to court. Was that wrong of Nintendo? My opinion is that, as long as people keep buying and using it, Apple can do whatever they want in their platforms. They will change when most app devs coordinately delete their apps from the store, in a mass "strike" or when customers stop paying for their shitty phones.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > They will change when most app devs coordinately delete their apps from the store, in a mass "strike" or when customers stop paying for their shitty phones. (Android user here.) Apple doesn't make shitty phones, far from it. Solid build quality, performance and stability across the board... there are very few Android devices that can compete with Apple and almost all come from Samsung.
paulmd 3y ago
> At least Microsoft had no way of stopping you selling apps for Windows what are you talking about? microsoft literally created and sold versions of windows that could only access apps sold through their own app store lmao microsoft also has the exact same policies as apple does on their own "platform", try selling an xbox app without doing it through microsoft's store they are possibly the worst example you could have given, and yet here you are doing the victory lap. cringe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39619432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39619432
kjreact 3y ago
Since Epic is fighting Apple, let’s overlook the fact it is charged by the FTC for using dark patterns to sell virtual costumes for billions; an interesting choice for a champion of consumer rights.
- tristan957 3y ago
  How does that apply here?
matwood 3y ago
It's hard to compare anything else to MS in the 90's because Windows (and Excel) had 90%+ marketshare. MS was able to strong arm companies into doing what they wanted by threatening to withhold Windows licenses. The MS case and recently lost Google case are closer to each other than anything going on with Apple.

jessekv 3y ago

In the EU, the EU owns the platform and makes the rules (controls and regulates markets). The question is: which platform needs the other more?

meindnoch 3y ago
As an EU citizen, I would choose Apple without hesitation.
- abhinavk 3y ago
  Are you in Stockholm?
  - meindnoch 3y ago
    No. Why?
    - Nevermark 3y ago
      Well, perhaps in Syndrome then?

_aavaa_ 3y ago

> We own this platform, (we built this platform), we make the rules I own my phone, I make the rules. If Apple doesn't want Epic on the App Store, fine. But their current level of control over what people can do with the devices they purchased and own is absurd and has nothing to do with market size.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
No no, you see the restrictions are there for YOUR protection. "Won't someone please think of the children?"
- _aavaa_ 3y ago
  "Anytime someone puts a lock on something you own, against your wishes, and doesn't give you the key, they're not doing it for your benefit"
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    HN's collective opinion: "Hey, if you don't like Apple's walled garden, the you can giit out! [and move to Android]" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2bOXQibamM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2bOXQibamM
    - djmips 3y ago
      It's a variation on the temporarily embarassed millionaires. HN is full of temporarily embarassed walled garden magnates. The say I don't want oligopolies or walled gardens punished because one day I could own a walled garden money making machine!
- blehn 3y ago
  You say that like someone who didn't have to periodically clean/erase/throw away their parents' malware-infested Windows machine (which was already bogged down by anti-virus software) in the early '00s. Not that I agree with every Apple policy, but it's hard to argue that their customers aren't generally more "protected" than they have been on other platforms. The fact that my mom can safely use an iPhone for 4-5 years with little to no support from me is incredible.