It is almost impressive how fundamentally you miss the point of so much going on here. The platform isn’t just the store, it starts with the phone and the OS. Apple has also cultivated a user base that has money and a willingness to spend on the platform. Again, since you keep thinking all of this is so easy, make your own phone, attract your own users, etc. Writing this out has distracted me enough to burn my pancakes. Moving on. Goodbye.
It is almost impressive how fundamentally you miss the point of so much going on here
not really. you just are including bits that are fundamentally not connected to the existence of the store. All the security features/UX tooling existed long before the store did and is part of the hardware pricing.
The platform isn’t just the store, it starts with the phone and the OS.
Sure, and the users are paying for that when they bought the hardware. nothing forces apple to build their own OS everything they need can be supported in userspace via linux for example. Its apples choice to develop and maintain the OS no one is forcing them to build their own hardware. There are plenty of examples of hardware developed by third parties that dont require exorbitant price gouging and compete on the market.
Apple has also cultivated a user base that has money and a willingness to spend on the platform.
This is entirely irrelevant to apples behavior with regard to application distribution and the services being provided.
Again, since you keep thinking all of this is so easy, make your own phone, attract your own users, etc.
Already been done multiple times, and plenty of alternatives exist and I also support such devices by avoiding apple native apis. in fact the app store is the only one I cant avoid because of apples policies this case is exactly about and which android already lost the case on and its an identical situation. SCOTUS literally disagreed with you already on this situation.
Its the active hostile and monopolistic behavior of apple regarding third party distribution that is at issue here. not them providing services that developers would actually use (and charging for market competitive rates for).
Writing this out has distracted me enough to burn my pancakes. Moving on. Goodbye.
SCOTUS disagreed with you re: android. and its not their platform, we’re discussing allowing stores/application to be installed on the users devices without apple interfering/collecting rent for doing nothing.
the reason apple is offering to do it at 15% (matching what google had to do) is because they realizing how much they fucked up with the first pass they did at 27% and that they’re likely to lose in front of SCOTUS.
facts:
apple will not be materially harmed by allowing 3rd party stores to be installed. neither in profits or due to being the ‘default’ store. losing a small percentage of store rent seeking profits will not effect their bottom line.
literally nothing apple argued in front of the courts for how they situation is different is relevant to antitrust laws or would be impacted.
its unlikely SCOTUS will overturn this result and apple is trying to buy their way out of the situation now because they know it. In short, not even apple believes your nonsense stance on the issue.
They are if their actions are determined to be anticompetitive. Antitrust laws prohibit a wide variety of monopolistic activities. Most companies at the top of the tech industry have been successfully sued under antitrust laws at some point in recent history, and for behaviors for less egregious than this.
It is almost impressive how fundamentally you miss the point of so much going on here. The platform isn’t just the store, it starts with the phone and the OS. Apple has also cultivated a user base that has money and a willingness to spend on the platform. Again, since you keep thinking all of this is so easy, make your own phone, attract your own users, etc. Writing this out has distracted me enough to burn my pancakes. Moving on. Goodbye.
not really. you just are including bits that are fundamentally not connected to the existence of the store. All the security features/UX tooling existed long before the store did and is part of the hardware pricing.
Sure, and the users are paying for that when they bought the hardware. nothing forces apple to build their own OS everything they need can be supported in userspace via linux for example. Its apples choice to develop and maintain the OS no one is forcing them to build their own hardware. There are plenty of examples of hardware developed by third parties that dont require exorbitant price gouging and compete on the market.
This is entirely irrelevant to apples behavior with regard to application distribution and the services being provided.
Already been done multiple times, and plenty of alternatives exist and I also support such devices by avoiding apple native apis. in fact the app store is the only one I cant avoid because of apples policies this case is exactly about and which android already lost the case on and its an identical situation. SCOTUS literally disagreed with you already on this situation.
Its the active hostile and monopolistic behavior of apple regarding third party distribution that is at issue here. not them providing services that developers would actually use (and charging for market competitive rates for).
poor pancakes. =(
Apple is not obligated to let third party stores operate on their platform. No matter how much you whine about it.
SCOTUS disagreed with you re: android. and its not their platform, we’re discussing allowing stores/application to be installed on the users devices without apple interfering/collecting rent for doing nothing.
the reason apple is offering to do it at 15% (matching what google had to do) is because they realizing how much they fucked up with the first pass they did at 27% and that they’re likely to lose in front of SCOTUS.
facts:
its unlikely SCOTUS will overturn this result and apple is trying to buy their way out of the situation now because they know it. In short, not even apple believes your nonsense stance on the issue.
hell, even moronic republicans in florida disagree with you.
Apple controls the platform, which includes all of the software for their devices. I don’t care what republicans have to say on any topic.
laugh like i said you’re a bootlicker. the idea that apple controls the software the owners of the device can install is mind bogglingly insane.
in your head:
insane
They are if their actions are determined to be anticompetitive. Antitrust laws prohibit a wide variety of monopolistic activities. Most companies at the top of the tech industry have been successfully sued under antitrust laws at some point in recent history, and for behaviors for less egregious than this.