You mean the antitrust case that Microsoft won? Or the Standard Oil breakup that made Rockefeller the richest human in world history years after he retired and brought upon higher costs and profit seeking from the resulting companies?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Responds to EU's Decision to Narrow Antitrust Case Prompted by Spotify
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You mean the antitrust case that Microsoft won? Or the Standard Oil breakup that made Rockefeller the richest human in world history years after he retired and brought upon higher costs and profit seeking from the resulting companies?
They have created their own platform but they can’t use it because of Apple, they can’t even mention it in the app or provide a link to go to their website and subscribe. I’m with spotify on this one.
Seems pretty fair to say they have to pay but you cannot prevent them from knowing if they sign up online they can get alternative prices. Its a balance on these things and this is a small concession and I think a reasonable one. Also up to these companies to work hard to let people know that.
Did the DoJ really shoot it down? Despite all the breathless claims that MS was going to be broken up, and the ridiculous claims there would be "Baby Bills" everywhere, none of it happened. All that happened was that MS opened some APIs, which people then complained about because it meant Microsoft was only helping people better engage with Windows.
LOVE the updated news that the EU Commission 'will no longer challenge Apple's requirement for apps to use the App Store's in-app purchase system for digital goods and services' this is a HUGE win!
Also shows how shifty they can be and possibly how easily they can be bought!
It would be nice to have Spotify, YouTube Music and Amazon Music (non-of which I use personally) to stream directly FROM and ON HomePods ... but I'm sure this can be done via AirPlay 2 from said app.
So the only complaining about it since so many other larger companies made noise about!
CC fees covers:
manufacture of the card
A hard and Soft check into your credit rating,
data mine everything you do with that card - even if you're unaware what exactly is done with that data (about 90% do NOT know).
Insurance for your purchases (LIMITED to specific CC cards by CC providers and at specific credit teirs and to specific countries):
aka - prepaid credit cards may insure you up to a certain amount.
aka - post paid credit cards, not all provide insurance.
Oh limited insurance for minimum monthly payments when you loose your source of income. The Terms of payment or length of credit does NOT change.
AppStore:
Insures your purchase outright and indefinitely,
Gaurantees the app you create is available and can be used on ALL iPhone models for up to 6yrs straight - unless hardware specific (Macro Lens on former to 14 plus models and all Pro/Pro Max models). Unless the developer pulls their app I'm able to re-download my purchase for that time frame for my device.
Arbitration of cost vs purchase by Apple for user and/or app company/developer/dev-Team.
Quality apps and services - much better targeted adds in the AppStore itself.
A lot more.
Absolutely NO cost to the vendor/developer/user for app cloud storage - immediate access to download! Name me one app store on ANY platform that has as many unique applications/games/tools.
AppStore has NOT leaked consumer data - YET!
^ you could NOT say the same about Equifax or TransUnion both of which have had data breaches (complete ones btw) multiple times in year. Any sanctions against them? NADDA - how safe do you REALLY feel with either having your information.
Properly defined rules they stick to unless arbitraged and a new consideration tends them to modify the rules which they clearly publish.
Equifax nor TransUnion have a DEFINITIVE Credit Score rating that is properly followed by landlords for rentals or for purchases of assets above $10K US/CAN. it's a crap system that isn't properly defined and followed ~ its like pixie dust!
Also shows how shifty they can be and possibly how easily they can be bought!
It would be nice to have Spotify, YouTube Music and Amazon Music (non-of which I use personally) to stream directly FROM and ON HomePods ... but I'm sure this can be done via AirPlay 2 from said app.
Didn't seem to be big 10yrs ago now did it? No ... tracking back that far NOBODY using iOS complained about the 30% fee!!
So the only complaining about it since so many other larger companies made noise about!
Really?
CC fees covers:
manufacture of the card
A hard and Soft check into your credit rating,
data mine everything you do with that card - even if you're unaware what exactly is done with that data (about 90% do NOT know).
Insurance for your purchases (LIMITED to specific CC cards by CC providers and at specific credit teirs and to specific countries):
aka - prepaid credit cards may insure you up to a certain amount.
aka - post paid credit cards, not all provide insurance.
Oh limited insurance for minimum monthly payments when you loose your source of income. The Terms of payment or length of credit does NOT change.
AppStore:
Insures your purchase outright and indefinitely,
Gaurantees the app you create is available and can be used on ALL iPhone models for up to 6yrs straight - unless hardware specific (Macro Lens on former to 14 plus models and all Pro/Pro Max models). Unless the developer pulls their app I'm able to re-download my purchase for that time frame for my device.
Arbitration of cost vs purchase by Apple for user and/or app company/developer/dev-Team.
Quality apps and services - much better targeted adds in the AppStore itself.
A lot more.
Absolutely NO cost to the vendor/developer/user for app cloud storage - immediate access to download! Name me one app store on ANY platform that has as many unique applications/games/tools.
AppStore has NOT leaked consumer data - YET!
^ you could NOT say the same about Equifax or TransUnion both of which have had data breaches (complete ones btw) multiple times in year. Any sanctions against them? NADDA - how safe do you REALLY feel with either having your information.
Properly defined rules they stick to unless arbitraged and a new consideration tends them to modify the rules which they clearly publish.
Equifax nor TransUnion have a DEFINITIVE Credit Score rating that is properly followed by landlords for rentals or for purchases of assets above $10K US/CAN. it's a crap system that isn't properly defined and followed ~ its like pixie dust!
Last edited:
I would not say Microsoft won the antitrust case. While the ruling to break up the company was later overturned, Microsoft was still found to have violated multiple antitrust regulations and had to agree to a number of requirements and constraints as a result of those case rulings. MS had also made a variety of other “behavior adjustments” during the antitrust investigation and process which is at least part of what the EU seems to be seeking here without a "formal" trial.
Last edited:
As per the original post, I was referring to the marketing - not the feature itself.
I guess if you don't count, they created the whole environment, maintain it and upgrade it.
I don't remember seeing a Spotify phone.
Last edited:
Digital Markets Act will take care of all this bullsh1t
Microsoft won the IE case? I'm not sure about that:
United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia
I remember them at the time having to build in a 'browser choice' dialog into XP that the USDOJ and its competitors all had a say in.
Hardly a victory for the extremely proud and competitive Microsoft.
It saw the end of Bill Gates as CEO and IE/Edge is hardly the power that it once was (although arguably Steve Ballmer has a lot to do with that too).
I think that Rockefeller's personal wealth wasn't the point of the Sherman act - it was more the setting the precedence of antitrust laws to help protect a competitive and healthy economy.
We're all here because we admire Apple to some extent - you can admire parts of a company and be appalled by others - as I do.
You may take the view that it's perfectly reasonable that 'winner takes all' - ok fine.
Except the US federal government has not agreed with that viewpoint for 100+ years and has demonstrated it on numerous occasions - Ma Bell and the Baby Bells etc. (I'm not American, so I'm sure that there are many other cases that I don't know of).
Interestingly, people think they should be able to use digital platforms for free or at almost no cost. If platform makers can't make money, they will not create and maintain said platforms.
Microsoft was almost broken up. They appealed it and won the appeal. The only thing they didn't win was the antisteering measures and had to allow other web browsers on Windows.
Fast forward a few years after that decision, Google Chrome came out. And now look where the industry is now: Internet Explorer is dead and Chrome is the #1 browser in the world. Chrome never would've kicked off if it wasn't for the DoJ's decision.
I like the convenience and security of buying through Apple, I really do.
I dont wanna give out my credit card number to every developer whoses app I wanna buy, or use in app purchase.
Maybe developers will lower prices if Apple gets rid of that 30%, but my guess is they’ll just increase price by, oh I don’t know, 30% after awhile, because they already know we are willing to pay that extra 30%.
30% is for those developers that earns 1 million or more, if you earn less its only 15%.
15% aint that much to have your app on the biggest (?) app store in the world.
I dont wanna give out my credit card number to every developer whoses app I wanna buy, or use in app purchase.
Maybe developers will lower prices if Apple gets rid of that 30%, but my guess is they’ll just increase price by, oh I don’t know, 30% after awhile, because they already know we are willing to pay that extra 30%.
30% is for those developers that earns 1 million or more, if you earn less its only 15%.
15% aint that much to have your app on the biggest (?) app store in the world.
Really? App Store sells apps. They can charge for it (especially if alternative app stores are allowed). They do nothing for in-app purchases. The service is provided by the app developers.
Microsoft won the IE case? I'm not sure about that:
United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I remember them at the time having to build in a 'browser choice' dialog into XP that the USDOJ and its competitors all had a say in.
Hardly a victory for the extremely proud and competitive Microsoft.
It saw the end of Bill Gates as CEO and IE/Edge is hardly the power that it once was (although arguably Steve Ballmer has a lot to do with that too).
I think that Rockefeller's personal wealth wasn't the point of the Sherman act - it was more the setting the precedence of antitrust laws to help protect a competitive and healthy economy.
We're all here because we admire Apple to some extent - you can admire parts of a company and be appalled by others - as I do.
You may take the view that it's perfectly reasonable that 'winner takes all' - ok fine.
Except the US federal government has not agreed with that viewpoint for 100+ years and has demonstrated it on numerous occasions - Ma Bell and the Baby Bells etc. (I'm not American, so I'm sure that there are many other cases that I don't know of).
Yes. Microsoft won the case on appeal. Not only did they win the case on appeal, the judge that presided over the original case got admonished for being biased and removed from his post. Ultimately the only thing that was left was them having to accept a verdict they were a schoolhouse bully… with their market position simply affirmed, and strengthened.
Browser choice is a European mandate, and only ever was prompted on European machines. And like how poorly Standard Oil and AT&T’s breakups have aged… and now this cookie nonsense being consensual data muggings… we can now see how obnoxious, useless, and counter to our best interests that they really are.
Allow me to add in. The breakup of Standard Oil is what *made* Rockefeller the wealthiest human in world history. He was not before that. It made him money, because he was the primary shareholder of each resulting company, in 1937 the man - as an individual - still accounted for a full 1.5% of the entire US GDP. Following the breakup, each of the 43 resulting companies made more money combined than Standard Oil ever made - instantly. Prices went up. Innovation went down. We’re still fighting this same battle against innovation in energy to this very day. More than a century later.
Last edited:
Yes, and typically you get one or two percent back. So, effectively, the fee is one or two percent.FYI: Swipe fees are between 2% and 4%
Swipe Fees
Credit and debit card swipe fees cost retailers and their customers more than $170 billion each year.nrf.com
"For credit cards, the fees average about 2% of the transaction but can be as much as 4% for some premium rewards cards."
And Apple exists because of the state so the state can do whatever it wants (this includes business regulation and consumer protection).
Hey Spotify, if you don’t like these anticompetitive rules all you have to do is start up your own hardware business and enter a market with incredibly high barriers to entry that already has two dominant, established competitors, one of which is sitting on enough cash to buy you and at least five companies your size.
That’s what this comment sounds like. It’s all noise, signifying nothing.
No one is saying Apple or other platform makers can't make money from creating or maintaining their platforms. The issue is about dominant companies engaging in anticompetitive behavior.
Apple can still make money selling iOS/iPhones.
Apple can still make money selling ads on their apps including the App Store.
Apple can still make money charging developers fees for offering/selling apps through the App Store.
...and so on.
None of this necessarily has to go away.
The ability, for example, of users to sideload or use alternative app stores on Android didn't put the Google Play store out of business and the same or similar occurring on iOS shouldn't put Apple's App Store out of business either. If the App Store is a desirable source for apps, developers and users will continue to use it. In the end, competition from other app sources may push Apple to make the App Store better which would be good for customers.
You are joking yes?
Let's see...
1. Microsoft forced OEMs into Windows only contracts, meaning if you wanted deep cuts to Windows licensing fees so you could compete with other Windows-based systems, you weren't allowed to sell computers with other OSes pre-installed. This effectively pushed non-Windows operating systems out.
2. Required any company that wanted site-wide licensing for Windows/Office/Server they had to count and pay for every "seat", which included, Macs, Unix workstations, mainframe terminals. Those agreements were far, far more costly than the actual hardware, so eventually it became cheaper for companies to start replacing hardware. This effectively pushed all non-Windows compatible hardware out.
3. Whenever a cross-platform technology starting making headway in the market, Microsoft was famous for, "embrace, enhance, extinguish" tactics. Netscape was a victim of that when Microsoft - who had a monopoly in the desktop computer market, decided that IE should be tied into Windows 98. This effectively pushed all non-Windows based technologies out.
And remember this was a company that had an actual monopoly. When monopoly still meant; a single entity that controlled a vast majority share of its respective market. (And building and owning something does not make you a monopoly, it makes you the owner.)
They are still a monopoly today, and I whole-heartedly agree that they should be allowed to do whatever they want on their Surface computers. Just as I believe Google should do what they want with Pixel devices. In the same way I think Apple should be allowed to what they want on their iPhones.
ANY company should be allowed to design and create whatever product they want. Have it run however they want. What features goes in that devices. Etc. Then let the market decide. The only time that should ever really become an issue is if that "device" obtains a monopoly position in its respective market and has done so through anti-competitive tactics. (i.e. If the only (or easiest/best) way to sign up to Spotify was via the iOS App Store, then Apple should not be able to dictate the terms.)*
*Although I do think if a company/developer/service creates a "player" only app, then they should be allowed to direct users to an outside method of subscribing, even if in an indirect way.
Last edited:
Apple came out with a great business model and now companies are complaining about the price. But what's the alternative? Lower the percentage? That's a slippery slope and also gets into the realm of governments setting the price. Remove the percentage altogether and make Apple bill the companies for the software and distribution? So much for startups, free apps and innovation. Someone (probably many) gets screwed with each possible resolution. I think leaving it as-is is best since no one is on the app store by force.
For software that has very low marginal costs, 30% may not be a huge burden. But when you are passing a huge percentage of each subscription to license holders or other parties, it’s a whole different story. It’s impossible for Spotify to offer the same price through their app as Apple does.
Apple and Spotify likely pay very similar rates to license music. I want Apple to compete by having better software for streaming, not because they are abusing their monopoly position to make their service more convenient or cheaper to sign up for.
Apple and Spotify likely pay very similar rates to license music. I want Apple to compete by having better software for streaming, not because they are abusing their monopoly position to make their service more convenient or cheaper to sign up for.
Credit cards and banks are a very different kettle of fish.
Banks deal in billions of billions of dollars with the millions of transactions made on their credit cards. While Apple has billions in revenue from in app purchases. It simply would not compare to credit card revenue.