Last edited:
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 vs. the U.S. Department of Justice: What You Need to Know
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But Samsung products don’t work with Apple either, so what’s your point?
So after the US Gov’t bans Tik Tok and “breaks up” Apple, it’ll be smooth sailing for all us normal Yanks, right?
Cripes.
Someone Under 60
2024
Cripes.
Someone Under 60
2024
I somewhat agree however there is some responsibility companies should be held to if they are going to become a leader in communication systems. I'd hate for any more corps to become the size that WeChat has become.
I wasn't forced into getting the products I have but do find it unfair that I have to sell those accessories at a major loss or let it become e-waste when I switch to something that benefits me more at the time. I still have my Mac Mini and iPad but because I took the iPhone out the mix it makes my watch, airtags and airpods useless. I hate having to be all in or nothing.
DOJ wants to blame Apple for the failure of Windows Phone? Green bubbles cause kids to buy iPhones? DOJ is going to have an uphill battle.
Look at a number of the “Trump” cases. The legal entity here in the US needs a reset. Add this to the JWWTT list.
Apple should just leave the US. Not worth the regulatory hassle.
I'll give the DOJ the benefit of the doubt for some issues, but others are just laughably stupid. Teenagers get peer pressured to buy iPhones: gotta sue Apple. Green bubbles: gotta sue Apple. iMessage not on Android: gotta sue Apple.
There is no smoking gun there! The DOJ is just mad at Apple for being successful? Is this some kind of Woke joke? Some of the claims are hilarious! How does the DOJ intend to prove these in a court of law?
- Powerful, expensive hardware is unnecessary if consumers can play games through cloud streaming apps.
- Apple uses its "rapidly expanding" role as a TV and movie producer to control content and affect the "flow of speech."
- The DoJ holds itself responsible for Apple's success. U.S. vs. Microsoft "created new opportunities for innovation," and without this case, Apple would have had more difficulty achieving success with the iPod and the subsequent iPhone.
- Apple made smartphones other than the iPhone worse by stifling the growth of cloud gaming apps and interactive AI services.
Last edited:
This case is so incredibly weak.
It won't get past the "monopoly" question, and then everything goes away. Which is a shame, because I'd like to see the silly arguments the DOJ would try to make about how Apple uses SMS and green bubbles.
But this case is going nowhere.
It won't get past the "monopoly" question, and then everything goes away. Which is a shame, because I'd like to see the silly arguments the DOJ would try to make about how Apple uses SMS and green bubbles.
But this case is going nowhere.
Apple has already hurt them badly by offering me cash back practically instantly. The bank canceled one of my cards because I never use it. My Costco credit card is used only at Costco lol.
And there are cards that do not offer virtual card numbers. They will surely blame Apple for that one too.
Succinctly: complete nonsensical bs.
goddamit it europe, stop sticking your nose in where it's not needed.
Oh wait.
Oh wait.
This is a sad reflection on DoJokers that takes money (tax) from all their citizens to justify their existence, self promotion and looking for something to fill their time. On the opposing side is which has a significant amount of consumers world wide that freely exchange their money for products within a closed ecosystem. DoJ leave Apple alone, pursue some real cases of injustice and allow the free market decide what it wants in their Apple products.
Potential new slogan for DoJ': "Department Of JUSTice" - JUST because we can."
Potential new slogan for DoJ': "Department Of JUSTice" - JUST because we can."
Feelings, basically. Apple is getting sued on some part due to hurt feelings lol.
That's a negative.
App store - no alternatives. Devs forced buy-in. No web apps allowed. This is covered.
Green bubbles - I've cited for years that Apple has the option to deploy RCS to be secure with messages to Android devices, yet they chose to avoid it... conveniently until this year. (edit for clarification: Apple in the same breath claims they care about security more than anyone else, but any message IOS sends to Android is unencrypted, and they absolutely can fix it - and are going to - but chose not to for years, because it benefited in $$)
Apple doesn't need to be a monopolist to behave with monopolistic predatory exclusionary behavior.
...And here we go with ad-hominem attacks instead of the merits. You'd never know that some Apple people are cultists.
Look, you can like the hardware and the software and still agree or not agree with the concepts. Apple shouldn't be doing these things. Many of them are literally being changed this year because Apple knew this was coming and the EU already enforced it. It's bad juju. It's not like the DOJ kicked your dog or something, you don't have to respond like it's the end of creation. Apple shouldn't do bad things.
Last edited:
The DOJ will soon be suing Nintendo, Sony, BMW, Tous, Nike etc.
This lawsuit is nonsense. People being stigmatized because cool
Kids use iPhones. So Android users need to have a blue bubble. WTF!
It will be interesting what comes of this. It isn’t;t like the DOJ just decided one day to file. This has been a five year investigation. Wonder just what they found and they are looking for.
Punishing companies for using stigma in the business would set a new precedent indeed. Consider industries like clothing, jewelry, cars, beverages, cosmetics, etc which also use stigma. Selling perfumes and cologne is all about stigma as is that Rolex watch.
Also consider the precedent set with requiring an Apple watch to work with everyone else. I guess lenses made by Sony, Nikon, and Canon will have to be designed to be compatible with all other camera vendors. Instead of an optimized design image quality would be sacrificed for universal compatibility similar to the use of adapters today. Will Tesla have to open up FSD to Waymo ? If someone dies from Waymo FSD is Tesla liable ?
People are saying having more choices won't hurt but it actually will because the precedent is far reaching and creates fragmentation. Imagine having to install and create accounts with 15 different app stores because the app is only offered in a specific one. How about having to install and setup a separate app from each bank because the credit card will not work with Apple wallet and only with their own apps. We already know what that's like with smart home devices where each one requires installing and setting up a separate app. This fragmentation is one of the reasons why consumers have turned their backs on the smart home industry. People are very upset with CA because instead of using Apple wallet for a digital driver's license, which everyone wants, they insist on having everyone install and setup the DMV's own super buggy app. That's fragmentation and it absolutely does not improve the customer experience.
What happens when Apple is required to completely open iOS and allow any HW to use any feature on the iPhone ? Apple will have to allocate resources to supporting the new devices to fix bugs and security problems. iOS is buggy enough without this distraction. If for any reason a third party doesn't get Apple's full support they will complain that Apple is intentionally trying to make the competition worse. If a third party product is causing bugs it could impact the stability of everything else. Consider how some rogue apps were causing the iPhone 15 to overheat and Apple was blamed for this because they "used titanium" (credit Ming Chi Kuo). Note again that *Apple was blamed* not the app developers. This instability occurred even with a locked down system so imagine what it's like when it becomes a free for all. Take a look at an open system like Windows. It's unstable precisely because you have so many different vendors with their own drivers running on the system. It's impossible to test for every possible permutation. Locking down a system is how you get stability and compatibility and right now the market offers consumers a choice. You can choose macOS / Windows or iOS / Android to trade flexibility vs stability. Having the government forcing Apple to become Windows / Android is actually taking away choice from the market.
This case is very different from requiring phone companies to allow portable phone numbers. The US government is completely incompetent and their worst competency is in tech. Look no further to when tech executives get hauled into Congress where old politicians show the public that they have zero understanding of even the basics of tech. Some of their questions are just embarrassing. You absolutely do not want the US government micromanaging product design with the exception being when public safety is at risk. People cheering the DOJ because they believe they will get lower prices are clueless. It's just moving money from Apple's pocket to companies like Spotify's pocket. No, they will not use the savings to pay artists more or pass savings to customers. Spotify is the world's largest streaming service and pay the artists the least. Artists despise Spotify and what they have done to the music industry. Neither will Epic where the CEO is salivating over the opportunity to inflate his own valuation. This case isn't for Apple customers who were not the ones asking for this lawsuit. This case is about corporate greed from all interested corporations and that includes Apple. Just be aware that passing on savings to customers is about as ridiculous as the during the debate for the Trump tax plan when they argued that the tax savings will allow companies to increase wages for employees. The lowly customers will just end up with a worse product with nothing to show for it.
Last edited:
Your historical anecdote fails to appreciate how Apple revolutionized and democratized software distribution with the iTunes Store and its derivative, the App Store. Unlike traditional software distribution at physical retail stores or even website software downloads, the App Store provides users with a secure and simple way to locate, install, purchase, and update applications. This greatly increases the commerce for consumer third-party apps. Additionally, it provides small developers with a secure and cost-effective method for distributing their apps, with almost no sales lost due to counterfeiting or piracy.Does anyone remember buying “shrink wrap” software off the shelf in retail stores? Those stores had rows and rows of shelves with software applications for the IBM PC. Some even might have had a small dusty shelf at the back with a few applications for that Apple platform.
If IBM had the same control over the software industry that Apple has today ALL those stores would have been IBM “App Stores”, and we all would still be shopping there. IBM had the money to do this at the time so it's not as far fetched as you might think...
Of course those IBM stores would not have had that dusty shelf in the back with applications for the Apple platform so Apple would have had to open their own stores to compete. They never would have survived.
Microsoft also would have never survived because IBM wouldn't have used them to port 86 DOS (a CP/M clone) to the IBM PC, but that’s the silver lining in this dark alternate reality
The software industry has been staunchly independent from the very beginning. Apple is hardware company and has never made money from developing software so it should NOT be allowed to exert such control over the software industry. This is the main anti-trust issue.
IBM knew they were a hardware company AND, YES, YES, YES!!! they didn't want to get anywhere near an ANTI-TRUST situation. This is a historical FACT! IBM understood if they created their own software division for the IBM PC it would have a natural advantage over any and every other software company that might write apps for the platform. This would dissuade other companies from writing for the platform and create an anti-trust issue.
I believe that some people who are unhappy with the App Store model, including other small developers, might not fully realize that going back to "the way things were" could actually make it even harder for small developers to succeed while entrenching large developers. The old model would have increased the barrier of entry for new, smaller developers to enter the most lucrative platform in the world.
I want to make it clear that I don't believe Apple's development of the App Store was driven by altruistic motives. As you pointed out, software for the Macintosh platform was scarce, and I think Apple's institutional fear of relying too heavily on large developers for the success of their platform is why the App Store was designed to promote the distribution of free and low-cost apps by small developers.
just my 2¢! 🤓
Did you know that Google's RCS implements end-to-end encryption, but that non-Google RCS does not?
Yes, Apple could have chosen to implement Google's RCS, but no sane company would tie themselves to Google messaging anything.
Apple chose to work with the standards, not Google's RCS.
I’m cracking up at grown adults being bothered because ppl know they use android with green bubbles