Apple Executive Defends App Store Rules Scrutinized by EU and US (bloomberg.com) 41
The Apple executive in charge of the App Store in Europe said that the company's policies ensure a level playing field for developers and ease-of-use for customers as regulatory scrutiny over the platform mounts. From a report: "Our efforts to help developers succeed are broad, deep and ongoing, and they extend to apps -- in music, email, or a variety of other categories -- that compete with some aspect of our business," Daniel Matray, the iPhone maker's head of App Store and media services in Europe, said in a speech Tuesday at a four-day virtual conference hosted by Forum Europe. The speech comes as Apple faces antitrust probes in the European Union and U.S. over rules it imposes on developers. In particular, regulators are taking aim at the requirement that apps use the company's in-house payment service, which takes a cut of 15% to 30% of most subscriptions and in-app purchases. Matray said that about 85% of apps it hosts don't pay Apple a commission because they're free or earn revenue through other means. Further reading: How Apple Stacked the App Store With Its Own Products.
Level playing field, nicely done (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
UK is not in the EU
That's not true. The UK has been blathering on about leaving since they arrived in 1973 and we keep showing them where the exit is but they just keep thinking of new reasons to stay.
Re: (Score:3)
"Brexit" simply means they'll go from being half in to half out of Europe.
(at great expense to the taxpayer).
Re: (Score:2)
"Brexit" simply means they'll go from being half in to half out of Europe.
(at great expense to the taxpayer).
The UK is the ex-girlfriend from hell.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but by the time it's all said and done, the UK will probably go for a Norway++ relationship, meaning the UK will bind itself to the same Common Market rules as the EU. Once the fantasy that Britain can somehow magically create trade relationships with the US and the Commonwealth that can make up the gap that would be lost by frictionless access to the EU, that will be the end of that.
And yes, that means Brexit will be among the most futile gestures by a British government since Neville Chamberlain's "Pe
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Level playing field, nicely done (Score:4, Insightful)
They couldn't. As long as they have retail in the EU they will be subject to EU rules. If they close all their retail and B2B stuff in the EU they will be pissing away hundreds of billions of Euros and it still won't help because their products will get taxed or confiscated at the border.
The EU always wins because the EU is a huge, valuable market and in the end it's always more profitable to play by the rules than to leave or to try to circumvent it. Even entire countries like the UK can't overcome it.
You gotta pay (Score:1)
Apple builds this store, creates the tech to consume it and then asks to get paid for it. How dare they ask for money. And the anti-trust thing, just ask Nokia or Motorola how their near monopolies on cell phones and app stores worked out. It just takes one disruptor to make a better phone that the kids think is cooler and Apple will fall from grace.
Re: (Score:3)
I find it very funny that the next article in line after this has the title:
"Google Removes 25 Android Apps Caught Stealing Facebook Credentials "
You are right. (Score:1)
Only Apple simps would use an example of successful curating of Google's store to defend monopolist Apples anti-competative stance.
Other stores are trivial to install on Android. If you are unhappy with it, or even side load apps you want.
This is one of the many reasons why my current phone is an Android.
Your comment has nothing to do with Apple taking a 30% cut from companies that are in direct competition with it.
Re: (Score:3)
"Your comment has nothing to do with Apple taking a 30% cut from companies that are in direct competition with it."
Also those not in direct competition, it's the malware checks you pay for and it's worth every penny.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple builds this store, creates the tech to consume it and then asks to get paid for it. How dare they ask for money. And the anti-trust thing, just ask Nokia or Motorola how their near monopolies on cell phones and app stores worked out. It just takes one disruptor to make a better phone that the kids think is cooler and Apple will fall from grace.
Since smartphones have all become little more than a device that provides access to common apps, I'm struggling to understand what is actually unique about the hardware. Apple's hardware has been reduced to nothing more than a fashion statement. It wouldn't even take a tech company to affect that revenue driven by a popularity contest.
The real question is, how the hell do you even define a "fall", when Apple is a certified card-carrying member of the Too-Big-To-Fail class?
Re: (Score:3)
"I'm struggling to understand what is actually unique about the hardware"
I guess that all depends on what your definition of "unique" is. If it's processor type, memory, etc., that's one thing. If you think that phones are just screens to run apps, that's another. What we don't know at this very moment is what could replace the devices Apple currently manufactures. Picking something from sci-fi might suggest a neural network that directly links one's brain to a personal space in the cloud as an example. We
Re: (Score:1)
"I'm struggling to understand what is actually unique about the hardware"
I guess that all depends on what your definition of "unique" is. If it's processor type, memory, etc., that's one thing. If you think that phones are just screens to run apps, that's another.
Since we're talking about the average computer idiot who doesn't know or care what kind of processor their "phone" has, I'm more referring to that electronic device bolted to every young adult in the modern world, that basically looks and acts just like every other app-serving device.
...What we don't know at this very moment is what could replace the devices Apple currently manufactures. Picking something from sci-fi might suggest a neural network that directly links one's brain to a personal space in the cloud as an example.
Here, let's explore your sci-fi idea. I'm providing online electronic feedback in the 21st Century via a plastic box full of keys on my desk that we all just knew would be extinct by now, back when we were being sold all that
Re: You gotta pay (Score:2)
Apple's hardware has been reduced to nothing more than a fashion statement.
Spoken like a person that either doesn't own an Apple product and doesn't bother to watch things like the recent WWDC Keynote (let alone any of the Dev. Workshops); or, at best, only owns one Apple product, and so hasn't experienced how Apple's spectacular integration comes in handy in the unexpected and most-pleasant ways, day after day, year after year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Spoken like a paid apple shill. Read right from apples shiny PR material.
Spoken like a moronic Apple Hater. Read right from Slashdot's shit-stained owner's manual.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's hardware has been reduced to nothing more than a fashion statement.
Spoken like a person that either doesn't own an Apple product and doesn't bother to watch things like the recent WWDC Keynote (let alone any of the Dev. Workshops); or, at best, only owns one Apple product, and so hasn't experienced how Apple's spectacular integration comes in handy in the unexpected and most-pleasant ways, day after day, year after year.
My first Apple product was a IIc. I currently own a Mac Mini (2012), MBP (2018), iPad (6th Gen), and iPhone 11.
If you cannot actually provide an example of this other-worldly integration that somehow blows away everyone else's "sync" capability, then I question if you are the poor fanboi who only watches from afar. And since Apple is one of the major players who is in constant legal battles for basically stealing designs, I'd say it's rather obvious they're not even trying to be unique.
They're good, but i
Re: (Score:2)
Apple builds this store, creates the tech to consume it and then asks to get paid for it. How dare they ask for money.
That's not the issue, and if it were there would never be an anti-trust case brought against them in the EU.
Their issue is that they are forcing others to use their payment means and then taking a cut. It's no different than you leasing a store in a shopping centre only to be told a condition of doing so is that you have to use the shopping centre's own bank and payment terminals when customers come to you to shop.
Anyway ultimately what you or I think is irrelevant, this is up to the EC and the courts on a
Re: You gotta pay (Score:2)
only to be told a condition of doing so is that you have to use the shopping centre's own bank and payment terminals when customers come to you to shop.
So long as there is another shopping center in town, and the government has not mandated shopping at the one you describe, then no government âoeprotectionsâ are warranted.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to think anti-trust only applies if you have an exclusive monopoly. I'm not sure if you think that due to a complete lack of understanding of how anti-trust works or due to unwavering faith in free market capitalism, something which never works out well for consumers or markets in general. Either way, I'm glad people who wrote laws don't think like you.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to think anti-trust only applies if you have an exclusive monopoly. I'm not sure if you think that due to a complete lack of understanding of how anti-trust works or due to unwavering faith in free market capitalism, something which never works out well for consumers or markets in general. Either way, I'm glad people who wrote laws don't think like you.
I said nothing about an "exclusive monopoly".
But when the marketshare chart looks like the one linked below, "monopoly" doesn't belong as a description of the smaller-piece-holder, when it is roughly 75% Android vs. roughly 25% iOS.
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: maybe read the wikipedia article on "antitrust (Score:2)
Or the EU complaint. Those guys probably know something you don't, eh? Or do you think any kind of market behavior is acceptable? The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890 so this is not new.
For the one-meelionth time in the one-meelionth Slashdot thread on "Monopolistic Apple", the Sherman Act in no way applies.
As the fandroids are ever-anxious to point out, Apple has a far-minority share in every and all market-segment they cater-to. So how in the holy hell are they a "monopoly"?
That's like saying that Volvo has no right to govern the policies of Volvo Dealerships. Don't like their polices? Buy a different car! If you own a Volvo Dealership: Try to get Volvo management to change their policie
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thats for courts to decide, not rapid blind apple fanbois.
As I said above "No cognizable publish policy issue."
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about who built it, it's about who uses it, and who's controlled by it.
If Apple wants full control of their playground, they can simply not sell their products to anyone.
We exert control over corporations because their actions have consequences that reach past their pocketbooks.
They are right... (Score:2)
Apple is absolutely right. There is a level playing field for every one not competing with Apple.
Unfortunately for Apple, this case has nothing to do with developers competing with each other.
Didn’t they learn anything from iBooks? (Score:2)
If the consumer is harmed they are still at risk.