Apple Confronts Critics in Letter To Congress (axios.com) 41
Apple is swatting down criticisms about how it runs its App Store, arguing its policies are just like those of its peers, in a new letter to senators today. From a report: Apple is making similar arguments to Congress to the ones in its defense in the Epic Games lawsuit -- namely, that it has the right to run its marketplace as it sees fit, and that companies and consumers that don't like it have alternatives. The letter, addressed to the members of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee that held a contentious hearing on app stores last month, contends that Spotify, Tile and Match Group misstated Apple's policies and are actually examples of companies that have been successful on iOS.
"Rather than demonstrating a problem with competition, these witnesses -- representing companies that have thrived in Apple's ecosystem -- showcased how Apple and the iOS ecosystem foster competition," wrpte Apple chief compliance officer Kyle Andeer, in the letter to Congress. At points, Apple appears to overstate its case. In one part, it writes that Spotify is wrong to suggest that developers can't communicate with customers about alternate purchase options, saying "Apple simply says that developers cannot redirect customers who are in the App Store to leave the App Store and go elsewhere." However, this restriction doesn't just apply in the App Store, but anywhere within an iOS app.
"Rather than demonstrating a problem with competition, these witnesses -- representing companies that have thrived in Apple's ecosystem -- showcased how Apple and the iOS ecosystem foster competition," wrpte Apple chief compliance officer Kyle Andeer, in the letter to Congress. At points, Apple appears to overstate its case. In one part, it writes that Spotify is wrong to suggest that developers can't communicate with customers about alternate purchase options, saying "Apple simply says that developers cannot redirect customers who are in the App Store to leave the App Store and go elsewhere." However, this restriction doesn't just apply in the App Store, but anywhere within an iOS app.
Microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
has the right to run its OS as it sees fit.
Bell System has the right to run its telephone service as it sees fit.
No wait, they didn't have that right.
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
has the right to run its OS as it sees fit.
Bell System has the right to run its telephone service as it sees fit.
No wait, they didn't have that right.
Eh, those were well established monopolies. And at least with Microsoft you could say there were viable alternatives, but with a Telco monopoly you are just at their complete mercy. Which is how it still is at most of the US of course, but that's for another discussion.
In any case, they don't relate at all to Apple. Maybe Apple is wise to not try to dominate the marketplace by pricing themselves out of reach for a lot of people? They have less than 50% in the smartphone business, way far from a monopoly.
And it's not like I want to defend them, as they are dicks and they will arbitrarily interpret their TOS any way they want. E.g. I have an app which allowed you to "tip" either via an in-app purchase, or via a link to my paypal. The rules said you are only allowed to allow purchases outside the app if they are not tied to any service or digital content. Which sounds like the definition of tipping, right? Well, Apple seemed to agree up to one point, until they rejected one of my updates for the non in-app purchase. When I quoted their TOS to them, they replied that the "tipping" is the service I am providing to the users!!! Rejected on appeal too! Should I be upset? Well, kind of, but, still the development environment they provide for free is so much nicer than the competitors (Android), and the money you get from the same app (due to them having built an app store great at monetization) is a lot more than Android, despite less actual iOS users, that I can't really hold a grudge. The 30% seemed steep, but it was still the best deal, and the 15% is decent. However, I have to point out for non-US developers you have to add another 5%, because most paying users are using USD and if you are out of the country Apple will only pay you in your local currency, keeping an extra 5% for the conversion (my bank would do it for less, plus I have USD accounts). Again, I can't complain much, I started iOS development as a hobby because it actually was fun, and it does provide income too to fund other projects.
Re: (Score:3)
A monopoly does not have full power of control— Apple is saying since there is competition that they are not a monopoly.
While it is a little bit of a stretch to say that their policies are what makes developers more successful on their platform than that of competitors, it is a plausible argument.
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is saying since there is competition that they are not a monopoly.
So where's the alternative App Store for iOS?
Re: (Score:3)
Just to clarify. I don't support the decisions Apple makes, but I accept that as things currently stand they have the right to make them.
Re: (Score:3)
All that said, the courts may choose to regulate them differently. But, that doesn't make the iPhone any less one segment of a larger market.
Re: (Score:3)
iPhones have a lot of software and services that can really make it hard to leave, leaving it's consumers at Apple's whims. While an basic iPhone to a new person would be easy for them to come a go, someone who's been using them for years would find it incredibly hard to leave.
Have an Apple Watch? You're Apple Watch will be reduced in functionality then as
Re: (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If the other people don't hold a trust [wikipedia.org] then they're also held to different legal standards anyway.
I think the only other comparable lock-ins are consoles, every other store is entirely optional in the ecosystem and consoles have a very different business model that doesn't involve 40% margins on hardware and are also unlikely to have the 80% margin on their stores.
Apple is profts (Score:2, Interesting)
This is what killed MS in mobile. MS was used to squeezing huge fees from OEM, and the leaving to the OEM and retail to figure out how to make a profit. This usually happened by some variation of bloat or ad ware. But in mobile th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
30% to the store isn't a huge cut - it's the same cut that Amazon gets of eBook sales, and that Google gets for PlayStore sales. And Sony gets 30% of Playstation game sales. Nintendo gets 30-40%. And MS gets 30% of Xbox game sales. Owning a platform and getting a cut of sales to the platform is a popular strategy. It's not cheap building and running a successful platform - Apple gives most of their tools and services to developers away for free, and they pay for it though their App Store sales.
And if you co
Re:Apple is profts (Score:4, Interesting)
But you could argue chicken-and-egg: Apple provides a safer app marketplace, which makes customers flock to its store and pay a premium. There is truth to it as well.
Re: Apple is profts (Score:3)
That has largely been shown to be nothing more than security theater, as it turns out that apple's censors are less concerned about bad actors and are more concerned about what might disrupt their business model. If you want to publish an app that does nothing more than rip people off, apple will generally permit you to do so and will more than likely look the other way so long as they get their cut.
Re: (Score:2)
Not entirely. Their level of control makes things possible that are not with Android. You can get to a point where the incremental safety does not provide incremental value, but we are not there yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Their level of control makes things possible that are not with Android.
Such as?
Re: Apple is profts (Score:2)
Re: Apple is profts (Score:2)
Indeed, Apple has a clear monopoly on the non adware supported personal electronics ecosystem. Neither Google nor Microsoft are truly in the same market, Google because Android is adware and Microsoft because it lacks mobile among other things.
The size of the ecosystem of modern personal electronics, makes creating competition a Herculean task. It's not enough to make a phone and the standard apps (with mapping being the most expensive). They need laptops, car and home electronics integration, home automati
Re: (Score:3)
This is hilarious! It's like saying the only thing Apple is guilty of is caring about their customer too much!
Re: (Score:3)
>This is where Apple appears to have a monopoly, as it is the only company that focuses on the needs of the real people that use its products
What? Do you work for Apple?
That is complete nonsense. Apple focuses on making money from the skinbags that buy their products.
At least the others are more transparent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thats an interesting retcon of what killed Microsoft in mobile - the reality is that there was no compelling reason to use their devices. At the time Google was still very positively held in consumer minds, and provides services that virtually everyone used in: gmail, maps, etc. Apple had itunes and an image, Microsoft had what, hotmail?
Even on PCs Microsoft isn't gouging OEMs from everything I've heard license costs are on the order of 10-20 dollars, PC margins are low because there is significant competit
If your friends... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
But this is not an antitrust suit.
Afraid? (Score:4, Interesting)
Someone is afraid of being found guilty of engaging in anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior.
Don't want the govt regulating how they operate their cash cow (App Store) where margins are close to 80% [slashdot.org]
apple may of gone to far with there rules will the (Score:2)
apple may of gone to far with there rules will they open up on there own? or will they forced to??
and what level will they be forced to open up to?
Re: apple may of gone to far with there rules will (Score:2)
Yes.
Re: (Score:3)
Link to Actual Letter (Score:2)
I am not smart enough (Score:3, Insightful)
The solution seems pretty simple to me.
All of the companies complaining about Apple's monopoly, can just pull their apps from the iPhone.
If the iPhone lost Instagram, Facebook, Spotify, Google Apps and a few others then Apple might be in a very different position and willing to negotiate.
If those companies are not willing to pull their apps...well, they should stop whining.
I wrpte things tpp but I (Score:1)
...usually use a spellchecker. Ypu knpw. The sprt pf thing that every majpr piece pf spftware includes that underlines wprds in red squiggles that cannpt be fpund in the spftware's dictipnary.
Their agument is silly (Score:2)
They do however skate dangerously close to violating consumer protections and unfair trade practices. You would think that with the crazy profits, they could support their users' better. I for one became fed up with demanding I buy a new phone when the one I bought (iPhone 6+ touch disease) failed due to a manufacturing defect.