Epic Tries To Show Apple Is Antitrust Violator Beyond App Store (bloomberg.com) 104
A top Apple executive tasked with defending the App Store in a monopoly lawsuit by Epic Games found himself having to answer Tuesday for a spate of other alleged antitrust fouls by the world's most valuable company. From a report: During Phil Schiller's cross-examination in a trial in Oakland, California, Apple's former global marketing chief was confronted about several instances in which the company has locked in users and made it difficult for them to switch away from its devices. Katherine Forrest, a lawyer for Epic, pointed out that Schiller emailed his colleagues a 2016 news article titled "iMessage is the glue that keeps me stuck to the iPhone," which explained that Apple's messaging platform is a reason people don't switch to Android devices.
She also quizzed Schiller on the idea that users can't easily move music and video purchased on Apple services to Google's Android. She went further, indicating that Apple's iCloud Keychain service for storing passwords on Apple devices can't synchronize with Android devices. Her point: Apple doesn't just lock in developers with its App Store rules, it also locks in consumers, limiting their ability to switch to competitors. In response, Schiller said many users subscribe to video and music streaming services and can input their passwords into a new device manually. He also suggested that users could use third-party password managers.
She also quizzed Schiller on the idea that users can't easily move music and video purchased on Apple services to Google's Android. She went further, indicating that Apple's iCloud Keychain service for storing passwords on Apple devices can't synchronize with Android devices. Her point: Apple doesn't just lock in developers with its App Store rules, it also locks in consumers, limiting their ability to switch to competitors. In response, Schiller said many users subscribe to video and music streaming services and can input their passwords into a new device manually. He also suggested that users could use third-party password managers.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Careful Epic (Score:5, Insightful)
2) You can have basically unlimited different game app stores/ecosystems installed side-by-side on your PC or Android device, unlike the iphone/ipad where you have zero choices beyond the apple's own store.
Re:Careful Epic (Score:4, Interesting)
So, I genuinely want to understand, as I've never installed an additional app store on an android device.
What benefit do you get from having multiple app stores? How do you vet competing app stores on android devices? Is it that you just want to have the option of installing a competing app store?
I generally find the apps I want in either the Apple App Store or the Google App Store. Beyond that I have no time to hunt down other app stores and deal with multiple credentials, having to expose my credit card information to multiple random vendors and etc.
Is there an amazing app store I'm missing out on somewhere?
Re:Careful Epic (Score:5, Informative)
Is there huge advantages to alternate app stores? Not to most users, it's more the fact that you have the option. I believe Amazon still has their own app store. I remember when it launched a big draw was they would have a daily app giveaway. Got some popular games for free when that was a thing, around the time Fire devices were new.
F-Droid is also an alternative app store with lots of useful open-source applications.
I believe alternate app stores are much bigger in other countries where phone manufactures don't want to pay for Google services on their devices so will just use the Android Open Source and devise their own ecosystem basically.
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks for the info. Being a smug American I hadn't even considered that other countries might have challenges with apps and stores.
I appreciate the thoughtful response.
Alternate Stores (Score:3)
Installing an alternate store is quite easy.
1) on samsung devices, you already have the Samsung Store AND the google Store.
2) for other stores, you only have to follow a link to the APK of the store app. You'll have to unlock the side-loading (installation of not trusted applications) and it's done. I think that new versions of Android prompt you for that unlock, earlier, it was in the parameters
Having alternate stores allows you
- to chose the cheaper store
- to install programs not present in the other stor
Re: (Score:2)
There's https://f-droid.org./ [f-droid.org.] It has NewPipe, which is a YouTube viewer/downloader. I just side load that without f-droid since I already have the Android developer tools and am comfortable with that.
Re:Careful Epic (Score:5, Insightful)
You get the same benefit from having multiple app stores as you get from having multiple stores of ANY kind. They have to compete. Just like in the real world, some stores may opt to compete on price. Other stores may opt to compete in customer service. Other stores may opt to compete in availability of certain products.
Re: (Score:2)
Just like in the real world, some stores may opt to compete on price.
And just like in the real world, in practice there's one option that monopolizes the others.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Careful Epic (Score:3)
Actually it's also about being able to do more with your app than the vendor permits. Case in point, I use an app called boldbeast for automatic call recording. The Google play version doesn't allow the app to store phone numbers along with the individual recordings, so I literally have to guess which file has the recording I'm interested in. However if I download it from the app's website and sideload it, I can have that feature.
Apple doesn't even allow call recording, so if you even want that at all you'd
Re: Careful Epic (Score:2)
Not for most users. But I use daily an Android phone with "Lineage OS for microG" that does not use any Google service, and uses F-Droid as app store (I have no Google Play app).
And in addition to that, I also have the "Humble Bundle" app, that is basically an app store for games bought on "The Humble Store". Having options is always a good thing.
Re: Careful Epic (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon has a great alternative. They used to offer "completely free" apps back in the day. Now they have a paid kids subscription. It was also possible to use "prime shipping credits" for apps as well (but have not made a purchase in a while). So basically cheaper alternatives with similar quality.
Re: (Score:2)
So, I genuinely want to understand, as I've never installed an additional app store on an android device.
What benefit do you get from having multiple app stores?
The one huge advantage is that I own the phone.
The company who's logo is on there cannot dictate what I can and cannot do with it. They can't prevent me from installing my own application or anyone elses, even if that is to my own detriment.
That kind of freedom is important to have, as it prevents a monopoly from being abusive.
Remember that a gilded cage is still a cage.
Re: Careful Epic (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I installed F-Droid just for auto auto rotate.
What an utterly useful app with absolutely no ads.
Re: (Score:2)
you can pay less for the same product on another app store.
if another app store only takes a 10% cut from developers then the same apps can be significantly cheaper on competing app stores.
Developers have more opti
Re: (Score:2)
To your point of number 2) the only reason that is a requirement is because PCs are an open platform and not vertically integrated. When Microsoft released its Surface RT with Windows RT and its own locked down Windows store, that was very much like an iPhone. A completely vertically integrated solution which may be locked down to the vendor's heart's content.
Google could do the same thing *exclusively* with its Pixel line. A practice only becomes anti-competitive if your actions inhibit the abilities of an
Re: (Score:1)
Weird, because I have SteamLink on my iDevice and can play anything I want.
Re: (Score:2)
re #1, you technically CAN, yes - but it's akin to saying "You can rub your face in sh1t". The capability is there, sure, but it's not one that anyone sane would ever exercise.
Re: (Score:2)
Or perhaps. Careful, I am only able to buy overpriced fortnite skins from Epic. Using their logic, surely I should be able to create and sell digital goods in fortnite - it is not much different from selling apps in an app store.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember when Apple started the iOS thing, it was considered cheap because the SDK was free as opposed to the ridiculous amounts for Playstation et al.
I can't wait to see how it will play out in the console ecosystem.
Re: (Score:2)
Not exact...
1) if you use unreal engine, on an application, you don't have to pay royalties on the 1st million $ earned through that application
2) if you sell several application, each has that 1 million $ exemtion
3) if you sell through EPIC store, you don't have to pay any royalties for unreal engine at all, these are included in the store cut
Please note that Unreal Engine is a big game engine (like Unity and other) and that it's normal to have licencing for using a library. Back in the past, developpers u
Hope they look into hardware as well (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do you think every industry should be required to provide first party repair manuals and parts to anyone who asks?
I think explicitly keying non-security components to the device so it is not possible to repair should be illegal.
Here is the YouTube video of a tech taking two identical iPhone 12s [youtube.com], swapping parts back and forth and recording these parts not working outside the original phone.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes. And once upon a time, they did. Just one example: https://www.samswebsite.com/ [samswebsite.com]
My local public library used to have all the common automotive service manuals, both aftermarket and OEM, clear back to the 1950's as another example.
Ditto for appliance service.
Re: (Score:2)
Having said the above, I can see that for some things this might be a bad idea, if repairing something would expose the repairer to eg high voltages, or toxic chemicals. In that case maybe parts/do
Re: (Score:1)
Do you think every industry should be required to provide first party repair manuals and parts to anyone who asks?
Pretty big jump from helping helping repair, to openly sabotaging those who figure it out on their own. Wouldn’t you say?
Re: (Score:2)
I have genuine service manuals for all of my TRS-80's from the 70's and 80's.
And back then there was far more difference and competition than there is today.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think every industry should be required to provide first party repair manuals and parts to anyone who asks?
Yes. As a matter of fact, that used to be the standard for most electronics and appliances. It's still (mostly) the standard with automobiles. I can buy a service manual and go to a local dealer and buy the parts I need to fix something myself. The auto industry hasn't collapsed because of it. Quite the contrary. And no one is building their own F150 from parts, they automakers fixed that by charging what they do for the parts. Apple could easily do the same. And there is nothing preventing a competitor fro
Re: (Score:2)
Yes!
Do they need to supply the parts for free? No.
It shouldn't cost the manufacturer much (if anything) to have a link to download a service manual either. I guess if they don't make a service manual even for their authorized repair people then that may be a problem though.
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the past, you used to get the full schematics of your TV with it... And for the TV were these schematics were not included, they were available to repairshops.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple's on-going attack on right to repair and independent repair shops are also anticompetitive.
You use the word "also" as if it is somehow anticompetitive not to gift your competitors the ability to steal your users.
None of the examples in TFS are actually anticompetitive practices. They are frankly perfectly normal ways to treat users of your service. No one is obligated to support your move to a competitor and aside from a few altruistic open source projects the examples in TFA are actually common place everywhere.
The assault on right to repair however is a direct action intended specifically to el
Re: Hope they look into hardware as well (Score:3)
No one is obligated to support your move to a competitor and aside from a few altruistic open source projects the examples in TFA are actually common place everywhere.
You're not allowed to actively prevent somebody from moving to a competitor. Apple did that for a long time until they got sued. Basically if an iOS user switched to Android, apple would blackhole their phone number within iMessage so that they can't receive any texts at all from other iOS users.
iCloud Keychain is indeed a trap... (Score:3)
Either Linux phones need to take off or Microsoft needs to try again on Windows for phones. Either way, we need more competition, not lower percentage cuts for apps...
Re: (Score:2)
If it wasnâ(TM)t for the crap software support lifecycle when it comes to Android devices, along with Googleâ(TM)s mismanagement of their platform, Iâ(TM)m not so sure Apple would have the customer base it does today.
So, if Apple hadn't built a better product + service than its competitors, they'd have fewer customers?
Re: (Score:2)
It's like Amazon becoming a huge company on the basis of its platform, and using all the money it earned in that market to crush, not other competing platforms, but smaller manufacturers and sellers in a completely different market.
Re: (Score:2)
If they'd allowed competing app stores, then yes, they'd have fewer customers for their app store.
To get the answer to that, just look at Android that allows 3p app stores. How many app stores are there that pose a challenge to Google?
Steve sez (Score:2)
not a monopoly (Score:2)
those are all annoying, and anti-competitive. but apple's US market share is roughly 50% for phones, and closer to 15% for computers. the international numbers are even lower. so if apple isn't a monopoly, it really doesn't seem like these things are going to result in any finding that they've abused a monopoly position.
i would love to have a ruling that companies in apple's position have a responsibility to not be anti-competitive. almost every industry today has been consolidated into a handful of large,
Re: (Score:3)
those are all annoying, and anti-competitive. but apple's US market share is roughly 50% for phones, and closer to 15% for computers. the international numbers are even lower. so if apple isn't a monopoly, it really doesn't seem like these things are going to result in any finding that they've abused a monopoly position.
Antitrust violations do not require a monopoly position. Go read over the original Sherman Antitrust Act and count how many times the word "monopoly" appears. Go ahead. I'll wait. (Hint: It's zero. The word "monopolize" does appear three times, but in only one of the eight sections of the act.)
The phrase you're looking for is "abused their market position," which is a very different question.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically Epic's complaints boil down to "we're shit at selling stuff, so we want Apple to give us all their money"
???
I don't know what trial you're watching....
Epic's complaints here largely boil down to "Apple's products are designed to make it hard for users to change to other platforms, which creates substantial market segmentation, and as a result, means that being able to compete on other platforms doesn't meaningfully translate to being able to sell software to iOS users." From an antitrust perspective, that's actually a pretty important argument to make, because that, combined with the high cost of switching
Re:not a monopoly (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, that's what Epic is trying to argue, that would require Apple to be the sole provider on the mobile market though.
No, it doesn't. Monopolies are *your* fixation. Antitrust law largely doesn't care about monopolies except for one small part that covers attempts to monopolize an industry.
The problem for Epic is that the Apple market share is very small, but very profitable and they don't want to play by the rules of that market (Apple has like 30% of the global market but 70% of the global revenue)
Apple has around 60% of active devices in the U.S. It most certainly is *not* "very small", at least in the context of American antitrust laws. It is smaller than Android on the world market, but U.S. courts don't generally care whether people in other countries are negatively impacted by antitrust law violations.
and Epic somehow believes that they deserve more than the revenue they get. Epic is free to play on other markets, they just know it's not as profitable, and they believe that Apple should make up the difference.
That's a gross mischaracterization, and you know it.
First, Epic's desire to be on iOS is not because it is highly profitable. Its desire to be on iOS is because the various gaming markets are largely non-overlapping. People either play games on their phone or they own a game console and play games on that. They either have an Android phone or an iOS phone. No matter how good you are at turning a profit on Android, being on a second platform is, by its very nature, more profitable than being on only one platform, whether iOS users spend more on stuff than Android users or not, because almost exactly no one will go through the pain of a platform change and throw away one $1,400 device in favor of a different $1,400 device just to play a video game.
Further, you're also wrong about your claim that other markets are not as profitable. In reality, Epic makes nearly all of its money from console games. I seem to recall that only about ten or twelve percent of Epic's income comes from iOS. So no, iOS is NOT more profitable. Not by a long shot. In fact, it's quite the opposite.
Looking at the numbers, it seems pretty clear that Epic went after Apple precisely because it was the least profitable store that was violating the law badly enough for them to feel confident about their chances of winning, which meant they could easily afford to throw iOS users away en masse in exchange for a chance at a broad enough victory that might also force Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo to similarly open up their much-more-profit-providing gaming platforms.
So approximately everything you said is factually wrong. This was never about opening up iOS. This was about forcing the Xbox, Switch, and PlayStation stores to let them sell things directly to users, rather than paying Microsoft *, Nintendo, and Sony a huge cut of sales. The iOS platform was just a softer target for the first stage of their legal action than one of the game console companies through which they earn a larger share of their revenue.
* The irony of Microsoft coming down on the side of Epic is not lost on me. It means their lawyers are as clueless as the mainstream press seems to be. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
What a pile of crap. The "original argument", as stated in the filed lawsuit, is the Apple has a monopoly over distribution of IOS apps, and that Apple has a monopoly on payments processed from IOS apps. Nothing has changed there. What HAS changed, is that the Apple and its fanbois realize there is no argument against those claims so instead THEY want to do a redefinition. The 'relevent market' isn't the sale of IOS apps, it is the sale of PHONES. Why, because that is the only way they can claim Apple
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What a pile of crap. The "original argument", as stated in the filed lawsuit, is the Apple has a monopoly over distribution of IOS apps, and that Apple has a monopoly on payments processed from IOS apps. Nothing has changed there. What HAS changed, is that the Apple and its fanbois realize there is no argument against those claims so instead THEY want to do a redefinition. The 'relevent market' isn't the sale of IOS apps, it is the sale of PHONES. Why, because that is the only way they can claim Apple does not have a monopoly.
Everyone wants a redefinition - that's how antitrust suits work. Depending on how you define the relevant market, anything can or cannot be considered a monopoly. Epic has a monopoly on sale of V-bucks and Fortnite skins and animations, if the relevant market is the Fortnite store. Ford has a monopoly on selling F150s. Microsoft has a monopoly on selling Windows. Apple has a monopoly on distributing iOS apps. But are any of those the proper definition of the market? There are lots of competing games with mi
Re: (Score:2)
V-bucks are Epic's product, of course they can control how they are sold. There is no 'market' for VBucks.
F150s are Ford's product, of course they can control how they are sold. There is no 'market' for F150s, there is just the truck market.
Windows is Microsoft's product, of course they can control how they are sold. There is no 'market' for Windows, there is just the PC OS market.
IPhones are Apples's product, of course they can control how they are sold. There is no 'market' for iPhones, there is just the
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. And for 'appliance' devices that offer a controlled experience and just work, the company that controls the platform controls the store. Thus Nintendo controls games on their consoles. Apple controls the iOS app store, the same way that Sony controls the PlayStation app store, Microsoft controls the Xbox app store, etc. Sure, general purpose computers, like MacOS and Windows, aren't as locked down - users' expectation is that it's more flexible and in return less "safe". And that's great, but it doesn
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly, you can't use your Steam library on a PS5 either. Apple wants the iPhone to be like a gaming console.
Google is MS (Score:1)
As we see with Wear OS, google docs, Google drive, hangouts, Google is crap at providing consistent, well maintained, and reliable
Keychain? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can get behind the other examples, but not this one. There's no reason to expect this service to be provided by Apple for competing platforms, and I don't expect Apple to allow what could be insecure access via a public API.
Re: (Score:2)
That's now how it works. Reasonable password managers allow for user export [bitwarden.com] of the password database in a portable format, such as XML, CSV, or the like, from within the application itself. Then the user imports the exported format into another password manager. It's "insecure access" only in the sense that the user chooses to export th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's "insecure access" only in the sense that the user chooses to export the password database into an unsecured format during the transfer.
It is insecure all the same, and it's not unreasonable for a password manager to decline to include a bulk export feature in the package that has potential to result in a leak or be misused by malware, etc. a "Reasonable" password manager CAN have a convenient export feature but doesn't have to in order to be a good password manager.
Re: (Score:2)
The market shows that it's completely unreasonable. "We're not going to tell u your own passwords except through a laborious manual process, one by one, because you might be a moron" is not reasonable.
BTW, what password manager is proof against leaking or being misused by malware to expose passwords one
Re: Keychain? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's iCloud Keychain service for storing passwords on Apple devices can't synchronize with Android devices.
Yes, and the problem of importing them is a problem for the developers of the alternative password managers people want to use to provide a solution for - not a problem the onus is on Apple to solve. Apple already even provides what an application developer would need in order to solve.. there is password manager software on MacOS that can import from the keychain. The fact an end user may
Password argument is not very good (Score:2)
The password manager argument is especially weak, given how much effort Apple made in the last iOS release to treat third party password managers as first class citizens on iOS.
Also, the "can't shift music/video to other devices" is more about contracts Apple has to abide by from media companies.
Re: (Score:2)
You're welcome to tell me how to bulk export passwords stored in Keychain without using a third party tool. The issue is not that Apple doesn't allow third party password managers, it's that once your start using Keychain it becomes really inconvenient to transition that information to a third party password manager. And for some
Re: (Score:2)
The Microsoft antitrust trial hinged on the same basic point. Your attempt to minimize that concern is misguided.
Re: (Score:2)
Look at what Microsoft was accused of doing: Building a browser into the OS and making it hard to change it. Guess what? Apple did that, too (WebKit), only they made it impossible to use a different browser engine. And they also built a payment system into the OS, and made it impossible to use a different payment system. And they built an ad tracking system into the OS (IDFA) and keep making it harder to obtain any other unique identifier for that as well. And on and on and on.
That middle one happens
My TV has a web browser (Score:2)
MS got into trouble because they had a dominant market position in personal computers (>90% at the time). Apple has 50% of the smartphone market in the US and lower outside the US.
Note: that as of IOS 14 Apple allows you to change the default browser on iOS, but still requires it to be WebKit-based. Presumably that's a security thing because Apple obviously doesn't make any money off of some other browser using the Web
Re: (Score:2)
and I'm not allowed to change that browser. Is Sony being anti-competitive?
Sure you can. Your TV can be augmented with an inexpensive device like a Roku or a Raspberry Pi that gives you different options. It's a fixed asset, so the addition of such a device doesn't meaningfully affect usability. Neither of those things is true for a mobile device.
MS got into trouble because they had a dominant market position in personal computers (>90% at the time). Apple has 50% of the smartphone market in the US and lower outside the US.
That's *technically* true, but ultimately, MS got into trouble because they abused their market position in one space illegally to reduce competition in another space. That does not require a dominant position — only a large eno
Re: (Score:2)
I can VNC from my iPad to a Raspberry PI that can run any web browser you want. Does that solve your problem? or do you have more carefully crafted rules that somehow specifically target Apple without tripping over dozens of other
The fact is you can do it (Score:1)
You're welcome to tell me how to bulk export passwords stored in Keychain without using a third party tool.
Why is using third party tool an issue? The fact is you can do it, even if Apple doesn't explicitly build an export tool (although Keychain Access does actually have an Export option... but I think it's only for certificates). Apple could lock that down enough where bulk export was not possible.
it's that once your start using Keychain it becomes really inconvenient to transition that information to
Re: (Score:2)
Identifying the third party tool, trusting the third party tool, actually being able to use the third party too. Every other password manager managed to figure this out, why not Apple?
It worked when it came to installing alternative browsers on Microsoft Windows for some reason, in the US and Europe.
Turn iOs into Linux (Score:2)
I've been there, and multiple times. Install Linux distro "X". Installed, up and running. Okay now I want to install program whatever. What's the answer? Well, we don't have program whatever in our official repository. There is a guy, however, who maintains the most current version of program whatever. All you need to do is enable his repository in [some obscure file location] and then install as normal.
Be aware, however, that since we don't maintain program whatever that future updates might break the inst
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the problem with 3rd party repositories is that if they exist, developers will use them, leading to a fractured system of little kingdoms and little egos.
The reason that they exist is largely because Linux isn't one operating system. It's dozens of slightly different operating systems, each with its own set of preinstalled baseline tools, apps, and configuration mechanisms. Each of those operating systems has its own package management system repository (and they don't all even share a single package management system, much less a single package repository).
And because each Linux distro is different, you can't just slap the package into a different distro
Music is easily transferable (Score:2)
The music you purchase in the iTunes Music Store (if it still exists?) is DRM free, and has been so for many years. Download it from iTunes on Mac or Windows, and then you can play it on whatever app you want on Android.
As for video, you can't move across any services and there is a lot of DRM on every vendor.
Re: (Score:2)
However, for services like Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, and Amazon Prime video, you can easily use those services with practically any device, because the clients are available for those platforms.
As far as the court is concerned, that allows you to use the service.
This is about a service provider (say, netflix itself, or in this case, Epic itself) saying that it cannot get to the users on the apple platform unless it bends over and takes it without lube from Apple.
This is simply a statement of fact. On android, t
Not "lock-in" and not antitrust. (Score:2)
Sorry but providing a product that no one else has is not "lock-in". Seriously is this a paid hitpiece from Bloomberg? I develop a messaging platform and implement it on my device. That people like it enough to stay with me has zero to do with antitrust. Not being interoperable with competitors is also not an antitrust matter.
I sincerely think Bloomberg has NFI what they are talking about.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry but providing a product that no one else has is not "lock-in". Seriously is this a paid hitpiece from Bloomberg? I develop a messaging platform and implement it on my device. That people like it enough to stay with me has zero to do with antitrust. Not being interoperable with competitors is also not an antitrust matter.
I sincerely think Bloomberg has NFI what they are talking about.
Exactly. Having a larger market share because you have a better product does not a monopoly make. I wonder what Epic's argument would be to explain why you can't make and sell items to use in game via third party tools? Or sell your account?
Re: (Score:2)
They are reporting on what was said at the trial. That makes it 'a paid hit piece'? You fanbois really are a riot.
Re: (Score:2)
It is when you exclusively report on just the allegations and not the reply from Apple which is conspicuously missing in most points. Welcome to the subtle art of media reporting.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, let's see. I see exactly two allegations made by Epic here: that you can't easily move music and video from Apple to Android, and that you can't share passwords between them. And I see this sentence: In response, Schiller said many users subscribe to video and music streaming services and can input their passwords into a new device manually. He also suggested that users could use third-party password managers.
Which reply are they missing exactly?
Welcome to reality.
self-interest (Score:1)
I know they're doing it out of self-interest, but if it ends up crushing Apple's walled garden and providing consumers with choice and freedom, I'm all for it. Go Epic!
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Epic is trying to make their own monopoly by getting exclusive games on their own platform. They would build their own walled garden if given half a chance.
Either way this falls, consumers are fucked.
Nobody wins (Score:2)
I hate Epic and I hate Apple and I hate Lawyers.
No matter what happens and what kind of deal they cut, I can guarantee that nothing that actually benefits consumers will result.
I felt trapped by iMessage until Signal. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LineageOS is not so bad.
The only reason I do not drive it on my device, is that I have an outstanding need for wifi calling with my carrier, and they are assholes about not allowing it on anything but their own (proprietary, privacy violating, horrible) stock roms.
If it were not for the shit state of wireless coverage in the US, I would totally be using Lineage.
The shit state of wireless coverage in the US is only tangentially related to the OS choice. If a reasonable solution to the wifi calling stopgap w
re (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
If they are trying to use iCloud Keychain as an example of abusive monopoly power, they are really reaching.
There's more to Apple abusing their monopoly power than with iCloud Keychain.
Here's another example [cnbc.com]
Phil Schiller said Apple allowed Amazon to bypass Apple's in-app purchase feature. But when Netflix wanted to do the same thing [slashdot.org], Apple prevented them from doing so which forced Netflix to remove in-app purchases/subscriptions for new and returning customers. After Netflix did that, Apple considered punishing Netflix for it [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Phil Schiller said Apple allowed Amazon to bypass Apple's in-app purchase feature. But when Netflix wanted to do the same thing [slashdot.org], Apple prevented them from doing so which forced Netflix to remove in-app purchases/subscriptions for new and returning customers. After Netflix did that, Apple considered punishing Netflix for it [slashdot.org].
Apple isn't a democracy they can twist the rules all they want. The same way Foo Bar Widgets can choose to sell their widgets at 0.01 / widget to a big customer, and charge 0.05 / widget to a small customer. The ability to use the Amazon app to purchase things on iOS is a big draw and they obviously calculated that allowing it would be a net positive.
Definitely not "fair", but fair isn't part of the criteria.
Re: Weak Arguments (Score:1)
(sing song voice):
I love the brushed aluminum frame on the Windows Quicktime Player that Apple provides for free!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)