Hacker News Reader

Comment by Despegar | Hacker News Reader

There's basically nothing new here. This is a similar aftermarket case to Kodak [1]. Like the Epic case, this too will fail.

A key element of Kodak was a bait and switch. If Apple had monopolized the aftermarket for iOS app distribution after customers were locked in, you may have a case against Apple (if you satisfy the other elements, like switching costs). But that was never true. From day one, the App Store was the only way to legally obtain iOS apps.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec....

View on HN

I doubt they'll manage to win, but the fact that Cydia predates the official App Store looks pretty core to the complaint.

Apple monopolizes access to 50% of American computer users and forces software shops big and small to pay their tax.

Users can't install what they want on their computers and they can't upgrade them.

The DOJ should force Apple to open the iPhone or face break up. Just because a breakup of this nature hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it shouldn't happen.

And another thing. There's no reason a company this big should also be a music and film studio.

Part of the appeal of the iOS App Store is that end users are partially shielded from developers who believe it’s their inalienable right to make apps to try to profit off of them.

App developers want to gain distribution.

> inalienable right to make apps to try to profit off of them.

What do you mean here? Do you have a problem with capitalism? The purpose of work is to earn a living. Outside of hobbyists and open source developers, nobody does this for free. It's work.

Should app developers be poor and unable to earn a living off apps? I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean, but that's how this comes across.

I think what you mean is that you're happy Apple controls distribution. My argument is that this isn't fair - they've built a computer, captured 50% of the US market, and control every economic funnel around these consumers, the likes of which we've never seen before in human history.

They have a mega monopoly. They're distorting the entire market. There are consumers, and then there are Apple consumers. Try to do business with the latter group without going through Apple, jumping through hoops, and getting taxed. And you come out without a direct relationship with your customer.

iMonopoly

> My argument is that this isn’t fair - they’ve built a computer, captured 50% of the US market, and control every economic funnel around these consumers...

> What do you mean here? Do you have a problem with capitalism?

It seems the more egregious example of being against capitalism is wanting to legislate an already successful business one to make it easier for your success.

Large dominant companies tend to consolidate their power through acquiring to remove competition and inhibiting the creation of competitors through their massive economical power. This is actually bad for capitalism since it removes the threats of competition.

First time ever I’m hearing a pro-capitalist person who is also pro-antitrust laws.

If you were a true capitalist, you’d grant people to choose if they want a walled garden or an „open” platform (although the alternative is not really open - just a bunch of big players forcing you to install their installers).

Capitalism works with regulation.

„Monopolizes access to 50% of users” - by definition, a monopoly is when you have access to the vast majoroty of the users :)

The entire economy around them!

- buying apps

- buying stuff online

- buying stuff in real life

- renting movies

- watching netflix

- subscribing to a dating service

- subscribing to anything

- playing games

- logging into your product

- ...

That's a super monopoly the likes of which this world hasn't seen before.

It begs the question - should Apple be forced to open iOS, or should they be split up outright into two or three different companies?

That is not what monopoly legally means.

First it’s 50% of cellphones not computers, but secondly as an iPhone customer I have never paid Apple for any app, but I have still paid for apps so that’s clearly false.

Apple forces companies to give them a cut of in App purchases, but Kindle and Netflix show you can sell to iPhone customers without that.

> First it’s cellphone not computer

Then I'll kindly ask you stop using it for GPS navigation, email, browsing the web, banking, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, dating, calculating, and ordering food. :)

And if you write any code at all that you run on it, just get outta here. :P

> I have never paid for any app

All your money goes to Apple and you leave everyone else out high and dry? I'm not judging you, but you have to see how that's not good for non-Apple employees.

Amazon and Netflix are getting my money without that Apple tax. It’s already a completely viable option for both specific purchases and ongoing subscriptions.

Just the world we want...

Is it not a computer first, cellphone second?

All iPhones are computers, not all computers are cellphones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com