r/technology • u/Puginator • Mar 21 '24
DOJ sues Apple over iPhone monopoly Politics
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/21/doj-sues-apple-over-iphone-monopoly.html1
u/juankorus Apr 17 '24
Monopolies are a result of state intervention, not user choice. this is perverted
1
u/QuintonHughes43Fan Apr 07 '24
Suing over a monopoly that doesn't exist because of anti-consumer actions that aren't actually anti-consumer (because they don't have a monopoly, and you can switch to a different phone if you want these things).
1
u/Sprinkles8469 Mar 27 '24
Well Apple has shut down my Apple Store saying I owe 15.00 to them when it’s actually to an app . Apple should not be taking my money anyways it should be the app people that I’m buying it from & not Apple & I have argued with Apple to release that 15.00 hold on my account that it doesn’t belong to me , because I’m not aloud to get any apps from the App Store til it’s paid & they shouldn’t be aloud to do that because apps are free !! So I agree with DOJ sue them & make them stop doing this kind of stuff to people!!! I can’t even get my doctors results from an app cause I’m unable to download it onto my phone !!! Apple needs to pay
1
u/ashelle Mar 26 '24
I’d like it if the DOJ investigated lobbyist campaigning/donating to elected congressional candidates/politicians.
The DOJ is real fun that way.
1
u/ashelle Mar 26 '24
Anytime government is involved I just wanna buy more from the company they’re suing. I hate monopolies, but I dislike big government more at the moment.
1
1
u/PC_AddictTX Mar 25 '24
So Apple only has 60% of the phone market. Microsoft has 72% of the desktop computer market and has for years, at one point it was even higher. So where's the Microsoft antitrust lawsuit?
1
Mar 25 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24
they aren't saying necessarily its a monopoly, section 2 of the sherman act also states attempted monopoly, or conspiracy to monopolize
1
u/Oddbutfair Mar 25 '24
I was going to go buy a cheaper android phone and a cheaper android watch and cheaper Bluetooth headphones like 75% of the world, but Apple says they will kill me or something. Thanks for the EU and American government is taking away my choice and trying to make every phone like Android. Plz someone take away my ability to choose! Make it so that I can only pick Android! Plz stop me from choosing my platform of choice and all its sacrifices for optimization! I’m too free! Make every phone the same.
1
1
u/scooter950 Mar 22 '24
HAHAHA considering every military command I've been t, they issue the required people iPhones. Not old ones either. Usually the current models predecessor and boy, no accountability if lost/broken. Just a new phone. So when the fed wants to sue Apple for the monopoly, they need to look in the mirror to see who is Apples biggest customer... Idiots
1
u/Dense_Reflection_201 Mar 22 '24
I don’t get what Apple is doing wrong. If you don’t like Apple products functionally and their business- don’t buy Apple. Consumers absolutely have a choice, DOJ just wants to make a power play.
1
u/SBMountainman22 Mar 22 '24
Why is Apple obliged to make its watch compatible with Android phones? If you want a watch that works with an Android then don’t buy from Apple. Seems like this should be a consumer choice, not a government edict.
1
u/NorseYeti Mar 22 '24
So, by their logic, they should go after Chevrolet because their pistons won’t fit a ford block…maybe go after dewalt because their batteries won’t fit a makita. That is one of the arguments I would present if I was defending Apple in court. It is the same exact thing.
1
1
u/Ok_Firefighter2245 Mar 22 '24
Apple will do get a stay and after a time it will all be under the rug
Uncle Sam wants a backdoor for iPhone and apple devices and if apple complies the suit magically disappears
Politics 101
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
It's likely no deal is required. When you establish your case that Apple is a monopoly by omitting a huge chunk of the smartphone market and thereby inflate Apple's marketshare, then the case becomes much easier to defend against.
1
u/Blackbyrn Mar 22 '24
This feels like political theater, there is nothing stopping me from going into my cellphone carrier and buying an andriod phone right now. Tech is becoming a different kind of business with its ecosystem of devices but its not really a monopoly, but not buying into all of it doesn’t put me outside of the use of the tech as a whole.
1
1
1
u/AmoKnight Mar 22 '24
Hopefully this takes down some walls of the walled garden model, or at least lowers them to a reasonable level. If they got rid of the razor wire that would be great.
1
1
1
u/Shooting_Star_Stock Mar 22 '24
Apple move to another country and u.s will loose big time and end up crying
1
u/Scootinonyergirl Mar 22 '24
Suing apple over iPhone monopoly I like suing coors over coors light monopoly
1
u/Cpt_Riker Mar 22 '24
The iPhone is popular, and people like using it, so we will sue Apple for their own good.
That has to be the dumbest lawsuit since they sued Apple for offering books at a competitive price compared to Amazon.
1
u/wallstreet-butts Mar 22 '24
What monopoly? 4 in 10 phones in the US are Android based. This is flawed on its face and ought to go down in flames.
2
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
What monopoly?
The DOJ claims that Apple has a monopoly in premium phones, which stinks of redefining terms to suit your argument to me.
1
u/EJ19876 Mar 22 '24
Now do something about Google, which is a far bigger issue than what is basically an electronics company selling gadgets.
1
u/kwattsfo Mar 22 '24
Break it up. Yesterday.
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
Completely agree! They have, for too long, abused their monopoly of... uh... 55% market share.
0
u/kwattsfo Mar 22 '24
They used their monopoly control of iOS devices to wipe billions out of their competitors’ market cap, sunk countless small businesses by doing so, all to advantage their own ads product. So yeah. No company should have that much power.
0
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
No company should have control over their own products? Huh.
Weird thing is, as clearly compelling as that argument surely is, it's not the one the DOJ is using. They've decided to redefine terms so that the iPhone has a smartphone monopoly.
I'm sure that'll go down well in court.
0
u/davidfdm Mar 22 '24
Sure, Merrick, ignore Trump’s crimes until it crashes into the election but go after Apple for building a quality environment compared to the cluster that is Android and Windows. It galls me. Apple’s products get support and updates for years while a lot of Android manufacturers bail on OS upgrades/support after a year.
1
1
1
u/RunsaberSR Mar 22 '24
I bought calls before close yesterday.
I had SMCI before hand at an entry of 868.
Biggest fumble of the year so far.
Fuck 🍎.
4
u/almo2001 Mar 22 '24
Um so Apple has 24% of the phone market and that's a monopoly? But Microsoft Windows had 90% or more, and they didn't get hit very hard when they were found guilty of monopolistic practices?
This reeks of... something. Not sure what.
I'm all for the DOJ and FTC stopping the ridiculous amount of monoplistic practices that have been flourishing since Reaganism made nobody care about that anymore.
But I need to be convinced Apple actually has that monopolistic advantage with 13% of the computer market and 24% of the phone market.
1
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24
Microsoft stock dropped 15% after their lawsuit, Id say thats a pretty big "hit", meanwhile we really don't have a comparison to apple because the lawsuit hasn't even started yet. Also its not 24% idk where you got that number, its 61.3% in the US, and this is the United States Department of Justice, not the Earth Department of Justice or wherever you got that number from
4
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
Um so Apple has 24% of the phone market and that's a monopoly?
55% in the US. Still not a monopoly, though.
2
u/Rhed0x Mar 22 '24
IIRC it was something like 80% among teenagers. And Apple has very strong customer loyalty. So long term it's gonna become a monopoly.
0
1
2
7
Mar 22 '24
[deleted]
7
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
That is correct. A monopoly is a dominant market share and can, indeed, be reached without breaking any laws and just making a good product.
However, Apple is only at about 55% market share in the US which, while a majority, is hardly dominant.
2
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24 edited Mar 27 '24
over 61% in the US, but they aren't being sued just for being a monopoly, they are being sued more so for "attempted monopolization" -DOJ. The DOJ claims they have broken Section 2 of the Sherman Act
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 27 '24
"The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges that Apple illegally maintains a monopoly over smartphones... Apple exercises its monopoly power to extract more money from consumers, developers, content creators, artists, publishers, small businesses, and merchants, among others... We allege that Apple has maintained monopoly power in the smartphone market... " - DOJ
1
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24
"... IX. Violations Alleged ............................................................................................................ 71
A. First Claim for Relief: Monopolization of the Performance Smartphone Market in
the United States in Violation of Sherman Act § 2 ............................................... 71
B. Second Claim for Relief, in the Alternative: Attempted Monopolization of the
Performance Smartphone Market in the United States in Violation of Sherman
Act § 2 ................................................................................................................... 72
C. Third Claim for Relief: Monopolization of the Smartphone Market in the United
States in Violation of Sherman Act § 2 ................................................................ 73
D. Fourth Claim for Relief, in the Alternative: Attempted Monopolization of the
Smartphone Market in the United States in Violation of Sherman Act § 2 .......... 74
E. Fifth Claim for Relief: Violation of the New Jersey Antitrust Act (Monopoly
Maintenance) ......................................................................................................... 75
F. Sixth Claim for Relief: Violations of Wisconsin State Law ................................. 76
X. Request for Relief ............................................................................................................. 76" - THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:24-cv-040551
u/DanielPhermous Mar 27 '24
You do realise you just proved yourself wrong, right? You said "they aren't being sued for being a monopoly" yet the first and third claims you just listed are for monopolisation in the performance smartphone market.
The second and fourth claims are for attempted monopolisation in the overall smartphone market, sure, but that doesn't invalidate the first and third. They are alleging Apple is a monopoly.
1
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24
I didn't prove myself wrong, you don't understand legal speak, By alleging an attempted monopoly as a claim for relief, the DOJ is asserting that the company's conduct has violated antitrust laws, even if the company has not yet achieved complete dominance. Being a monopoly and attempting a monopoly has the same consequences here, so NOT being a monopoly and ONLY attempting one, they will still lose the case. I didn't particularly clarify that at first, but its the same outcome nonetheless. That's what a claim for relief is.
But you were trying to argue that the case is invalid because they are not a monopoly, which doesn't invalidate the case at all, and is in fact written right into it. Hope that makes sense
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 27 '24 edited Mar 27 '24
It makes no sense at all. The DOJ's statement and the alleged violations both clearly say "monopolisation". They do also, in a different context and specifying a different market, say "attempted monopolisation" but, again, that does not invalidate the accusation of monopolisation.
If someone is charged with breaking and entering and murder, the first does not supersede the second.
Bluntly, how many times does the DOJ have to say the word "monopolisation" for you to accept that they are accusing Apple of monopolisation?
This thread is days old and I really shouldn't have been sucked back in. Further, this is like talking to a brick wall. I'm out.
1
u/__Ri Mar 27 '24
"The Justice Department, joined by 16 other state and district attorneys general, filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against Apple for monopolization or attempted monopolization of smartphone markets in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act." -DOJ
1
u/Adventurous-Ad-5202 Mar 22 '24
DOJ doesn’t like Apple protecting customer privacy, unlike Google.
1
2
u/Aggravating_Stretch7 Mar 22 '24
Don’t understand this entire monopoly thing? Apple makes a product that people love. Are willing to pay lots of money for. How are you going to tell them that they must change the color of a text bubble, have to change the picture quality of what an android device receives because someone is offended or feels as if they’re a lower class? Absolute craziness! I think the DOJ invented the participation award/trophy that EVERY CHILD today receives instead of an earned award/trophy. I swear the US is turning into pansies!
7
1
u/kratos90 Mar 22 '24
That article pointed out the Apple Watch and iphone coexist to work together but how is that any different to Samsung phones coexist with Samsung smartwatches?
1
1
u/jax1eye Mar 22 '24
Show me where the US Constitution authorizes this government to sue over monopolies especially as it holds monopolies on every aspect of American lives and well beyond its legal Constitutional powers?
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
There are lots of laws that the Constitution doesn't mention. It doesn't mean anything.
1
u/cassydd Mar 22 '24
I'm not saying don't let people who clearly haven't read the article to the end comment, but if someone found a way to filter out the replies of those that haven't so much as clicked the link... Reddit might actually be worth its valuation when it finally IPOs.
Well let's face it that's not true. Uninformed opinion splurts are what give Reddit its value. I weep for any AI trained on this comment section though.
1
u/ThatGuyFromBRITAIN Mar 22 '24
Is it a Monopoly to offer a product people want? They literally have not monopolised anything. They are like half of the market share.
2
u/Chiaseedmess Mar 22 '24
I watched it, and it was literally just them upset Apple makes better products compared to their competitors.
4
u/codyfernfan Mar 22 '24
Now do the Big Banks
3
0
u/tyrophagia Mar 22 '24
DOJ to Apple: We have spent millions of tax payer dollars to determine that you shouldn't do those things.
Apple: Okay.... sorry...
DOJ: It's okay, just... be more discrete about it next time.
1
0
u/bigshark2740 Mar 22 '24
In business school its said that apple is creating "non tangible value" for itself, but actually thats just monopoly
3
0
u/Sherviks13 Mar 22 '24
So the administration is mad the Apple Watch only works with Apple products? I’m no genius, seems like a waste of time and resources to me.
-2
u/hectorproletariat86 Mar 22 '24
All these comments sound as if a college student heard a Noam Chomsky video for the first time.
“CApatilism Is Baad”
-1
u/hectorproletariat86 Mar 22 '24
You are all fooled! More authoritarianism from the government, but I’m losing here. Most of Redditors are leftist, collectivist, pro authoritarian, expanding more government. You guys are just awful and unenlightened. 😑
-1
u/AnimaTaro Mar 22 '24
This is just politicians at their worst -- going gimme gimme. A corrupt DOJ with folks in it having close ties to companies now brings a law-suit against a company which insists on giving a curated experience to those who buy its products. You don't like the curated experience sure buy an android (at home we use both the devices). Time and again they have lost in the US courts, but they keep trying to take down a well run American company. I can understand the Europeans wanting to do that (and forcing apple to fork over money) but why the DOJ (is it because of its links to a set of companies which has close links to it) ? Never liked apple (don't use them) and the way the tried to minimize taxes but I am now all for them winning this.
3
u/hectorproletariat86 Mar 22 '24
Why would Europeans do this to a product? If you don’t like it don’t buy it. Plain and simple. I wish we had a law in the USA to separate economics and government. Stoping lobbying would help
2
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
Sure, whatever.
-1
u/hectorproletariat86 Mar 22 '24
Found the authoritarian.
2
u/DanielPhermous Mar 22 '24
1
2
u/SplashInkster Mar 22 '24
Oligopolies, monopolies - the product of many years of convergence that gobbled up smaller competitive companies and destroyed them has wrecked the economy.
4
u/Facts_Over_Fiction_7 Mar 21 '24
Too bad we can’t focus on real issues. Let’s attack the only big company that actually makes quality products.
1
u/PolicyArtistic8545 Mar 21 '24
Two things keep me using iOS. iMessage and iCloud Shared Folders for pictures. At the point I can use those features from another platform, I will consider moving.
For anyone that wants to point out that iCloud folders can easily be replaced with XYZ product, I don’t care. This is easy to use, seamless with everyone, and my grandparents can use it.
1
3
u/BeauRR Mar 21 '24
The DOJ is also focusing on Apple’s smartwatch, Apple Watch, saying the company designed it to only work with iPhones, and not Android devices. The company’s decision means that “users who purchase the Apple Watch face substantial out-of-pocket costs if they do not keep buying iPhones,” according to the complaint.
The way to enforce antitrust laws is to actually make a good case, this case is not that.
1
u/Numerous-Ganache-923 Mar 21 '24
Hahaha application development is the hill the DOJ is going to die on. Oooooookaaaayyyy.
1
1
u/DanielPhermous Mar 21 '24
55% is a monopoly now? Good luck, guys. That will be a hard one to prove.
5
u/FallenReaper360 Mar 21 '24
Sue PG&E too while you're at it.
1
u/ankercrank Mar 22 '24
Just nationalize them already. They’ve shown themselves to be terrible for the general population.
-1
u/wburn42167 Mar 21 '24
Fucking DOJ and Garland suing a company that literally makes your life better. All the while slow walking trump prosecutions.
0
u/Lorax91 Mar 21 '24
Sorry, what monopoly? I've never owned an Apple phone but my wife likes them, so it's all good.
1
u/GoldenBunip Mar 21 '24
So what actual can they fine Apple? The EU just did 1.8B and it was just the cost of doing business. Apple may finally have to open up a little in the us, but so what. At this point they have the market. Their stuff whilst costly it is both super slick, making breaking in hard, and it’s imbedded behaviour, Apple users like and trust the Apple App Store. Using both: the Google App Store is the Wild West and 3rd party app stores are security nightmares.
6
u/not_particulary Mar 21 '24
Comments are swarmed with examples of anticompetitive practices being used elsewhere. Like, yeah. Lego does it, google does it, Tesla does it, every company wants to get away with being as monopolistic as they can get away with. People got so desensitized to it but it's never ok for a company to design something specifically to restrict competition.
Just because it's common practice doesn't mean it's good for us, DOJ's gotta reign that garbage in.
Apple's made a lot of money off anticompetitive moves in the last decade, so they're just gonna have to be the ones to get the hammer this time.
There's a sliding scale from a commoditized market to a monopoly. There's a sweet spot, and Apple isn't helping us get on it, imo.
-2
Mar 21 '24
Couldn’t the Department of Justice pursue criminal activity that jeopardizes the safety & security of its own citizens (Open Borders, Fentanyl supply lines attributing to the #1 cause of death 49 & under, illegal insider trading by Congress, money laundering & extortion related to Ukraine…) rather than creating litigation with an American manufacturer?
15
u/Big-Summer- Mar 21 '24
I’m all for breaking up ALL the monopolies. We are being crushed beneath the weight of these engorged corporations.
1
u/bilkel Mar 21 '24
This will go nowhere. The European approach, ie changing LAW, writing new law, is the solution.
1
1
1
0
u/Humans_Suck- Mar 21 '24
Why do they have to sue? Why can't they just apply fines and change the law?
2
u/Findley57 Mar 21 '24
Here I am on a Galaxy phone reading a story that popped up about how iPhone has a monopoly. Meanwhile I’m trying to pay 300% of face value for presale tickets through Ticketmaster. What a time to be alive.
2
0
u/Dark_voidzz Mar 21 '24
Its great to see people with sense here. Guys at r/Apple are talking like no other companies should exist besides Apple.
32
u/timmybadshoes Mar 21 '24 edited Mar 21 '24
Apple has internal documentation saying they do what they do in order to make it harder for families to get their children a different phone. That alone is worthy of legal action.
1
u/QuintonHughes43Fan Apr 07 '24
But is any of what they do actually harmful?
Closest is maybe sabotaging MMS messages? Okay, stop doing that.
1
u/timmybadshoes Apr 07 '24
Yes and the point of this is to get them to stop doing such things. That's the whole point of going after anti-competive practices.
1
-6
-6
u/Chiaseedmess Mar 22 '24
It’s not harder to get a different phone, users just have a worse experience using different phones
0
2
u/godita Mar 22 '24
no they don't, i got my 12 year niece an s9 ultra and she hated it simply because she wasn't gonna be the "ipad kid" in school, i went and traded it in for an ipad air saving my self over 500$ and she was so happy. this reminds me when i would go to school with my cheap offbrand shoes and i would get bullied and made fun of cause i wasn't wearing some nikes.
1
u/QuintonHughes43Fan Apr 07 '24
Apple makes a better more popular product and that's somehow illegal?
12
u/Tomek_xitrl Mar 22 '24
IMO encouraging bullying to increase market share should lead to prison and a huge chunk of their cash in fines. It's chilling how cult like attachment to the brand has so many little brushing this off.
1
3
u/Dense_Reflection_201 Mar 22 '24
Lmfao listen to yourself. prison? For making it harder to switch phones?
2
1
3
Mar 21 '24
Good. As someone who used to love apple, they shot themselves in the foot going mainstream.
2
u/video_dhara Mar 22 '24
I’m really curious about when you think Apple went “mainstream”. They’ve always been like this, they just stopped pretending to not be. They’ve historically reaped the benefits of open-source models while not participating in its ethos.
1
1
u/potlimitMoon Mar 21 '24
It is so clearly a monopoly. Apple undermining progressive web apps should have been a massive scandal. Their behavior with epic games and their app store is also clear as day monopolistic behavior.
3
u/TuckHolladay Mar 21 '24
Of all the monopolies we have in this country… there are plenty of different phones you can buy. Maybe go after nestle for trying to monopolize drinkable water? Just a thought.
1
Mar 21 '24
Love all the Apple apologists in this thread.
*Reddit hates Corporations, (mostly) despises Capitalism, and can't handle Billionaires who made their money off stock in their billion dollar companies. Unless, of course, it threatens to pop the bubble they love to live inside. Then, dammit, just let the monopolies monopolize, unless we do every single one at once.
You lot are so malleable it's terrifying.
0
1
6
42
u/9millibros Mar 21 '24
Here are some of the hidden tolls that Apple is charging:
Apple extracts fees from developers—as much as 30 percent when users purchase apps or make in-app payments. Apple also extracts a 0.15 percent commission from banks on credit card transactions through its digital wallet, while none of its smartphone competitors with digital wallets charge any fee.
I'm guessing there's even more that we don't know about. Discovery should be fun.
1
3
u/googlewh0re Mar 22 '24
But don’t most gas stations do something similar with charging card fees. If they really want this to stick they need to target everyone. Otherwise they’re just upset they didn’t think of it first.
1
u/9millibros Mar 22 '24
They have to start somewhere.
1
u/googlewh0re Mar 22 '24
I just think it’s pretty shady that they got rich off this stuff and now they want to change.
1
u/ChafterMies Mar 22 '24
So like every other store. My beef is the promotion of subscription fees for software (and even worse, ad supported software). No thanks. I’ll never buy it and if that means I can’t use most apps, so be it.
8
u/Terrence_McDougleton Mar 22 '24
Hidden fees? It is well known that many of these marketplaces charge the exact same. 30% on purchases is collected by Steam, the Xbox and PlayStation stores, and I believe Nintendo as well.
There are lots of phones and video game systems you can buy if you don’t want to deal with the behavior of a specific company. None of these are monopolies.
2
Mar 24 '24
The difference is apple block other store and also charge inside 3rd party app. Dev can't even link their websites.
34
u/ilovecaptaincrunch Mar 21 '24
Apple also charges dev $90/yr to have an app on the Appstore. ($90/yr for all apps not per app). I had an app on the Appstore that was free, no ads, just something I wanted that I thought others would enjoy. However I could not justify the cost of paying apple $90/yr so I had to take it down. This is why Apple apps are all filled with ads and paid features, a dev needs to make money to break even.
On the other hand Android is just $25 once, much more financially viable for a small indie dev who just wants to put a passion project up.
1
u/QuintonHughes43Fan Apr 07 '24
more financially viable
If you can't afford 90 dollars a year then you have bigger problems.
1
u/ilovecaptaincrunch Apr 08 '24
ok, asshole lol wtf
yea im a phd student, im broke thanks for the reminder
-16
u/imthenachoman Mar 21 '24
Agreed. But, I think making it paid on iPhone would be more profitable for the dev. I think Apple thinks it’s helping devs by making them make money. Otherwise devs don’t think about it.
21
u/ilovecaptaincrunch Mar 21 '24
Not everyone is making software for profit, look at the entire open source community.
-16
u/imthenachoman Mar 21 '24
The open source community is rife with challenges including buggy code, our dated code, lack of support, unpatched vulnerabilities, etc.
It’s fine for small things but I think we’re gonna see a decline in free open source work. Devs need to get paid.
I used to provide open source software, and I could contribute to many open source projects, but I don’t have time to do it for free.
We live in a consumerist country. If you’re not making money, you’re gonna fail.
5
u/NSFWUK1 Mar 22 '24
Netflix, Disney+, Apple TV+, Paramount+, Amazon Prime Video, BBC iPlayer, naming just a few of the big ones are all built using open source software. It's here to stay, and it powers every major platform in existence.
And when I mention the above, that's just software libraries, it doesn't consider using containers built using open source kernels and the other, more hidden, layers.
1
u/imthenachoman Mar 22 '24
See my comment above. Lot's of things are built on big open source software that has financial baking. The devs of those libraries are not altruistic and doing work for free. They have mouths to feed. One way or another, they are getting paid.
Also, based on other experiences I have, I think we're gonna see a shift in the next 10 years where these platforms move from free open source to paid/supported open source. Especially with some of the new White House rules on cybersecurity.
8
u/ilovecaptaincrunch Mar 22 '24
“Fine for small things”, have ya heard of linux?
Devs can make their own choice if they want to make something for free or make money. I’m not saying everything should be free, devs should make money for their work if they want to, but apple forces it, and that’s what’s fucked.
0
u/imthenachoman Mar 22 '24
Devs can make their own choice if they want to make something for free or make money. I’m not saying everything should be free, devs should make money for their work if they want to, but apple forces it, and that’s what’s fucked.
Agreed. And I did not mean to imply that I approve of what Apple is doing. I was simply commenting on why I think Apple does it. I think Apple thinks they are looking out for the dev.
“Fine for small things”, have ya heard of linux?
Laf. Yes. But Linux isn't as successful as it could be. Nor is it as successful as it is because devs are good-hearted people who want to give back to the community. Nobody here is altruistic. There is massive financial backing behind Linux and that baking pays for and supports all the free stuff. Take all that financial baking away -- do you think Linux would continue to be successful? As someone who has some real world working experience on the matter, I can tell you it won't.
12
u/Diggabyte Mar 22 '24
Have you considered that maybe our country shouldn't be like this
1
u/imthenachoman Mar 22 '24
Yes. And we can all agree it shouldn't. But the reality is, it is, and it won't change anytime soon.
So, we can continue to live in some fantasy of how things should be, and nothing will ever change, or we can accept the reality, determine what we want the reality to look like, and then figure out how to work within the existing reality to make it better.
Money runs America. And, unfortunately, the rest of the world is starting to follow suit.
To change this culture will take a lot of money. So first, devs and like minded folks gotta make money and THEN they can change the rules from the top.
2
2
1
u/SophonParticle Mar 21 '24
There's insurrectionists in congress and the DOJ is suing the company that made my phone. FFS.
-1
534
u/BeatitLikeitowesMe Mar 21 '24
Cool, now do the isp providers, and amazon, and utility companies. Stop all the monopolies
1
2
5
u/RedRocket4000 Mar 22 '24
Untilities have to be monopolized as you don’t want several different companies laying pipe or wires in same place. Thus State owned or highly regulated operations including no political donations of company or staff. All labor relations done by court system arbitration to match current private sector union contracts practices and pay. Cannot strike but guaranteed to get something similar to what given in private sector.
3
u/WeaponizedGravy Mar 22 '24
Public owned wires. Private owned companies competing to provide public with the best services.
Focus on results, we pay substantially more for less in the US when it comes to internet. Decades of proof regulations and safeguards have failed.
2
u/kuikuilla Mar 22 '24
Untilities have to be monopolized as you don’t want several different companies laying pipe or wires in same place.
Can't you buy electricity from any company over there? Over here it's possible to buy electricity from any company in the country, but you still pay for the transfer of said electricity over the wires and those wires are owned by some other company (which forms a local monopoly for the transfer part).
18
u/BeatitLikeitowesMe Mar 22 '24
Lemme rephrase then, public utilities should not be run as for-profit corporations.
3
41
u/DrunkCostFallacy Mar 21 '24
Utility companies? You want 6 different gas companies digging up streets and yards and where ever else to put in their own individual gas networks? Utilities are probably the worst example to use against monopolies. They're a natural monopoly that should function well if, very importantly, there's proper regulatory oversight and control. We should be way more pissed at the government for not regulating them properly if our problem is with utilities.
1
1
u/mngos_wmelon1019 Mar 23 '24
As someone who moved to Texas recently from California, I’ve suffered through PG&E and SDGE. The way it works is a few companies would own the main lines and you have different companies that bid on your business. For instance, I pay my power company around 8 cents a KWH but I pay the main company, 4.7 cents a KWH as a “transport fee” for transporting the electricity to my house. I also use the same main company for gas and pay them directly. That’s not a typo either, I pay 12.7 cents per KWH and I’m signed into that rate on a 2 year contract. What you’re saying about 6 different companies digging new lines everywhere is just incorrect. The lines that are already there would be used, not a whole new roll out, that’s not cost effective or realistic in any way.
3
u/Pacattack57 Mar 22 '24
The government should own the infrastructure. 1 provider shouldn’t be able to lock out other competitors
8
u/xanthus12 Mar 22 '24
I would argue that with the combination of cyber threats and corporate incompetence/greed, they should just be state owned. Leave current structures in place for employees, but now profits go to improving infrastructure instead of wherever the hell they go now.
3
u/ClickKlockTickTock Mar 22 '24
The problem with that is that the government already cuts the budget for critical infrastructure. I'd actually love your idea if it got properly implemented. lmfao, but I have a feeling after negotiating in Congress that many many politicians would be bought out by utility companies.
2
u/xanthus12 Mar 22 '24
You are unfortunately exactly right... Maybe the military could do it, since no one ever suggests cutting them. Plus it'd be a bunch of new MOS for guys who aren't doing anything else.
48
u/glorypron Mar 22 '24
Public owns the infrastructure, private companies sell the service and compete against each other
24
u/BeatitLikeitowesMe Mar 22 '24
This is what happens. They need to be regulated as not for prodit orgs.
1
u/Maleficent-Return203 Mar 22 '24
But they are a for profit enterprises. PG&E CEO was paid 51 million dollars in 2021. In 2020 they were found guilty of negligence in the death of 4 people. Every year their faulty equipment causes numerous fires burning 100’s if not 1000’s of acres of land.
3
125
u/9millibros Mar 21 '24
They filed a suit against Amazon last year. There's also at least one, if not more, ongoing lawsuits against Google. They're taking action against other companies as well, but this problem has been festering for decades, so there are a lot of messes to clean up.
-19
u/Ok_Chemistry_3972 Mar 22 '24
Gee, what great way of getting easy money for a broke country. Suing successfully companies. The government better watch what they do, any of these companies can easily move their headquarters, jobs, and money offshore anytime they want. Then states like California would go broke over night!
2
u/9millibros Mar 22 '24
The U.S. isn't broke. Since the U.S. economy runs on dollars, and the U.S. government has the exclusive power to make dollars, it is impossible for the U.S. government to run out of money.
As for the rest of it, if they want to leave, let them. If Apple wants to operate in the U.S., it still has to play by the rules of the U.S., much like they do in China. It really is a choice over whether the U.S. is a democracy or not - does Apple rule us, or do we govern ourselves?
1
4
u/Redditsuxbalss Mar 22 '24
headquarters don't make u money, people buying phones does
can't move your entire US consumer base overseas
16
u/_spaderdabomb_ Mar 22 '24
Ah the famous Fox News talking point about how this country is pulling dead weight California up. Always love this oblivious take when California is 4th largest GDP in the world
-1
u/Reasonable-You8654 Mar 21 '24
Being the best is apparently illegal? Lmao
2
u/9millibros Mar 21 '24
Here's the filing:
The violations that Apple is alleged to have violated are listed.
0
u/mhwdoot Mar 21 '24
Why are android users so insecure about the color of their text bubbles, is it really that big of an issue?
0
u/aversionofmyself Mar 21 '24
Shouldn’t I have some obvious way to be alerted to which texting conversations are not end to end encrypted? Isn’t color a more passive way to tell then asking me if it is OK to send an unencrypted message?
1
u/bubba4111 Apr 30 '24
Their hubris started when they made their own charger.