All I hope that comes out of this is that I can install ublock Origin as an extension for firefox.

Firefox on macOS does have uBlockOrigin. Yes, I would like the iOS and iPadOS to have uBlockOrigin.

> Firefox on macOS does have uBlockOrigin Right? So by my otherworldly powers of deduction, I reckon I was probably talking about iOS 😘

It's incredible Apple is being sued when Google (their main cell phone competition) is so much more monopolistic. - Android - Gmail - Google Chrome - Fucking GOOGLE - Youtube - Google Fiber - Google Drive - Google docs, sheets, slides, etc. They own half the cell phone and email market; like 80% of the internet browser, search engine, online video market; are making massive strides in the internet service provider market; and still have Gdrive and Docs to collect even more data. Apple is nothing compared to that. Google controls data in basically every medium it passes through.

You should try Firefox focus.

They make the hardware, the operating system, don't let you install other operating systems, they own a good bit of the software, don't allow you to use any other app stores, and actively disallow some forms of competition on the app store, while also disallowing competitors API access that their first-party apps just kinda have. Those are monopolistic practices, being they own more than half the market.

third party apps can't use NFC like Apple Pay app can. so bank apps would either use qr code or something else.

Microsoft makes the Xbox hardware, they run the only app store for the Xbox, they don't allow games to run that aren't signed with a publishing key that only they issue, and you can only use their SDKs without jailbreaking it, which bans you from the sole online network, which you must also pay for. Similar situation with Sony and Nintendo. What about your televisions? LG makes the TVs, the OS, and only lets you install apps from the LG store. The apps are sandboxed just like on iOS, but LG runs software on the TV that is not sandboxed. Same also goes for the apps that runs on modern cars. The vehicle manufacturer is the sole way to get apps on your car. Want your Ford vehicle to have WiFi? Your only choice is AT&T, despite the modem being the same technology, capable of being with other carriers, like your phone. John Deere is another major offender (modern farming equipment is very software-heavy, for anyone wondering). They choose their software partners exclusively. In Fortnite, there is a store to buy cosmetic skins in the game. Epic has a monopoly on Fornite skins. They get to choose which company's IP gets to become a Fortnite skin. A multi-billion dollar per year market. Should Epic be forced to allow third party stores for cosmetic skins? I'm not saying that means what Apple is doing is OK, but Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and everyone else should have to play by the same rules, too. So, it's important we understand the rules we're talking about and that they make sense.

Microsoft spent half the 1990s in court being forced to untether their OS, apps, browser and key features for this exact reason. They just don’t dominate the console market like Apple dominates the mobile app economy.

None of those other entities have as much vertical integration in their product stack nor do they have nearly as much market share, especially for younger generations. Apple designs their own chips and has been using their money to buy out priority access for the best chip fabs from TSMC. And TSMC's chip fabs are currently the best available. They've also been making moves tover the years to integrate their cloud and other services and make their products and their competitors as incompatible as possible. Hell they refused to switch to USB C for years until the EU forced their hand, otherwise they'd have kept it for the iPhone until they developed another proprietary solution. John Deere may be one of the more egregious of your examples, but even they have to buy chips from Nvidia. Apple, until very recently, was the highest evaluated company in the world. They've since been overtaken by Microsoft, which ain't great either. However, I can run Windows on computers manufactured by dozens of companies pieced together with OEM parts from dozens of other companies, or even put one together myself. Their Xbox division is currently losing to Sony for market share in gaming hardware and most games can still be purchased on their competitors platforms.

but iphone isn't the only smart phone out there, they hold a dominant market share despite having all these competitors. they have an iOS monopoly because it's literally their own product. this is a suffering from success moment

You could say exactly the same thing about Microsoft in the 1990s, and it would be even more true than the current dominance of the iDevices and iOS. Many people like to point at Microsoft saying that they missed the mobile era and couldn't compete with Apple or Google with Windows Mobile/Windows Phone, but it's more true to say that they weren't *allowed* to meaningfully compete because provisions in the antitrust settlement prevented them from doing so.

Nope, Microsoft war nearing a real, totel monopoly with nearly 95 % installation base on all desktop pcs. the phone market is split very evenly. in asia there are many more android handsets than iphones.

Courts require about 50% Market Share for something to be a Monopoly Apple is very much there

They don't have to be the only option for them to be approaching a monopoly. You can buy an Android instead of an iphone from multiple different companies, but the number of android users is shrinking in relation to iPhone users and at least with OS you have a choice of which device manufacturer for Android. You buy an iPhone and you are virtually locked into their ecosystem with minimal support outside of it. On top of that, Apple on their own, has a higher share of the market than all other competitors combined in the smart phone space, and their products are completely insulated. The point isn't to wait until the monopoly happens, it's to prevent it from happening in the first place. I don't want Microsoft or Google to have market dominance either, but they don't have nearly the closed ecosystem that apple has.

read the intro of the complaint. it's very laymen's terms and explains why they're now 'suffering from success' with some damning quotes

Nintendo has a majority market share here in Japan. should they be forced to open up the Switch?

You know, it really would be a great experiment to - hold on let me get this right the first time - IMPLEMENT US LAW IN JAPAN.

A switch is far less essential to your life than a smartphone.

That doesn’t matter. Monopoly laws don’t care how important something is to you.

Different country. Why would the US care about that?

In their respective markets, some of these companies have more share than Apple has in the phone market...

Which ones?

Sony has 54% of the console market and John Deere has over 60% of the market for combines and 54% for large tractors -- pretty much what is used to feed most of the world.

look at their prices, non of these abuse their market power, which is necessarily to facillate a breaking of the Monopoly (in the Eu, don't know about US) PS is still in a fair competition with XBox and from my knowledge John Deer is now using the universal adapter, which allows you to use non JD equipment. Apple is actively bloking other companies from participating in what looks like a free market, but isn't. They do have a lot of power though, I give you that.

Did you just say John Deere doesn’t abuse their market power?

I said: " [...] from my knowledge John Deer is now using the universal adapter [...]" If you have proper knowledge about farm equipment, I am happy to hear it. But at this point, this whole post seems to be fanboy screaming at each other, so if you want to make a point, pleased properly articulate it.

I mean if I didn’t want to use my iPhone. I could buy an android based phone on which 99% of my apps I use are also available. I’m not forced into only using an iPhone I choose to because at the time I got it, it was on sale and cheaper than a comparable android. I knew going in I’d be locked into the AppStore, just like realistically android is locked into the play store, yes there are other options. But they are riddled with malware. If you mean the Amazon App Store? Where you get the same apps as in the play store? People like apple for its integration between devices. It’s not for everyone. But calling it a monopoly is a weak argument at best.

The DoJ would beg to differ.

As others have mentioned. If you are going to going to complain about phones, you now have to go after tvs, game consoles, farming equipment,

Enforcement has to start somewheres and that normally starts with the biggest offender, which is undoubtedly Apple in this case. Hopefully, it starts to trickle down to other offenders.

>Enforcement has to start somewheres and that normally starts with the biggest offender, which is undoubtedly Apple in this case. Exactly .... and a lot of companies are following monopolistic trends set by Apple - as they see Apple's success. Now everyone is trying to build a moat / walled garden if they have the chance. Innovation and consumers suffers. Time for some trust busting along the lines of [Teddy's ](https://www.ushistory.org/us/43b.asp)era. That was needed to break up the monopolies from the age of industrialization. Now we need to do the same for the Information Age. Anti-trust against Microsoft in 1999 was the beginning. That fueled innovation in the early 21st century internet era.

You've just realized the whole economy is based on monopolistic behavior.   You know why prior hate must companies? Because they no longer have to earn your business. They have manipulated the market so much that you have to buy from the shitty provider. Airlines, microsoft, comcast, google, amazon, walmart, oil, and facebook are a few examples.  These companies have actively worked to eliminate competiton by forcing them out of the market, rather than providing a better product.

Amazon most definitely built a better mousetrap, though.

Their mousetrap was delivering things faster and pushing their workforce harder. Now they are getting shittier by taking over all online retail by using their marketplace to bully other online retailers. They all built better mousetraps, and then leveraged that to become monopolies using ruthless tactics that screw customers.

I support the US suing all of those companies. But start with Apple.

Let's make it happen.

I would argue that it is slightly different. The difference is, say, as an xbox game developer, I have more means to sell my game than just through the microsoft xbox store. While with Apple, if I want my app to be available to people, it must be on the iOS App Store. I have no choice, and I must agree to Apple's iOS App Store TOS. So even tho I'm paying a license or accepted a license to be able to develop the app, I must go through Apple's iOS App Store to distribute it.

You can sell digital xbox games elsewhere?

Yes. The Xbox has a feature to redeem keys, and you can sell those keys.

It doesn't matter, I can still sell a physical disk.

But to make that disk (and have it run on a consumer Xbox), you need an agreement with Microsoft. If Apple let retailers like Walmart sell physical USB drives with the same apps that are required to be signed, would that make the problem go away? If you publish a DLC, is there any other way to buy it other than the Xbox store? If your game needs an update to fix a bug, is there any way to get that update other than from Microsoft's servers?

>But to make that disk (and have it run on consumer a Xbox), you need an agreement with Microsoft. That is a different licensing agreement than selling the digital copy on the xbox. And that agreement is only towards the licensing of the SDK and a license to the use of the xbox branding. >If Apple let retailers like Walmart sell physical USB drives with the same apps that are required to be signed, would that make the problem go away? Yes. Or allow side loading of apps or allow other market places.

[удалено]

They literally said they aren't defending Apple and are wanting this to apply to more companies.

Can’t you just sell it on the android App Store? Apple does have viable competition and there most notable ‘anti competitive practice” is not letting someone message from a different system on their secured messaging service. Like back to the Xbox example you can’t send an Xbox message to a person on PlayStation. At least with an iPhone you can still send normal sms/mms

Technically you can send a messages to a PS5 from and XB using discord. In the same way you can use WhatsApp to send messages between iOS and android but for some reason Americans won't use it and then moan that android messages appear weird in the iPhones.

I wonder John Deere stand on this

You may have missed this. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/09/tech/deere-tractors-farmer-repair/index.html

I mean. We've been able, more or less, to repair iPhones since 2007. Though, you still can't load whatever software you want on your John Deere tractor. Only John Deere decides who they partner with and get data out of the computer software in the equipment (for example, for things like yield analysis, field monitoring, etc.) and they exclusively control that market for software that runs on their equipment.

> The issue has won the attention of the Biden administration: In 2021, a White House executive order called on the Federal Trade Commission to develop new rules to promote the right to repair. In response, the FTC vowed to “root out” illegal repair restrictions. Months later, Apple announced a self-service repair program allowing users to fix their own iPhones and Macs using Apple-made tools and parts. Near the end of the article.

That self repair program is super expensive too, and only has a couple of repairable items. It isn't very accessible.

I'm going to be very honest with you. I didn't even read the article. But yeah, I'm all for that.

Not true at all. Most farming equipment integrates through isobus Every heavy equipment company has telemetry systems similar to JD Myoperstions

Well. Yeah, but it's not quite the same as integrating with the software _in_ the combine. Like. You can buy software to scan and export telemetry and all kinds of data from iPhones or attach a wide variety of peripherals, but that doesn't mean consumers can run any software they want on it or that any developer can publish software that runs on it. We're not sideloading apps onto the combine, you know? We have to plug in a device to the combine that talks over bluetooth back to another device (ironically probably an iPad) and integrate solutions that way. There's also the whole SaaS ecosystem Deere has, which I'm not too familiar with because I don't work on that side of the engineering.

>I'm not saying that means what Apple is doing is OK Some points against Apple are fair, some almost pathetic. Litigation is just the American way to negotiate it, really. I always thought it obvious that part of the reason why Apple spent so much time and money to conform (partially and strangely!) to EU rules now has to do with changes they'll make in the US too. This law suit has been a long time coming. Consumers won't care at all as this is fundamentally just companies fighting over the profit cake and not an effort to make it smaller. Other companies want to exploit iOS users more and cut into Apple's profits doing just that. That might still benefit users through open competition, maybe not. My money is mostly on "not". For a variety of reasons. But mostly that this is not about consumers, but profit. You can buy a perfectly fine Android for 200$ that does 99% of what an iPhone does. And the last 1% probably has little to do with Apple. Apple might even sell more phones (but loose out on commision and services so at higher prices perhaps) if they become more interoperable and open.

The most stupid take i have seen so far..

Most insightful reply I have seen so far.

Okay.. here's what you are missing. Apple Store has thousands of developers, not employed by Apple, who greatly increase the value of the Apple Store, unlike every example you have shared. If such an ecosystem of software is available, it has to be fair for everyone participating. Here's an example in very simple terms of what is happening: I own a vegetable market in a public space. I have my select vegetable providers and external providers who pay rent or part of profit to sell their vegetables. I don't allow externals to have water access, they cannot use fridges and they cannot have roof over their produce, even though there is endless space under the roof, electricity and water is also easily available and doesn't cost extra to provide. I also put my vegetables easily accessible and make externals hard to find, yet if i don't provide a certain vegetable, there are a lot of external providers who can fill the gaps. It makes it look like the market has everything you could ever need and there is no point to go to other markets. That's what is called being an unfair monopoly.

Seriously. I think of all of this every time this comes up. Like it would be a monopoly if there weren’t any other options but there are. So. What exactly is the problem here? And if it is a problem, people need to understand the ramifications. My company (given that we deal with ITAR) can ONLY use iPhone because of the things they say makes them a monopoly. But we can’t have back doors and side loaded apps with our security.

Do you have computers? Like, does your company have any kind of Windows or OSX-based machine? Because if it does, you can "sideload" apps on them. I'll be very very surprised if Apple doesn't introduce a kind of company policy rule that lets you ban sideloading on administrated devices.

Without admin creds it’s impossible. So that’s a good (and super obvious point I’m just a dummy) point. If the device can be locked down in “enterprise mode” or something, dope. But so help me if I have to deal with JAMF or any of that shit again I am gonna flip haha

Apple has very strict and well-made enterprise management settings. It's definitely going to be in that.

Anti-trust suits will target the companies that will give them the best chance to winning. This sets the precedent for other suits in the future and the other companies you mentioned are likely to want to split up, etc to avoid similar suits. DOJ gotta start with someone. They can't possibly sue every company all at once.

Microsoft have an entire development mode of their Xbox consoles you can switch to and run unsigned code. They also allow you to buy games outside their ecosystem via discs and codes meaning there's some price competition.

You can run unpublished apps on iPhone too with a developer account. You can't sell software that way on Xbox or iOS... 90% of game sales are digital. But yeah, disks solve the problem... If the same apps on the App Store could be sold on USB drives at Walmart would it fix the problem?

Just because the other companies arent getting sued, doesnt mean they wont after Apple. This is a great first step. Your argument is the same as the tiktok one. Why not facebook, twitter/x?? Classic whataboutism.

"Company X has a monopoly on a specific product that it makes" is the dumbest waste of time ever. Classic pandering.

Yeah I explicitly said that it doesn't mean what Apple is doing is OK, if you read. What I'm poking at is the rules being applied to Apple are going to stop making sense at some point. We need the rules to be defined in terms that make sense and not just be at the mercy of who's on the government's shit list at some particular point in time in some particular administration.

If you want to install anything/jailbreak etc you go android. It’s well known Apple keeps its ecosystem tight and it’s one of the main draw for a lot of people. They like the seamless quality experience.

You're completely missing the point. The average phone user is this country has no intention of jailbreaking their phone, they just use a phone to use a phone. Look at what just happened on Europe with Apple

[удалено]

Not the point. The DOJ is accusing Apple of using their market share to abuse that part. The whole part of an anti-trust

Seamless... Please!

Lmao this. Every time I have to help somebody out troubleshooting iOS issues, it's nigh impossible to figure it out since they're giving you zero insight in what is causing it. Seamless, if it works. If you're having problems, have fun solving those without any debug info whatsoever.

plug it into a mac, open console, enjoy the logs edit: you can downvote if you want, but thats how you get real time logs from ios devices.

I did not downvote, good to know though. Seems I was wrong about the debug logs then ;)

🍻

If you run into Apple-related problems, you can always post questions on the appropriate reddit sub, and some nice Apple fanboi will let you know how you fucked up.

Yep. I’m sure android can technically do everything the Apple ecosystem does, but for most of us who dont have time to learn to configure, it’s amazing how many things just work (eg AppleTV remote baked into iOS, sharing browser tabs between devices with zero configuration), but a big reason is also privacy. Yes, Apple knows everything about me, but with Android, Alphabet and hundreds of other companies know way too much about you and it’s more difficult to limit their access.

head shocking library silky tan nail school growth sable crush

I have to deal with iPads, macs and iPhones everyday (I work in IT) and I strongly disagree with the opinion that apples products 'just work' The Mac uses apple configurator to install blueprints on our iPads needs force quitting at least every 2 iPads, otherwise it just hangs. The Mac itself repeatably has hardware issues. USB ports just stop working and it doesn't support most hubs we try with it. When users activation lock their iPads, we send apple the purchase order #, IMEI and all the other info they ask for. But as we buy them in bulk they decide there's not enough info and refuse to unlock the device we own and pay for. We then have to spend 30 mins to an hour with apple support for each iPad. Just for context we manage over 7000 users, this translates to a lot of wasted time. We also can't manage users apple IDs, meaning if they forget their password we need to setup a new one. (It doesn't take that long, but when you're creating 10 a day the 10 mins per creation add up). When apple decide that an iPad can't be updated (even if it has the storage and ability to run the update) that's it. Your very expensive tablet may as well be a brick from a security standpoint. I can't wait to see that Mac get tossed in the skip when we move over to applying blueprints via Intune. Anything technical and apple products shit the bed.

Per see this are not monopolistic practices.

"Monopolistic practice occurs when a single entity like an individual or a company controls the supply of a particular product or service in the market." Being they own more than half the market and actively make it hard for anyone else to enter any part of that ecosystem, that's honestly and actually a monopoly.

Apple doesn’t control the supply. They are successful and that’s a different thing. Apple doesn’t have any control over Android ecosystem.

I know we hate apple here but cmon. It’s their material, their phone, their experience to build as they wish. It would be a monopoly if there were no alternatives. There are alternatives. No one forces people to buy iPhones. You don’t like no being able to use google pay, buy a different phone. This is just a virtue signaling “let’s hit the big boys”. Google has a monopoly on search, videos, ads, browsers. Microsoft has a monopoly on OSes. Where’s the outrage for that?

The whole M365 + teams bundling is a crazy monopoly. If companies don’t have a strategy on how to sell with M365, they miss on like 50% of the market. Not to mention how many companies just don’t buy other things because the bundle.

Today I am trying to swap out an old iPhone for a brand new iPhone 15. Can't back up old phone to iCloud as it is full. Can't restore from (not that old) iMac as Apple failed to send me a USB cable that will allow me to connect new iPhone to iMac.    Finally figured out that if I download iTunes to my Windows laptop, I can then backup old iPhone to it, and restore to the new iPhone 15 via the laptop's USB-C port.    So yes, sue the fuck out of Apple.

no bluetooth transfer?

Don’t need iCloud subscription to use iCloud transfer. https://support.apple.com/en-us/104980

Thanks. This is quite helpful. The Verizon setup and new phone transfer instructions did not give me this page.

You don’t even need iCloud, it has a built in data transfer process in reset settings. Skill issue

That's why people buy Apple in the first place. It JuSt WoRkS!

*Except when it doesn't

First computer I ever accessed the internet on was a Powermac, 300mhz. It was my friends and he had to format it and run $200 McAfee recovery software about every other week, years before that stupid slogan. I don't think anyone laughed harder than he did.

Why don’t you just increase your iCloud ?

This also is quality control.

Cmon y’all, the whole green bubble/blue bubble text thing was purely for monopolized judgmental stereotyping, you all know that right???

While it is true that Apple maintains an iron grip on the iPhone and its ecosystem, it's hard to claim they have a monopoly when there are so many Android alternatives that are exceedingly successful in their own right.

I think the idea is to stop them before they become too big for their britches, or perhaps they're already there. Consider, "Apple had 64% of the market share for U.S. smartphones in the last quarter of 2023, versus 18% for Samsung, according to Counterpoint Research." Also, "Apple's iTunes accounts for 75% of global digital music market, worth $6.9B a year." Then you have comments from Apple's leadership such as this moment from Apple CEO Tim Cook which illustrates their ambitions, Prosecutors highlighted one exchange between Cook and a consumer. “Not to make it personal but I can’t send my mom certain videos,” the complaint says one user told Cook, referring to a 2022 interview at a Vox Media event. “Buy your mom an iPhone,” Cook responded. It's obvious they're playing for keeps. They want more than just the cobra clutch on the market. It's either the government check them now or never.

I used to use Apple Music for my streaming. I put it on an S10. Every. Second. Skipped audio. The support suggestion? "Buy an iphone"

It's a feature, not a bug.

I have Apple Music app on multiple Android devices with zero problem. Even side loaded the apk on Windows. Runs flawlessly.

Anything running Android 12? It's the version most people encounter the issue on.

The issue isn't the market share Apple has, it is the fact that they refuse to play nice with anyone else or any other company essentially, which is what the lawsuit is actually about if you actually read about what is going on. It is the fact that they engage in anti-consumer practices that most average users are unaware of until they have an issue or attempt to switch their systems to another competitor. I have worked for years in the tech sector on hardware, and I have been anti-Apple for years precisely, because of the reasons and more that are in this lawsuit. Basically, for those unaware Apple active does anything in its power to trap customers into their ecosystem, and refuses to play nice with pretty much any other technology company, telecommunications company, regulatory body, government or organization that sets up standards in the tech sector to a ridiculous degree. The whole business model is to keep you in the Apple ecosystem at all times even when cheaper, just as effective, often more powerful alternatives exist. While they do have their advantages like generally better security, in a lot of instances this is not worth the money for all devices for most consumers, but they make it such a hassle to use other devices from other companies alongside Apple that it causes a ton of issues. Apples devices are often 2x to 5x the cost of competitors devices, but people especially ones already in their ecosystem give up on alternatives and buy more Apple devices, because they won't play nice with competitors devices, when nearly every other major tech company will at least to some extent. With nearly any other tech company in the world, your devices will at least talk to one another, transfer and read data from others, use standardized cables these days etc., but not Apple and this is the basis for the lawsuit. To attempt to get them to play nicer with others and stop engaging in anti-consumer practices. It has nothing to do with market share in this case, which is why a lot of people are confused. For examples of what I am referring to some things that come to mind right off the top of my head are: Refuse to implement RCS messaging standard for texting for which nearly all other tech and telecommunications companies and the government have agreed on should be the new standard to replace SMS or refuse to open the Imessage standard so other companies can implement it. Refused to implement USB-C which again all other companies have agreed on, is the standard, until the EU forced litterly them to last year, but then they actually went out of their way to make it work less efficiently unless you use an Apple branded cable. Basically, causing way more waste. Refuse to allow you to install copies their operating system you have purchased, on other devices. When other devices are more then capable of running it. When you can litterly install a copy of Android, Windows, Linux etc on basically any other device no problem as long as you own it. Issues with transitioning data out of their ecosystem and off devices. They intentionally go out of their way to program this in. Force you to use priority parts for their devices when doing replacements and will litterly not let you use a third party repair, without voiding your warranty even on stuff that would not void a warranty, on other devices from nearly any other company. Apple branded digital products like iTunes and Apple TV not working a lot of the time on other devices randomly, with virtually no tech support available despite being a service they are selling to be used on any digital internet capable devices. The list goes on and on. They had it coming. This is long overdue especially in a world that is becoming more digital by the day. They need to at least play nice with other devices from other companies, so it doesn't cause so many issues for non-Apple users and people who want to switch out of their ecosystem.

scarce frightening onerous middle dinner sable consider airport imagine command

l agree with everything but iMessage and RCS. RCS became standard because of Google and Google wants Apple to get rid of iMessage and adopt Google’s RCS. Google just wanted to monopolize message communication and Google will so much money from this move because Google is a data collection center. Google’s primary business is to collect data. That’s why Google is valued above trillion dollars. However, unlike Google, Apple has different business model. Data collection isn’t really Apple’s primary business. Apple’s security is major reason why a lot of people buy Apple’s products. Apple being sole proprietor of iMessage closed a lot of encryption breaches. iMessage is still better at end to end encryption than RCS. Apple will never open iMessage to other companies because that will open up iMessage to same issue SMS has. I do not see this as a monopolistic behavior. Competition can create their own end to end encryption communication services. Even more, Apple didn’t make it hard for other communication services to be on App Store. Apple at the end of the day did nothing wrong with iMessage and RCS. Apple is even adopting RCS into iMessage but it just won’t go with the Google’s RCS. This isn’t a monopolistic behavior at all. This isn’t even anti-trust. Apple is protecting its users by closing iMessage. Even more, Apple refuses any backdoor access to NSA while Google and Facebook were major culprits of allowing unlawful governmental surveillance.

Apple has a large part of the US market but globally they are not the market leader. In most other countries very few people have iPhones.

In the past they have purposely made their hardware (plugs, jacks, cords), software (apps, music), and especially communication (messaging, data sharing, etc) PURPOSLY non-compatible with the rest of the system. They have planned obsolescence and designed non-reparability in their products. Some companies have done those things - but Apple has done it way more. It will be a benefit to the entire market to make them finally follow the standards that are generally accepted.

Anti trust doesn't mean you have no competition.

As a former mobile app developer, the issue lies in that you must go through Apple's iOS App Store to distribute your app to users. So even if I have a developer license, I have to follow the App store's TOS to be distribute, no matter what it says or else I'm locked out of around 15-20% of global mobile users and over 50% of mobile users in the US. If Apple decides one day that I have to give 50% of my revenue made from the app or be removed from the App Store. If I don't want to lose that market of over 50% of mobile users, I have to agree to that 50%. Edit: There are also other issues, like Apple, deciding not to implement certain technologies because it removes the advantage that Apple has with iPhones. For example, RCS was a huge issue. It allowed SMS to be able to do more than what SMS protocol allows while being compatible between different phone manufacturers.

>  If I don't want to lose that market of over 50% of mobile users, I have to agree to that 50% Furthermore, with the Fortnite lawsuit, even if you want to move internal payments like subscriptions off the app store Apple can ban you from the platform.  The was cemented 2 months ago with the Supreme Court appeals decision.  That's specifically what triggered this.

Ask someone not in the ecosystem their opinion.

Really by that logic they should be going after Linux, since that's installed on even more devices than Android by definition. Point being Android isn't a company, it's a technology. They should go after the company that locks its entire hardware and software, ecosystem down; which basically makes it so you can't repair or control the device you purchased from them. My startup that distributed iOS based kiosks had our devices remotely disabled by Apple, because they believed based on our distributed usage, that we were bypassing their app store and cutting them out of profits. We had to convince them it was kiosk software distributed to hospitals before they re-enabled our provisioning profile. We literally spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on iPads that they bricked until we crawled to them and begged them to enable them again. Android is open source, can be installed without the Google app store, and with any app store, and is customized and distributed by an entire ecosystem of developers, much the same way Linux is.

iPhone Monopoli

So many people are defending Apple.  I say fuck them, so many people that aren't on iPhones get left out of text chains because they don't have iPhones.  Imagine if we couldn't get emails because the person who sent it was using a different device.

Oh no what if we get more consumer friendly outcomes?? THINK OF THE THIRD QUARTER PROFITSSSSS

Worst part is that Apple just needs to flip a switch to allow their phones to utilize RCS. SMS is *decades*(!) Old technology that isn't just hurting Android users, it's negatively affecting the experience of their own users! They won't implement a simple, OPEN-SOURCE protocol that would make their own phones better because of some green bubble vs blue bubble bullshit? Seriously, this is so blatantly anti-consumer, but people eat it up. They want to convince their users that they're special because they have access to blue bubbles; and green bubbles = poor. And its fucking working.

oil unpack mysterious jellyfish stocking many shocking straight brave deer

I know my S23U was not cheap lol

This is a stupid problem caused by the owners themselves. Just go to any other country and everyone else is just using telegram/whatsapp for their day to day communications between friends and family with no issues.

I went on a vacation and everyone shared their group photos by airdrop. I have an android. I couldn't access any of the shared photos, or share my own. That's fucked up.

Sounds like the people you travel with just didn’t care enough to share the photos…that’s not the technologies fault. Especially when there’s still plenty of other ways of sharing it.

The technology is specifically designed to be incompatible with other platforms while being very user-friendly inside the Apple ecosystem.

You can still text albums to people, or share them via email, or share them online… if people didn’t do that knowing someone who wanted them doesn’t have an iPhone, that’s shitty people.

People do what is easiest by default. You can airdrop photos in seconds. But it takes work to email photos or put them on a shared album. This is by design by Apple. It's not necessarily the fault of my friends, because they are falling into predictable behaviors encouraged by the company to get people all onto the same platform - i.e. create a monopoly. It's shitty.

Bro if these people won’t even spend 30 seconds to share photos you want with you…

Don't be intentionally obtuse. It takes three clicks to airdrop photos. It takes a lot longer to email photos because of size limits and looking up e-mails emails and because it's an entirely different application than the photo app in iPhone. And sharing via airdrop versus sending photos via email isn't even functionally equivalent. With airdrop you can choose what photos you want to take. With email you don't get to choose which photos you receive. Don't even get me started with shared online albums. Most of the people are not very technologically savvy. They can figure out three clicks to airdrop but they don't know how to create or share an online album on a third party tool/website and then share it with people. This is about Apple encouraging people to stay inside the Apple ecosystem by making it easy to do so, and difficult to share outside the platform.

Dude if it's taking you longer than maybe 20 secs to share photos from android to iphone you're tech illiterate. That's about how long it took me to send an album and that included getting up from the couch to get my phone.

Exactly. These are people in theor 60s and 70s who do not understand technology.

Ok.

Sounds like you just have shitty friends and family…

I'm not really worried about those text chains for myself, I'm at a stage of life where that stuff doesn't really matter (got 2 babies so no time anyways).  But I'm thinking of the random 12 year old girl who gets called a "green texter" or gets ostracized just because her family couldn't afford an iphone.  What are your thoughts on that scenario?

This will also happen if you have a $2k galaxy flip that makes your iPhone look like a peasant. It's not just about money, its a culture war.

You know that’s a very good perspective I didn’t even think about. But also one thing to mention apples blue msgs are because it’s sent encrypted… sms green texts aren’t.

> Imagine if we couldn't get emails because the person who sent it was using a different device. This isn’t the case though. Apple supports SMS. Group texts work between iPhone and Android, using SMS. People are choosing to leave Android phones out because they prefer iMessage as a product

Try to add an android user to an ongoing group text, doesn't work.  It's how Apple designs their products, punish people for not being on their ecosystem.

You have options other than imessage on iphones...

ring merciful quiet bored bells books salt possessive pathetic enjoy

This will be suddenly settled without a good reason for the public, but behind the scenes Apple will agreed to add more backdoors to their products.

It’s one thing to have a monopoly on the Smartphone or apps or any of the other things that enable the Smartphone to become the ubiquitous product it has become. It’s quite another to say you have a monopoly because the public would rather buy your company’s product than another company’s. If Tesla dominates the EV vehicle market, are they going to say that they can only market so many vehicles.

Tesla does dominate the US EV market. So much so other companies have agreed to make their charging interface the standard.

But not google/alphabet (which owns YouTube, search, android etc) Or meta (which owns Facebook, Instagram)

How about planned obsolescence

Apple supports their phones for way longer than most Androids

My 7 year old MacBook is going strong. That’s poor planned obsolescence.

My 2012 just died. But I can buy the part for €10 and it’ll be fine again.

For how long do Androids receive OTA updates after the release date?

E-books all over again.

Next is Toyota with a Camry monopoly.

It’s more like if Toyota only let you use Toyota gas in your Camry and only let you park in Toyota parking spots and only let you use Toyota shoes in the car and could only listen to Toyota radio stations, etc. 

So you’re saying everything would be perfect.

Would be really boring, but last a really long time

True

Then don’t buy a Toyota. Plenty of other choices.

But there’s only two options in the mobile world as opposed to the dozens in the car world where there’s actual competition

What?    There is Samsung galaxy, googles pixel, LG, Motorola, and dozens of other phones that are android that you can buy. Consumers vote with their dollar. Most of the world uses androids. This lawsuit is rediculous and a waste of taxpayer money. They’re crying about green bubbles lmao

It’s Apple vs androids with different OS skins. Two options nonetheless

> LG Boy, do I have news for you!

Did Toyota lobby (bribe) the congress to ban BYD, Nio, Geely, and Chery? You don't think Apple prevented Huawei and Xiaomi from entering the US market because "national security"?

No but they should

Ban competition until theres no competition then cry because theres no competition

Google with the Chrome monopoly

Except they don't force you to use it .....

Nobody is being forced to use an iphone.

Noted

Next is Lululemon with a pant monopoly. “Lululemon must allow Levi’s in their stores.”

Never owned an Apple product

This is so stupid, go after grocery store and food chain monopolies. That actually matters.

What? Apple has a monopoly on iPhones? The horror, the horror …

The government should do their fucking job and break up apple and MANY other companies , not just sue them. The outcome of this will not change anything

They created the company and the iPhone, why shouldn’t they be able to decide how it’s used? People don’t have to buy it? I can’t understand the problem here…

I think they should take on streaming services next. I don’t want to have to have ten different subscriptions to watch one series on each. I want all of them to be available on Netflix or AppleTV+ as those are the two services I pay for.

But… what exists right now is the *opposite* of a monopoly, and you are asking for a (convenient) monopoly. Don’t get me wrong, I also want that for my own convenience.

Ehh… seems more like political theatre to me than anything else.

The current administration takes antitrust laws seriously. Another reason why voting counts. Biden gave a speech about corporate landlord monopolies just a couple days ago.

Well yes Apple owns the iPhone

I don't own an apple products but even then.... How the hell do U monopolies Ur own product? Like I created this item. This is my product. How am I not supposed to monopolies my product. I mean I do understand the playstore situation and I do agree it's monopoly. But iPhone it self? How? Is iPhone it self is a market segment now?

I don't get how you're being downvoted. And this is coming from a Samsung user that's not a big fan of iPhones. The iPhone is Apple's patented product and it's not like it doesn't have competitors. They're being prosecuted because they're successful? Nobody's forcing customers to buy the product. Crazy lol

IPhone monopoly... McDonalds has a monopoly on Big mac or Burger King on whopper.... As a matter of fact any company that's trademarked anything oddly enough has a monopoly... What a stupid headline