Supreme Court Allows Anti-Trust Lawsuit Against the App Store

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, comander said:

The analogy would be automobile manufacturers creating software to prevent the use of parts made by third parties. 

A better analogy would be auto manufacturers preventing you from filling your car anywhere but at gas stations owned buy them.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

????  because not everyone owns an ios device.  And what about those who don't want to use the app store or google play?  should they just not be allowed to distribute their own apps on their own website?

You can distribute your own apps on your own website. 

 

If if you don’t have an iOS device, developing an iOS application is pretty hard, and the App Store being anti-competitive is a little redundant.

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, wasab said:

No, what's idiotic is that you find google play store or any other app store can be swap in as an alternative on iOS. For there to be competition, an alternative needs to exists which it doesn't on iOS. 

 

If I want to travel by plane, I can go American airlines, if I don't like that company due to higher price, poor service or any other reason, morale, ethical, or irrationale, I can get jet blue as the alternative choice. On iOS I don't and to point out Android play store as a competitor is akin to pointing out airlines as a competitor when you need an alternative taxi service. 

No, it's akin to Lyft over Uber. iOS vs Android isn't an entirely different market both are smartphones and both suit the same purpose. A taxi and plane serve entirely different markets; you don't take a flight across town.

Quote

Know what Google says about Amazon competition? Over 80% of user searches for a merchandise goes to Amazon so Amazon is a valid competing search engine. I think you will find something stupid in that logic but somehow that logical part of your brain turns off when it comes to apple products. 

I'm the one that's blinded by Apple?

 

I haven't once in this thread suggested that there shouldn't be an alternative app store; just the incredibly nonsensical analogies you keep coming up with.

 

It's you who is jumping on the Apple hate train, not the other way around.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, floofer said:

You can distribute your own apps on your own website. 

You cannot distribute apps for ios on your own website, stop being silly.

Quote

If if you don’t have an iOS device, developing an iOS application is pretty hard, and the App Store being anti-competitive is a little redundant.

That doesn't make any sense.  You seem to be ignoring a major component of the problem here.

 

If I want to distribute an app for ios, I have to use the app store there is no other option to sell or distribute my app.  Not sure why you are ignoring that.

 

 

[Chett_Manly]

I love how insanely biased the original post is. 

 

Apple is forcing Devs to pay 30%, FACT.

Apple blocks any serious attempt to provide an alternative to the App Store, FACT.

Customers pricing is inflated due to Apple's monopoly control, FACT.

 

Apple's monopoly status is going to be ended on iOS. The writing is on the wall, consumer class action will go forward, while at the same time Spotify will be launching an all out assault. The days of setting up a closed platform then launching competing products against the developers on the platform, knowing your 30% cut will make them uncompetitive, will be over. 

 

All thanks to this man siding with the 4 liberal justices!

 

[DrMacintosh]

27 minutes ago, Chett_Manly said:

Apple is forcing Devs to pay 30%, FACT.

Apple blocks any serious attempt to provide an alternative to the App Store, FACT.

Customers pricing is inflated due to Apple's monopoly control, FACT.

Citation needed. 

[wasab]

 

 

1

2 hours ago, 79wjd said:

 

1 hour ago, 79wjd said:

No, it's akin to Lyft over Uber. iOS vs Android isn't an entirely different market both are smartphones and both suit the same purpose. A taxi and plane serve entirely different markets; you don't take a flight across town.

I'm the one that's blinded by Apple?

 

I haven't once in this thread suggested that there shouldn't be an alternative app store; just the incredibly nonsensical analogies you keep coming up with.

 

It's you who is jumping on the Apple hate train, not the other way around.

we arent talking about competitions in phones but competitions in the software vendors. The developer's have the freedom to publish apps on their own platforms and consumers should have the right to an alternative other than the app store.  Anything less than that is lack of competition and you bringing smartphone handsets into the mix is very much akin to calling out airlines as a competitor when in fact it is not even an alternative i the first place. 

Edited May 14, 2019 by wasab
This post is buggged. Whoever is the technical admin for the forum may want to look into this.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You cannot distribute apps for ios on your own website, stop being silly.

Why not? Applications, like iFunBox can install IPA files on your device.

45 minutes ago, mr moose said:

That doesn't make any sense.  You seem to be ignoring a major component of the problem here.

 

If I want to distribute an app for ios, I have to use the app store there is no other option to sell or distribute my app.  Not sure why you are ignoring that.

 

 

Because it’s not true. You can install third party app stores, like vShare and AppCake for a while now using a configuration file. They aren’t well regulated, and probably won’t be good for your device. But they are there and can be used. 

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, wasab said:

we arent talking about competitions in phones but competitions in the software vendors. The developer's have the freedom to publish apps on their own platforms and consumers should have the right to an alternative other than the app store.  Anything less than that is lack of competition and you bringing smartphone handsets into the mix is very much akin to calling out airlines as a competitor when in fact it is not even an alternative i the first place. 

Not sure what you are trying to argue in that post, but none of the quotes you presented actually say what you claim they do.  

 

The whole problem with this issue is that some people re being way to broad and ignoring very pertinent information.  Making wide and varying analogies that don't actually address the technical issues of the problem don't help in anyway to convey an argument.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Citation needed. 

Revenue from an app, according to the developer website is 70-30 split with 30% to Apple. This doesn’t affect pricing though as it’s always been this way.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, floofer said:

Why not? Applications, like iFunBox can install IPA files on your device.

You can do it with xcode too, just don't ever update your phone or let it turn off.

 

 

3 minutes ago, floofer said:

Because it’s not true. You can install third party app stores, like vShare and AppCake for a while now using a configuration file. They aren’t well regulated, and probably won’t be good for your device. But they are there and can be used. 

 

And that's why this lawsuit exists, because it's that easy for a company to produce an app that they can serve their own apps on without grief.  You know apple would have pointed to vshare/cydia/xcode and said it's already a thing.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You can do it with xcode too, just don't ever update your phone or let it turn off.

iFunBox should install the applications permanently if the package is signed. You do need to jailbreak to keep your app on Xcode though, so yes, not ideal.

10 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

 

And that's why this lawsuit exists, because it's that easy for a company to produce an app that they can serve their own apps on without grief.  You know apple would have pointed to vshare/cydia/xcode and said it's already a thing.

They have been here for a while. It might cost more for Apple to admit that these exist. They aren’t well known or popular, so there’s no real benefit to hosting an app on those stores.

 

Cydia is not an App Store. You need to jailbreak to use Cydia properly. So although its well known, again Apple probably doesn’t want everyone to know about it.

[wasab]

59 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Not sure what you are trying to argue in that post, but none of the quotes you presented actually say what you claim they do.  

 

The whole problem with this issue is that some people re being way to broad and ignoring very pertinent information.  Making wide and varying analogies that don't actually address the technical issues of the problem don't help in anyway to convey an argument.

i said apple is being anti competitive for not allowing the user to install apps outside the app store. its plain and simple. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, floofer said:

iFunBox should install the applications permanently if the package is signed. You do need to jailbreak to keep your app on Xcode though, so yes, not ideal.

They have been here for a while. It might cost more for Apple to admit that these exist. They aren’t well known or popular, so there’s no real benefit to hosting an app on those stores.

 

Cydia is not an App Store. You need to jailbreak to use Cydia properly. So although its well known, again Apple probably doesn’t want everyone to know about it.

Do you know how they get the package to be signed?   Using dodgy enterprise certificates.

https://money.cnn.com/2015/12/23/technology/vshare-apple-apps/index.html

 

otherwise there is no way to legitimately do it.   

 

Seriously you are ignoring the elephant in the room,  pointing to all the dodgy side shows in an effort to ignore the core of the problem doesn't actually lend any weight to your argument.

 

2 hours ago, wasab said:

i said apple is being anti competitive for not allowing the user to install apps outside the app store. its plain and simple. 

Then whats all the kerfuffle about planes and cars and shit?

[wasab]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

 

1

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Do you know how they get the package to be signed?   Using dodgy enterprise certificates.

https://money.cnn.com/2015/12/23/technology/vshare-apple-apps/index.html

 

otherwise there is no way to legitimately do it.   

 

Seriously you are ignoring the elephant in the room,  pointing to all the dodgy side shows in an effort to ignore the core of the problem doesn't actually lend any weight to your argument.

 

Then whats all the kerfuffle about planes and cars and shit?

They are analogies, why you have an issue figuring it out? and im not the first one to use it. EU politicians used the same analogy when grilling Mark Zuckerberg to illustrate the fact there is simply no competition to facebook. 

 

Signed or unsigned, so what? is the regular users gonna be installing apps off certificates? iOS has no alternative place to install app. I personally used certificate back in my iphone days, that thing is a piece of junk. 

Edited May 14, 2019 by wasab
What the hell is wrong with my quotes?????

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Do you know how they get the package to be signed?   Using dodgy enterprise certificates.

https://money.cnn.com/2015/12/23/technology/vshare-apple-apps/index.html

 

otherwise there is no way to legitimately do it.   

 

Seriously you are ignoring the elephant in the room,  pointing to all the dodgy side shows in an effort to ignore the core of the problem doesn't actually lend any weight to your argument.

It’s only pirated apps that need it. 

 

However my original point. If you sign up to the Apple Developer Program, which you need to do to become an Apple developer - this is the real monopoly and has been for some time, you have an easy choice to go for the Apple App Store. It’s free to put free apps on the App Store due to this. Only cost to put on the App Store is the 30/70 split (That I can find, could be wrong). No other App Store can compete - everyone just uses the App Store because it’s there. Why waste time putting on other stores when there is no gain, and you’ve already paid to use the Apple App Store.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, floofer said:

It’s only pirated apps that need it. 

 

However my original point. If you sign up to the Apple Developer Program, which you need to do to become an Apple developer - this is the real monopoly and has been for some time, you have an easy choice to go for the Apple App Store. It’s free to put free apps on the App Store due to this. Only cost to put on the App Store is the 30/70 split (That I can find, could be wrong). No other App Store can compete - everyone just uses the App Store because it’s there. Why waste time putting on other stores when there is no gain, and you’ve already paid to use the Apple App Store.

And so we are back at the start,  no one can legitimately build an app for ios unless they get approval from apple.    It's not specifically about creating another store, and even if it was your opinion that one is not needed or serves no purpose does not trump the fact apple's monopoly doesn't permit none to exist.   This is about people being able to create and distribute their ion apps without having to get apples permission.  It should be as easy to install 3rd party software as it is in windows.

 

[mr moose]

20 minutes ago, wasab said:

They are analogies, why you have an issue figuring it out?

Cos their shit analogies that don't work? loos like I am not the only one having issues and I don't even think we disagree on the topic

. 

20 minutes ago, wasab said:

and im not the first one to use it. EU politicians used the same analogy when grilling Mark Zuckerberg to illustrate the fact there is simply no competition to facebook. 

Different situation, probably had different context too.

20 minutes ago, wasab said:

Signed or unsigned, so what? is the regular users gonna be installing apps off certificates? iOS has no alternative place to install app. I personally used certificate back in my iphone days, that thing is a piece of junk. 

I think the app store itself should stay the same, but allow side loading either from an app or website.   Then those who want the app store and it's benefits can use it and those who want to use something different can.  The whole requirement for any app to be vetted and signed by apple is just the tool they use to enforce the monopoly.

[SADS]

having not read this whole thread. i've always liked the way apple handled the app store.

vetting and verifying apps, rather than letting any old crap on there gives me much more confidence in what i am using on my device. sometimes a little lock down is a good thing in my opinion. not everyone (grandparents?) desires the freedom that a tech savvy person would want.

[LAwLz]

I don't see how anyone, as a consumer, can be against this.

This can only benefit consumers, with 0 drawbacks.

 

I am all for it.

 

 

 

47 minutes ago, SADS said:

having not read this whole thread. i've always liked the way apple handled the app store. 

vetting and verifying apps, rather than letting any old crap on there gives me much more confidence in what i am using on my device. sometimes a little lock down is a good thing in my opinion. not everyone (grandparents?) desires the freedom that a tech savvy person would want. 

The app store isn't being removed. What might happen is that we might get alternative stores too, which might not even be preinstalled on the phone. I would not be surprised if 95% of all Android phones has installation of apps from outside the store enabled. I know for certain than for example my grandparents' phones and my mom's phone has it disabled, which means everything installed has to go through the Google Play Store.

 

It is entirely possible to give "tech savvy" people options, while at the same time defending non-savvy people through proper default settings.

[CiBi]

12 hours ago, mr moose said:

Imagine if you bought a PC and the only software you were allowed to run was windows unless you jailbroke it? 

Aren't ereaders like that usually? For example if you buy a Kobo reader you can only buy and read books from the Kobo store, if you buy an amazon one you can only read the books you bought on amazon.

I'm absolutly not sure it is in fact like this but I always thought it was.

 

I do know for a fact that there are/where laptops that were locked in their bios to only run windows 8 and up and no linux distro's either, which is kind off the same thing as app store on ios devices.

 

I think there are other similar situations where the hardware provider locks out software that it doesn't provide, I don't inheritly have a problem with this. In this case with iPhones I think there are more advantages then disadvantages.

 

//Also to continue with the far sought car comparison, no car company supports running other firmware than theirs on your car...

[RejZoR]

Oh boy, if this is on top of the priority list then Apple stuff won't get improved much. Has anyone seen the garbage state browsers are on iOS ? They are all clumsy Safari clones that hardly resemble their self on Android for example. Firefox on iOS is nothing like Firefox on Android. Opera didn't even bother doing the full browser and they only offer Opera Mini. And even that one is visibly cut down version. What, you'd like to set Firefox as default browser on iOS. AHAHAHAHA, dream on!

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, CiBi said:

I think there are other similar situations where the hardware provider locks out software that it doesn't provide, I don't inheritly have a problem with this. In this case with iPhones I think there are more advantages then disadvantages.

What advantage does it have for us consumers that Apple are artificially locking out other stores on iOS?

 

 

44 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Oh boy, if this is on top of the priority list then Apple stuff won't get improved much. Has anyone seen the garbage state browsers are on iOS ? They are all clumsy Safari clones that hardly resemble their self on Android for example. Firefox on iOS is nothing like Firefox on Android. Opera didn't even bother doing the full browser and they only offer Opera Mini. And even that one is visibly cut down version. What, you'd like to set Firefox as default browser on iOS. AHAHAHAHA, dream on! 

The reason for that is because the App Store does not allow third party browser engines. Opera Mini gets around this by executing the code on the Opera servers and then sending the result to the phone. Things like Firefox for iOS are just skins for Safari. I am not sure how it is now, but in the old days the Safari version available to third party developers were an older version than the stock browser as well.

 

With this ruling, we might be able to get other browser engines to iOS (through sideloading).

[dalekphalm]

8 hours ago, Chett_Manly said:

Apple is forcing Devs to pay 30%, FACT.

Agreed. This is publicly available information.

8 hours ago, Chett_Manly said:

Apple blocks any serious attempt to provide an alternative to the App Store, FACT.

Agreed.

8 hours ago, Chett_Manly said:

Customers pricing is inflated due to Apple's monopoly control, FACT.

Disagree. You might be correct. But you just saying "FACT" doesn't inherently make it a fact. You've drawn a conclusion based on the evidence - and that's totally acceptable. But unless you've got proof and hard evidence? In my experience, most apps that have a cost, are the same on iOS vs Android (Bar some exceptions no doubt).

[CiBi]

32 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

What advantage does it have for us consumers that Apple are artificially locking out other stores on iOS?

Less chances for my relatives to fuck up their device