Support NeoGAF

[Topher]

The reason Windows is an open platform today is because of what transpired back then and all the subsequent lawsuits. Windows would lekely be very similar to what iOS is today..

Incorrect. Windows has always been an open platform. The anti-trust case against them wasn't about that at all.

 

[Kokoloko85]

They created a product and didnt force anyone to buy it…
People saying they have tech/software that they keep exclusive to there ecosystem, so does everyone else

 

[Rubik8]

Apple may be evil, but so is every big corporation. The difference is that Apple makes products that I love. I hope this lawsuit fails.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

People still defend this shitty company!

Why is it shitty?

 

[twilo99]

Incorrect. Windows has always been an open platform. The anti-trust case against them wasn't about that at all.

Steam wouldn’t be allowed to be a thing without government intervention.

 

[twilo99]

Why is it shitty?

It’s a brilliant company, people just like to hate on success.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Haven't read anything more on the case than what the OP has summarized, so have no idea exactly what law they claim Apple is breaking. Sounds like another one of those weird anti-market stances they've been taking on lately. Credible competitors clearly exist in every area they operate in. Probably another big, wasteful loss for them.

Must have been worried about an American based tech company being too successful. Got get that position moved overseas ASAP. LOL

 

[Topher]

Steam wouldn’t be allowed to be a thing without government intervention.

Ok.....explain how so.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Apple may be evil, but so is every big corporation. The difference is that Apple makes products that I love. I hope this lawsuit fails.

They would still make the same products you love, they would just have to play nicer with other devices and allow you use other storefronts, if you chose to. Imagine being able to install apps that aren't in their appstore without the need to jailbreak, I bet their chips would make for some awesome emulation. Imagine an android user sending you a video and it doesn't look like it was recorded from a 2005 Nokia.

 

[ReBurn]

Which IMO is BS. If customers don't like Apple's closed ecosystem approach, there are plenty of Android-based phones they can buy instead. Many people in fact actually do that very thing.

A company isn't beholden to open up their walled garden just because they tightly couple their hardware & software together. Even if it's a general-purpose device, that isn't a requirement. Even if that one company owns all the (proprietary) hardware & software tech for that product, they aren't beholden to do this. And, them having that ownership doesn't inherently mean they're an illegal monopoly; that requires actual abuse of their ownership in ways that are basically price-gouging customers and enforcing hefty legal fines for customers who want to get out of the ecosystem (i.e excessively large cancellation fees, no refund policies, removal of paid content for no reason to do with loss of license rights on Apple's part, etc.).

As long as Apple aren't doing those things to their own customers, they can technically "shut out" alternative competitors all they want and be legally justified. It's their OS, it's their hardware. It's their R&D and manufacturing money. If they feel the experience is best by keeping things tightly coupled, so be it. Customers who don't agree can buy non-Apple products. That's the free market in a nutshell.

I get what you're saying, but I think it misses the point a bit. Customers don't always know that they're buying into a walled garden before they buy and Apple doesn't make it clear that they are doing it prior to sale. A lot of people don't know they're in a walled garden until it has already happened. How many people know that if something breaks on their phone that they may not be able to have it fixed because Apple hard pairs parts to the logic board? Apple is doing it to their customers and it puzzles me when people defend it.

It's my opinion that companies should not be allowed to dictate how devices are used after they are sold to consumers. If someone wants to accept the risk of installing an app provided by a third party outside of Apple's app store onto the phone they just paid $1K for then why shouldn't they be able to? If a company wants to create and sell a web browser for iPhone that's not based on Apple's WebKit and distribute it on their own website instead of Apple's app store why shouldn't they be able to? Why should any company be able to dictate how a device can be used after it is sold? If someone wants to replace a component in an iPhone with a generic one when it breaks they should be able to without the functionality of the device being diminished, but a lot of the time you can't because Apple doesn't want customers to be able to use third party components to fix their devices. It's anti-consumer and anti-competitive straight down the line.

 

[LordCBH]

Why is an iPad needed for education? Our local schools just do fine with cheap centrally managed chromebooks.

Dumb gov actions in buying iPads do not make Apple a monopoly.

To be fair, most of the low cost android tablets are hot garbage that barely function. But for the most part, I do agree that students don’t need iPads. Have you seen what they do to iPads? They destroy them.

Cheap chromebooks for the majority with maybe iPads for some more artistic programs would do fine.

 

[reinking]

I get what you're saying, but I think it misses the point a bit. Customers don't always know that they're buying into a walled garden before they buy and Apple doesn't make it clear that they are doing it prior to sale. A lot of people don't know they're in a walled garden until it has already happened. How many people know that if something breaks on their phone that they may not be able to have it fixed because Apple hard pairs parts to the logic board? Apple is doing it to their customers and it puzzles me when people defend it.

It's my opinion that companies should not be allowed to dictate how devices are used after they are sold to consumers. If someone wants to accept the risk of installing an app provided by a third party outside of Apple's app store onto the phone they just paid $1K for then why shouldn't they be able to? If a company wants to create and sell a web browser for iPhone that's not based on Apple's WebKit and distribute it on their own website instead of Apple's app store why shouldn't they be able to? Why should any company be able to dictate how a device can be used after it is sold? If someone wants to replace a component in an iPhone with a generic one when it breaks they should be able to without the functionality of the device being diminished, but a lot of the time you can't because Apple doesn't want customers to be able to use third party components to fix their devices. It's anti-consumer and anti-competitive straight down the line.

I disagree with your first point. You are assuming Apple customers are idiots. A lot of them are buying iphones for the app store. They don't want multiple markets. They want simplicity and ease of use without fear of malicious software. IT JUST WORKS and that is all they want. You can argue that Apple has instilled fear about bad apps if they have to open up iOS to others but Apple customers don't care. As for repairs, we have had multiple Apple devices repaired at uBreakiFix.

 

[ReBurn]

I disagree with your first point. You are assuming Apple customers are idiots. A lot of them are buying iphones for the app store. They don't want multiple markets. They want simplicity and ease of use without fear of malicious software. IT JUST WORKS and that is all they want. You can argue that Apple has instilled fear about bad apps if they have to open up iOS to others but Apple customers don't care. As for repairs, we have had multiple Apple devices repaired at uBreakiFix.

I'm not assuming they're idiots. I'm saying they're uninformed and Apple tries to keep them that way.

Dismantling the walled garden does not have to change the simplicity and ease of use Apple provides in any way. They can continue to only use Apple services and apps if that's what they want. Allowing third part apps to be installed doesn't change "it just works" on MacOS, so why would it change that on iOS?

Apple's walled garden also does not protect users from malicious software. iOS has many critical vulnerabilities at any time and many of them are exploited before Apple patches them. On more than one occasion last year Apple had to rush out critical security updates to patch zero day vulnerabilities that they introduced and were exploitable. Apps with vulnerabilities make it past certification often. That "closed ecosystem keeps people safe" line is just PR bullcrap. They do it to force app developers to use their core services and to prevent them from bypassing app store payment methods so they don't lose their 30% cut.

The reports of parts being device locked are well documented, especially on newer phones. Just because you were able to fix something once doesn't mean your local repair shop can just fix anything. Apple has made it more and more difficult to repair broken phones with each successive model. From ifixit:

Like I said, I don't understand why people defend it.

 

[mckmas8808]

Ah okay that does make sense. They’ve historically been extremely uncooperative in playing nice with other companies, and iMessage is probably one of the biggest and most obvious offenses.

I hate the Blue Bubble converstations that happen between iPhone and Andriod users. It's so stupid!!!! Text messaging should be divisive at all. I've had people tell me that they ONLY stick to getting iPhones just so their families don't yell at them for not having the blue bubble. Or they don't want to be the green dot person. That's gross.

 

[mckmas8808]

Start at 1:20

My favorite part: "Apple has consolidated it's monopoly power, not by making its own products better, but by making other products worse"

Exactly what I was talking about with Airplay and SMS. Androids despite using newer/better tech, appear worse because Apple with their shady tactics sabotage Android users. I have to use WhatsApp to send my Android friends a video or photos because apple screws them up to blurry tiny low res thumbnails

It's insane that Apple is this bad about something so simple.

 

[Aaron Olive]

Apple is my second-most hated company behind Epic Games. They don't have a monopoly. This is severe government overreach.

Governmental Distractions

Last week it was Boeing planes falling apart due to FAA ineptitude and a whistleblower Assassinated.

This week let’s sue Apple because they’re taking too long to implement RCS and we can’t peek inside your phones.

 

[ntropy]

translation: FBI wants Apple to open the backdoor

 

[3liteDragon]

This shit's so stupid lol, so why not go after Sony for being too dominant in the console space & MS for being too dominant in the PC space with Windows then? They're acting like people are being forced to buy Apple phones at gunpoint or something when there's so many Android manufacturers out there, reminds me of the Epic lawsuit when it comes the walled garden stuff. I prefer their walled garden than the open system Android has, last Android phone I had was the S7 & that shit came with pre-installed bloat like all the other Androids do. When it comes to battery life, animations/smoothness, software/hardware integration, iPhones are still the best for me & the walled garden plays a big part in that. Of course it all comes down to preference in the end, but this lawsuit ain't going anywhere.

 

[PendekarRajawali]

Apple competitors just need to step up their game.

 

[Mooreberg]

Is there a legal basis when the monopoly is a byproduct of customers being braindead?

 

[Drell]

Is there a legal basis when the monopoly is a byproduct of customers being braindead?

Are you writing this from a Windows ?

 

[Mooreberg]

Are you writing this from a Windows ?

Nope.

 

[Ozriel]

That would suggest a high likelihood if there's one corporation siding with the DOJ on this, it's Microsoft. AKA the biggest tech lobbyists in the world, and I don't mean that in a good way.

The entire argument is extremely flawed because Microsoft only begrudgingly made Windows more "open" out of legal actions. They were as "walled garden" with Windows as Apple is now with iOS. Microsoft's problem was they used their position and resources for blatant anticompetitive practices that got the DOJ involved in a lawsuit. However, they were and still today aren't technically obligated to make Windows an open platform, and considering MS are the sole owners of the tech patents, APIs, code etc., it is not necessarily "open platform" in the first place.

There is nothing inherently wrong or illegal with companies wanting to "lock in" their users. All companies do this. The only problem is if those companies then abuse their customers financially and make it nearly impossible for them to exit that ecosystem at a reasonable price. From my understanding, Apple doesn't do anything like that. If they do, then maybe the DOJ have a case on their hands.

But Apple simply not wanting, say, Microsoft, to set up an app store on iOS that cuts Apple out of their 30%, is both logical and legally OK on Apple's end. iPhones may be general-purpose devices but that doesn't mean they have to follow the Windows standard, which even Microsoft don't really want to implement and would quickly reverse a lot on if they had the leverage to do so.



Those companies can make Android alternatives of their products. Simple solution.

You know what...since this is something that's very obviously being spearheaded towards the console gaming market in the future, let's just get an example out of the way.

Should Sony and Nintendo be forced to no longer bundle DualSense or Joy-con controllers with their console SKUs anymore? Because the example you're using with Airpods, could be directly utilized to argue that Sony & Nintendo are creating "higher prices for consumers and less innovation". Why can't they package Mad Catz or Hori controllers with their consoles instead?

I mean yeah, in this example, those Mad Catz & Hori controllers would work immediately when paired, but then why can't the argument simply shift to an "ease of access" POV? That's the slippery slope here, IMO.

I'm listening to the DOJ's speech on this right now and a lot of the arguments can either be directly rebutted or applied to other Big Tech companies, like the digital wallet example. Let's not pretend Apple's the only conglomerate accessing personal user data and maybe selling it to other companies & governments here. So I'm both not 100% on board with this lawsuit because it's VERY selective for starters and, more damningly, it is setting up arguments that could be easily warped and applied to console platform holders in the gaming market.

And let's just ask, who's the $3 trillion mega-conglomerate that'd benefit the most from both this AND successive similar cases in the gaming market? Yeah. Let's really think about this one before shaking the pom-poms over "market justice" or whatever.

Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?

The EU’s investigated, fined and forced Apple to make changes. The DOJ has been working on this case since 2019 or so, and are already planning to take Google to court. There’s clearly a crackdown on Big Tech in recent years.

The entire argument is extremely flawed because Microsoft only begrudgingly made Windows more "open" out of legal actions. They were as "walled garden" with Windows as Apple is now with iOS.

You cannot be serious with this.

And let's just ask, who's the $3 trillion mega-conglomerate that'd benefit the most from both this AND successive similar cases in the gaming market? Yeah. Let's really think about this one before shaking the pom-poms over "market justice" or whatever.

What the heck does this have to do with the gaming market? The vast majority of the issues the DOJ puts forward have nothing to do with gaming…and this is an investigation that began years ago.

As a long term Apple user, I’d be happier if I had more control over the device I pay a premium to buy. Just like I have with my MacBook Pro.

 

[Team Andromeda]

DOJ are a complete Joke

 

[Ozriel]

They created a product and didnt force anyone to buy it…
People saying they have tech/software that they keep exclusive to there ecosystem, so does everyone else

Good thing the DOJ’s not disputing that, but saying they’ve used their market position to quash competition which harms consumers.


Curious to see if many of you have the same argument when the DOJ’s case against Google kicks off in May.

I disagree with your first point. You are assuming Apple customers are idiots. A lot of them are buying iphones for the app store. They don't want multiple markets. They want simplicity and ease of use without fear of malicious software. IT JUST WORKS and that is all they want. You can argue that Apple has instilled fear about bad apps if they have to open up iOS to others but Apple customers don't care. As for repairs, we have had multiple Apple devices repaired at uBreakiFix.

‘Simplicity and Ease of use’ is also one of the most popular reasons why people buy Macs…and yet people manage to use MacOS without being swamped by an avalanche of malware.

 

[ReBurn]

This shit's so stupid lol, so why not go after Sony for being too dominant in the console space & MS for being too dominant in the PC space with Windows then? They're acting like people are being forced to buy Apple phones at gunpoint or something when there's so many Android manufacturers out there, reminds me of the Epic lawsuit when it comes the walled garden stuff. I prefer their walled garden than the open system Android has, last Android phone I had was the S7 & that shit came with pre-installed bloat like all the other Androids do. When it comes to battery life, animations/smoothness, software/hardware integration, iPhones are still the best for me & the walled garden plays a big part in that. Of course it all comes down to preference in the end, but this lawsuit ain't going anywhere.

The government did go after Microsoft in the desktop OS space and ultimately it paved the way for Windows to become a more open ecosystem and for Mac to rebound helping to make Apple to become the company it is today. Microsoft no longer sets things up on Windows in a way that straight up prevents people from using competing services and they no longer pressure OEM's into only install Windows and Microsoft products into Windows. As it sits today people have more choice within the Windows ecosystem and with desktop OS in general than ever before.

Consoles as closed ecosystems could be impacted by a case like this. Fortunately you can still buy games for consoles from third party retailers as physical media and in the case of two platforms you can buy games digitally from third party retailers, so consumers still have a choice other than a single distribution channel provided by the platform holder. But if they ever go all digital and make it impossible to buy games, apps and services from anywhere but their own app store it's reasonable to assume that the DOJ could go after them, too.

 

[Rick Dangerous]

Why would anyone defend corporate greed is beyond imagination... Apple, aws, Microsoft, etc are all plagues. Take off the mud from your eyes.

 

[Kokoloko85]

Good thing the DOJ’s not disputing that, but saying they’ve used their market position to quash competition which harms consumers.


Curious to see if many of you have the same argument when the DOJ’s case against Google kicks off in May.




‘Simplicity and Ease of use’ is also one of the most popular reasons why people buy Macs…and yet people manage to use MacOS without being swamped by an avalanche of malware.

But there is plenty of competition out there like samsung.

 

[Oddvintagechap]

That's such an interesting cultural difference and I wonder where it comes from. It's almost unfathomable to not have whatsapp here, it's pretty much synonymous with "texting"; if someone says they'll text you here, it's going to be on whatsapp lol.

I think it’s pretty simple. Android. Messaging has always been horrible in that platform. Standard texting app made people gravitate towards digital messaging apps. Whatsapp happens to be the one that is attached to your number while not being nickeled and dimed to the former per text charges.

Start at 1:20

My favorite part: "Apple has consolidated it's monopoly power, not by making its own products better, but by making other products worse"

Exactly what I was talking about with Airplay and SMS. Androids despite using newer/better tech, appear worse because Apple with their shady tactics sabotage Android users. I have to use WhatsApp to send my Android friends a video or photos because apple screws them up to blurry tiny low res thumbnails

This doesn’t make any sense, what do you use to sent other android users your videos? definitely not your default SMS app. Would it be nice for Apple to release iMessage on Android? Maybe? still wouldn’t be the default app. You would still need to download it.

 

[ScHlAuChi]

But there is plenty of competition out there like samsung.

You are missing the point - if you already bought lots of apps on iOS you cannot migrate those over to Android.
Therefore Samsung and other Android phones are not competition, as they dont compete on the iOS apps market.

 

[kikkis]

You are missing the point - if you already bought lots of apps on iOS you cannot migrate those over to Android.
Therefore Samsung and other Android phones are not competition, as they dont compete on the iOS apps market.

Even the most casual PS5 gamer is like hundreds of dollars in on Sony ecosystem. I doubt even the apple enthusiasts are even 50 bucks into their app store.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

I think it’s pretty simple. Android. Messaging has always been horrible in that platform.

Nah, i mean what's your reference frame for "always" anyway? I've had WhatsApp since 2009, all messaging sucked equally back then and WhatsApp was immediately wildly better than all other options; iirc the king of messaging back then was blackberry.

 

[TheDreadLord]

You are missing the point - if you already bought lots of apps on iOS you cannot migrate those over to Android.
Therefore Samsung and other Android phones are not competition, as they dont compete on the iOS apps market.

Right, but not necessarily all these apps have been developed to another platform. Is it a monopoly when people are freely choosing one brand over the rest? There is no such thing of perfectly balanced market. There will always be one champion and the rest will play the catch up game where they need to look for other strategies such as lower prices and so on.

 

[Kokoloko85]

You are missing the point - if you already bought lots of apps on iOS you cannot migrate those over to Android.
Therefore Samsung and other Android phones are not competition, as they dont compete on the iOS apps market.

And? Why should be able to?

Can I migrate my games from steam to PS, or vice versa? I really dont get the issue.

 

[ScHlAuChi]

And? Why should be able to?

Yes you should, is it Apple´s data or your data?

Can I migrate my games from steam to PS, or vice versa? I really dont get the issue.

Consoles are not general purpose computing devices like PCs or phones - different devices, different rules!

 

[Ozriel]

Right, but not necessarily all these apps have been developed to another platform. Is it a monopoly when people are freely choosing one brand over the rest? There is no such thing of perfectly balanced market. There will always be one champion and the rest will play the catch up game where they need to look for other strategies such as lower prices and so on.

And? Why should be able to?

Can I migrate my games from steam to PS, or vice versa? I really dont get the issue.

Perhaps actually read some of what the DOJ is complaining about?

The lock-in problem at the heart of the Apple monopoly lawsuit

Specifically, green bubbles, smartwatches, and digital wallets.

www.theverge.com

 

[Little Mac]

DOJ to Andriod users:

 

[Bojji]

That's such an interesting cultural difference and I wonder where it comes from. It's almost unfathomable to not have whatsapp here, it's pretty much synonymous with "texting"; if someone says they'll text you here, it's going to be on whatsapp lol.

Depends on the country, in Poland default communication is trough facebook messenger, rarely sms. I don't know much people that use whatsapp.

This map confirms it, as well that most of europe use whatsapp:

 

[bumpkin]

What is the point of this lawsuit, to force Apple to let a hundred other companies make shitty iPhone knockoffs with iOS on them? No thank you.

 

[Bojanglez]

What is the point of this lawsuit, to force Apple to let a hundred other companies make shitty iPhone knockoffs with iOS on them? No thank you.

Probably to make Apple allow other companies be able to offer services in a way that is not in any way controlled by Apple of iPhones.

 

[Kokoloko85]

Perhaps actually read some of what the DOJ is complaining about?

The lock-in problem at the heart of the Apple monopoly lawsuit

Specifically, green bubbles, smartwatches, and digital wallets.

www.theverge.com

Im going by comments in the thread.
Reading from comments like people cant move there programs from ios to android or imessage lol. These arent problems for me. Why would apple make there tech or programs like imessage available to others? Its for there system. Android has more users Anyways and dont they have there own version? Its like Blackberry had there own messanger.

Yes you should, is it Apple´s data or your data?

It’s a program I bought on an ios, I can use it again on my next iphone. I dont see the problem of platforms keeping things to themselves. But each to their own.

Consoles are not general purpose computing devices like PCs or phones - different devices, different rules!

Where can i read these rules and who wrote them? I think it just sounds weird. Can you move your GOG game to Steam?
I cant even move my ebooks away from kindle lol

 

[WhamBamThankYouMaam]

”Don’t buy an iphone if you don’t want to.”

There, fixed it.

 

[Krappadizzle]

I don't have any love for Apple or their closed ecosystem but I'm still failing to see how they have a monopoly on the smartphone market. I've not had an iphone in over 10 years and have not felt any need or want to jump back into that ecosystem. I don't feel compelled or slighted by not having one either.

Just don't get stuck in their system if you don't like the system. Whining about social pressures of teenagers has less to do with Apple and more to do with adults not teaching the value of independence from social pressures that so many tweens get sucked in to.

It's valuable for a young adult/teen to learn why those kinds of pressures are superfluous to living an enjoyable and healthy life.

 

[Bojanglez]

Im going by comments in the thread.
Reading from comments like people cant move there programs from ios to android or imessage lol. These arent problems for me. Why would apple make there tech or programs like imessage available to others? Its for there system. Android has more users Anyways and dont they have there own version? Its like Blackberry had there own messanger.

It’s a program I bought on an ios, I can use it again on my next iphone. I dont see the problem of platforms keeping things to themselves. But each to their own.

Where can i read these rules and who wrote them? I think it just sounds weird. Can you move your GOG game to Steam?
I cant even move my ebooks away from kindle lol

This isn't what it is about. General purpose devices (such as PCs and phones) have become engrained in how most people access basic services (email, banking, utility services etc) so if a single entity (Apple) have complete control of what is available to these devices and how then it could:

• Stifle innovation
• Censor communications
• Inhibit competition of services
• Control secondary markets
• etc.

So nobody (here or DOJ) is saying that you should be able to move games from GOG to Steam, but what they are saying is that GOG and Steam should be allowed to exist on iOS and compete. Gaming is a frivolous example, this could have real-world worrying implications if Apple decided to (for example) restrict certain banking Apps. Yes in theory people could use their browser, but as it stands Apple control all browsers in iOS and restrict (or don't support) concepts that would allow PWAs to compete (although due to pressure this is changing I think).

I like Apple hardware, typing this on a Macbook right now, amazingly it allows me to install software from wherever I want (at my own risk), I don't see why their phones shouldn't also do this. I would like them to do it because they are a nice company that welcomes competition and backs themselves to out innovate others, but I think that they are scared of the money they will lose and want to hold on to their monopoly on the iPhone marketplace as long as possible.

 

[ReBurn]

Im going by comments in the thread.
Reading from comments like people cant move there programs from ios to android or imessage lol. These arent problems for me. Why would apple make there tech or programs like imessage available to others? Its for there system. Android has more users Anyways and dont they have there own version? Its like Blackberry had there own messanger.

It’s a program I bought on an ios, I can use it again on my next iphone. I dont see the problem of platforms keeping things to themselves. But each to their own.

Where can i read these rules and who wrote them? I think it just sounds weird. Can you move your GOG game to Steam?
I cant even move my ebooks away from kindle lol

Many of the comments in the thread are based on people only reading the title and doing the typical knee jerk "just don't buy an iPhone if you don't like it" apologia.

The lawsuit isn't about people not being able to move their apps to a phone that isn't an iPhone. It's about how difficult Apple makes it for consumers to leave their walled garden, how difficult Apple makes it to interact with people using phones outside of the Apple walled garden, and how difficult Apple makes it for third party apps to operate consistently across platforms due to how Apple intentionally diminishes what they're capable of on iOS compared to Apple's native apps.

 

[Kokoloko85]

It's about how difficult Apple makes it for consumers to leave their walled garden,

Lol, there not holding a gun to anyones head. You just buy another phone

how difficult Apple makes it to interact with people using phones outside of the Apple walled garden,

Never had any issues. I use text, imessage, emails, whatsapp, telegram, line, skype, jitsi, zoom, facebook, discord with people all over the world etc etc.

and how difficult Apple makes it for third party apps to operate consistently across platforms due to how Apple intentionally diminishes what they're capable of on iOS compared to Apple's native apps.

This I dont know about though, so ill take your word

 

[MarkMe2525]

This doesn’t make any sense, what do you use to sent other android users your videos? definitely not your default SMS app. Would it be nice for Apple to release iMessage on Android? Maybe? still wouldn’t be the default app. You would still need to download it.

It does make sense. RCS is an advanced SMS standard that allows for advanced encryption, read check, advanced reactions, andvanced group messages, higher quality video, and higher quality photos through the "default app messages". Android users have been using RCS in their "default messages app" for years. It can work within iMessage with little fuss and would allow Android and iOS customers to share what they want, without the limitations they now face. The best part is that Apple could still leverage their standard iMessage functionality between iOS users. They can work in concert and Apple could still give these RCS messages their little green bubbles.

Apple will not implement the standard for one specific reason, it works too well. It would dispell the illusion that you can only do these things by having both users use iMessage. A current Apple user would no longer have to be concerned that their group messages wouldn't work if they switched to another platform. That apparently is bad for their customers.

 

[darrylgorn]

I'm not assuming they're idiots. I'm saying they're uninformed and Apple tries to keep them that way.

Dismantling the walled garden does not have to change the simplicity and ease of use Apple provides in any way. They can continue to only use Apple services and apps if that's what they want. Allowing third part apps to be installed doesn't change "it just works" on MacOS, so why would it change that on iOS?

Apple's walled garden also does not protect users from malicious software. iOS has many critical vulnerabilities at any time and many of them are exploited before Apple patches them. On more than one occasion last year Apple had to rush out critical security updates to patch zero day vulnerabilities that they introduced and were exploitable. Apps with vulnerabilities make it past certification often. That "closed ecosystem keeps people safe" line is just PR bullcrap. They do it to force app developers to use their core services and to prevent them from bypassing app store payment methods so they don't lose their 30% cut.

The reports of parts being device locked are well documented, especially on newer phones. Just because you were able to fix something once doesn't mean your local repair shop can just fix anything. Apple has made it more and more difficult to repair broken phones with each successive model. From ifixit:

Like I said, I don't understand why people defend it.

I'm not sure if it's defending the company as much as the fact that people just don't give a fuck about making most of those listed items proprietary.

The iPhone market seems to have a small fraction of its buyers who like to praise its technical innovation, but its biggest audience are normies who just want something that is functional and robust.

 

[dottme]

I'm not sure if it's defending the company as much as the fact that people just don't give a fuck about making most of those listed items proprietary.

The iPhone market seems to have a small fraction of its buyers who like to praise its technical innovation, but its biggest audience are normies who just want something that is functional and robust.

I think I’m technical but out of my job, I want something that just work.
I don’t want to have to install this 10 store apps to access an app because exclusive.
I don’t want to install flash so I can access a website.
I don’t want to switch browser to access a website which only work on chrome.
…

the iPhone user base is big enough and spend enough money to make business adapt to them. Thanks to iOS ’abusing’ its position, we got rid of flash and I don’t want the same shit to happen again.
I’m ready to pay more to keep my life easy, else I would have got an Android device.

 

[TheDreadLord]

Perhaps actually read some of what the DOJ is complaining about?

The lock-in problem at the heart of the Apple monopoly lawsuit

Specifically, green bubbles, smartwatches, and digital wallets.

www.theverge.com

None of what is described in this post applies to my user case.