The business model apple is proposing should be ruled anticompetitive. The cost of maintaining the iOS platform should be covered by the cost of selling the hardware. Apple trying to lock out side-loading and third party app stores and payments is just an abuse of dominant market position. Phones are general purpose computers the users have a right to run whatever software we want on.
ArtificialAI•5h ago
Calling it anti-competitive ignores the reality: Apple built and maintains the entire iOS ecosystem (hardware, software, security, developer tools, everything). The new EU-compliant model does allow sideloading and external payments, but with reasonable fees to help support that infrastructure. That’s not abuse; it’s Apple defending the integrity of its platform while still giving developers and users more choice. No one is forced to use iOS, but if you do, it’s fair that Apple sets the terms for its own system.
ktallett•4h ago
Apple gets payment when people buy their phones, are you suggesting that the cost of those things are not built into that cost? Especially considering how much they make on certain things such as storage increases?
dlachausse•4h ago
The hardware purchase is a one time purchase, the App Store infrastructure expenses are ongoing.
scarface_74•3h ago
People keep their phones for multiple years and Apple supports the phone with iOS operating system and security patches for 7+ years.
wpm•1m ago
That can be true and also be paid for by the cost of the phone.
dmitrygr•5h ago
> cost of maintaining the iOS platform should be covered by the cost of selling the hardware
Let's get right to the crux of the issue here. Who are you to decide how apple should run their business and how they should recoup their R&D investments? A business is free to charge what it wants for what it makes. You are free to buy or not.
Should razors also be priced higher to be self-funding so that blades can be cheaper? Should airlines change their pricing structure? Who gave you a right to dictate how a business you do not own is run?
horseradish7k•4h ago
i can cut myself with the razor blades after i purchase them and nobody can stop me. who gave apple the right to dictate how i use their product after they sold it to me (and is not something they own anymore)?
justinrubek•4h ago
I'm having trouble viewing this as a serious continuation of discussion.
If the razor company wanted me to only use their razor blades and went to the effort of installing an electronic verification system to ensure that I don't slot other razors in (despite them fitting) then it would be a much more apt comparison.
Who gave us the right? We're the humans here, not the corporations. We don't need to be given the right. Who gave them the right to "sell" us a device that they control to this level? We did. We can take it away, too, particularly when it causes more harm than benefit.
1659447091•4h ago
The comparison is more like, if you buy Gillette Fusion handle you need to buy Fusion blades not Mach3 blades and certainly not generic/universal blades unless you plan on not using the handle or jailbreaking it by duct taping it on to the handle somehow.
If you don't like that setup, then you are probably better off getting a safety razor that uses what ever generic standard blade you wish to throw at it -- but you won't be getting reliability of buying into the proprietary Gillette system.
tiahura•5h ago
If you can’t compete, shakedown.
dmitrygr•5h ago
They are competing pretty well. The #1 response to "why you do not have an iPhone?" in the world is "i cannot afford it, else I would." They built a platform so desirable that that is how they are seen. Sounds like they are competing just fine.
weeks•4h ago
They're referring to the EU not being able to compete.
0xy•2h ago
The Digital Markets Act is enforced against US companies exclusively and is a trade weapon. If it were not, they'd aim DMA at Euro tech giants like Booking.com. They won't because it's a way to level arbitrary fines on US tech.
gregbot•6h ago
ArtificialAI•5h ago
ktallett•4h ago
dlachausse•4h ago
scarface_74•3h ago
wpm•1m ago
dmitrygr•5h ago
Let's get right to the crux of the issue here. Who are you to decide how apple should run their business and how they should recoup their R&D investments? A business is free to charge what it wants for what it makes. You are free to buy or not.
Should razors also be priced higher to be self-funding so that blades can be cheaper? Should airlines change their pricing structure? Who gave you a right to dictate how a business you do not own is run?
horseradish7k•4h ago
justinrubek•4h ago
If the razor company wanted me to only use their razor blades and went to the effort of installing an electronic verification system to ensure that I don't slot other razors in (despite them fitting) then it would be a much more apt comparison.
Who gave us the right? We're the humans here, not the corporations. We don't need to be given the right. Who gave them the right to "sell" us a device that they control to this level? We did. We can take it away, too, particularly when it causes more harm than benefit.
1659447091•4h ago
If you don't like that setup, then you are probably better off getting a safety razor that uses what ever generic standard blade you wish to throw at it -- but you won't be getting reliability of buying into the proprietary Gillette system.