- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
The US Department of Justice and 16 state and district attorneys general accused Apple of operating an illegal monopoly in the smartphone market in a new antitrust lawsuit. The DOJ and states are accusing Apple of driving up prices for consumers and developers at the expense of making users more reliant on its iPhones.
You must log in or register to comment.
I don’t hate Apple but I do hate their influence. They release some wireless earbuds and then suddenly all the manufacturers “don’t have enough room for a headphone jack”, …get the fuck out of here.
Deliberately degrading picture quality when the metadata says it’s from a competitor to push the narrative that they have the best cameras is also pretty low. Points for the sheer audacity, though.
Wait is there actually proof of this? That’s pretty damning.
The proof is the status quo. Video texts from Android users look bad on an iPhone. Apple could choose to fall back to RCS instead of SMS from iMessage. RCS would offer better video quality than SMS, which overall improves the interoperability of all phones. Because RCS is a standard and the natural successor to SMS, refusing to support the standard makes it less likely to succeed, with the intent of defending their dominant market share.
While I agree with you, this isn’t as outright as I though it would be though. Apple fan boys could very easily just handwave this away. Frankly I don’t live in the US so no one here uses iMessage anyways so I don’t really have any examples I have seen or could use to show people.
Vote with your wallet.
I’m one of the few people that use my headphone jack with Grado headphones and have had Motorola phones so I can listen to music the way I want.
Don’t even get me started on the light green bubble shit.
Fuck Apple.
But how is that Apple’s fault? Weird argument.
Actually it coincided with IPX rating for smartphones. The last headphone jack smartphones did not have water resistance, but the newer models did. People voted for a more sealed phone with their wallets.
These days you can get both, but my phone has a 3.5mm jack and NO ipx rating that I could find
Actually it coincided with IPX rating for smartphones. The last headphone jack smartphones did not have water resistance, but the newer models did. People voted for a more sealed phone with their wallets.
My rugged phone is IP68 but it has Usb C connector and SIM/SD tray, so adding a headphone jack while having an IPX rating seems not impossible.
It’s not impossible, they just didn’t do it back then so we ended up in the situation we are in now. By the way, the DAC in my phone is low quality, so I hear popping and distortion when I play
http://plasticity.szynalski.com/
at the same time, my phone doesn’t do output to a DAC through USB because it already has a 3.5mm port, so I can’t use something higher quality
Then why can they waterproof the usb plug-in but not the headphone jack?
What’s a headphone jack?
That’s not Apple, that’s the free market. Samsung touted wired headphones and a headphone jack and the market still showed they wanted wireless.
But we had wireless headphones already. The choice to have both was nice. Not being able to charge and use headphones sucks. Also tiny e waste pods with tiny non recyclable batteries are terrible for the environment compared to a wired pair when thrown in a landfill.
If you enjoy a good laugh, then head over to hackernews to see the meltdown apple bros are having: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39778999
What? Unbelievable. I’m shocked. Shocked, I say. This really comes as a surprise. I would’ve never expected this. No one would have seen this coming. This is really outrageous. They are innocent. I can’t comprehend this. No way! It’s not acceptable! /i
– Apple Fan, probably (without the irony flag then)
I mean I’m an Apple user, although not exclusively, and I am very surprised, not because Apple doesn’t deserve it, they absolutely need to be reigned in like all big tech companies. I’m surprised as hell that the US government in 2024 is attempting to crack down an extremely profitable business. You love to see it
Apple did some sort of “tech innovations” through years, but its economical success has always been based on its locked down ecosystem.
Apple’s marketing about its customers being part of an elite, hence zero compatibility with the ‘mass’, is disgusting imho.
Glad to hear it could be over, especially if it comes from US lawmakers.
EU has been trying to regulate them for years.
Were perhaps finally getting somewhere with this. I’m still afraid it’s too slow though.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66708571
#New iPhone, new charger: Apple bends to EU rules
I think they were fine before, because they were offering the best experience for the people who want someone else to configure things for them and make decisions on privacy, security, etc., for them. Problem now is that they no longer offer much in the way of brand new user experiences that no one else offers, and additionally they don’t prioritize the user’s privacy and convenience and prioritize how much money they can make with the centralized user information they control and don’t allow the user to make decisions on their own privacy and security.
Be prepared for a lot of hand-wringing about “security”.
Apple, Microsoft, and Google all learned in the last couple years “security” shuts down any arguments, and they use it at every turn to justify whatever they want, regardless of the actual dangers or alternative mitigation methods they could take.
If our modern software security means anti-competitive behavior and user lock-in tactics are OK, then that’s a problem with our security practices, and we need to reevaluate some things.
They learned this line from the government. You can’t criticise goverments after they utter the magical national security buzzwords.
lol this is going to go nowhere
I don’t think so. EU did push through with reform, the US will join sooner or later.
The EU passed new laws to address new needs. The US is trying to see if they can provide consumer protection with existing consumer protection laws from the past.
Passing consumer protection laws is pretty hard when people don’t vote enough democrats into the senate and house. The GOP hates consumer protection regulation.
If it was all Blue States, if probably agree, but it does include a few Deep Red States with North Dakota, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Tennessee, etc. That makes me cautiously optimistic.
Because???
If was all Blue States, with a Democratic Federal DOJ, it’s quite possible that it’s just political messaging. With a mix of Blue & Red States, it’s still possible it’s messaging or a (rare) common-enemy, but it’s more likely they think something’s actually there, and they don’t want to waste their time playing nice with the “other side”.
At least it happened.
We all know that these accusations are true.
So much so that I need to ask: is it really illegal to do all these things?
Smarter Americans in that past recognized that freedom, including the free market, doesn’t just happen of its own accord, that it has to be defended, legislated. That is how antitrust laws came to be in arguably the most capitalist nation on earth.
Apathetic Americans now have lost sight of the importance of protecting their freedoms.
“Illegal” is not just some hypothetical moral absolute. It is the politics of defending one’s values. Americans clearly no longer value either their freedoms or the free market.
No, these are not illegal activities until you add “as a monopoly”. Antitrust laws are fine with all sorts of behavior as part of competition but not when you dominate a market and it keeps new competitors out
Everything here will hinge on whether Apple is a monopoly in the markets of concern. I’m sure there are legal definitions and precedents for that.
The EU said so, and the US did successfully sue valve for monopoly practices.
EU decisions carry no legal weight in US, and I’m sure the laws are very different. Maybe it signals opportunity and regulator opinion but they’re completely independent decisions
With Apple tipping over the ~50% market share in the US and with the current rulings in the EU, maybe the US DOJ smell blood in the water. Hopefully something unusually good for the consumer will come of this, but I won’t be shocked if it doesn’t.
I only recently found out about iPhones having 50% market share in the US and that’s insane to me. I think anyone who’s used both Android and iPhones a lot knows that iPhones are both a worse product and worse value for money, so in a fair market they would be the minority
While I prefer remaining in the Walled Garden because Apple makes it a veritable Eden compared to so many customer-hostile apps, I can see this. I still think the Walled Garden is better for customers (assuming you can also choose a different ecosystem) and it’s ok for one of many competitors, the rules have to change once you dominate the market. se la vie.
“using private APIs to undermine crossplatform technologies like messaging, smartwatches, and digital wallets,”
- I don’t understand and why all the chat apps don’t disqualify messaging as a concern
- what’s the deal with watches? You can use an Apple Watch without an Apple device. Granted I never looked into other smart watches on an iPhone, so I do t know: what’s the limitation?
- sorry, but confidential stuff like wallets and health records should remain controlled. …. Even if Walmart is funding this
I want to be able to choose a walled garden for my phone, just like I want to choose for game compatibility on my laptop, and ultimate freedom on my servers. Those are the right tools for my needs
You can only use an Apple Watch with an iPhone. While you CAN use one without a phone, you need an iPhone to configure it the first time (or if you need to reset).
Thry are very locked in.
I once got an Apple Watch as a bonus at work. Had to sell it to a buddy because I couldn’t use it without an iPhone. So dumb.
“Please sir, don’t take away my manacles. I don’t know how to not be a slave!”
I’m always impressed how far corporations managed to convince people to be loyal to them. Not saying it’s a person’s fault, I used to fall pretty badly for corporate bullshit myself.
The whole “walled garden” concept is inherently anti-consumer. Have you ever asked yourself why there hasn’t been any real innovation in the phone/smartwatch fields for years now. Or why phones aren’t cheap to fix anymore. Or why battery life gets so bad after two or so years that most people are forced to buy a new one.
Things don’t have to be this way. We can have well designed products that work together without all the lock in.
I completely disagree. As long as there are valid choices, an option to choose a walled garden has benefits. It’s only a problem when that’s your only realistic choice. In this case, as long as Android is common enough to be a valid choice and there are multiple Android manufacturers, then you really don’t see any of these problems.
If you don’t think there’s any innovation in phones, either
- phones are maturing. They are very powerful and do a lot: revolutionary change is much less likely now
- news fatigue. There are significant improvements in every model; I bet your self from ten years ago would be amazed. Also it’s silly to expect revolutionary change every year. Look less often
Or why battery life gets so bad after two or so years that most people are forced to buy a new one.
- iPhones seem to have better battery life. Come on over to the dark side
- I gave my two year old iPhone to my teen and battery health was still high eighties percent
- it’s really not that expensive to replace a battery. I mean, it might be in the latest models, but I historically pay Apple to do it after 2-3 years (so I can give it to my kid with full battery health) and it really doesn’t seem any more expensive after inflation than it’s been for decades. And there are cheaper places that can do it. While it’s a little frustrating that it’s difficult to do yourself, it’s just not put that bad
Your first point is fair, and I’m not really sure if it’s just the technology maturing or a symptom of stifled innovation. Personally, I think there are still innovations to be made in this space, even big ones. But it’s not just Apple’s fault. The duopoly of iOS and Android has completely cornered the international market, new players have almost no chance, and the 30% cut app developers have to give Apple or Google puts them at a big disadvantage. I think a shakeup in the phone market would be very good for consumers.
iPhones seem to have better battery life.
I just have annecdotal evidence from people I know with iPhones (and mine, too, though it has been a while). It seemed to me, at least, that Apple phones tend to slow down quite a bit after a few years, and they start having battery problems. Some people I know seem to have gotten lucky with the battery thing, others not so much. But if it works well for you, then great!
More importantly, the “garden” is not the problem. If someone chooses to, they should be able to only use Apple products, download only Apps from the Appstore, and trust Apple with their data. It is the “walled” part of the deal which is the problem. Once inside, there should be an out. That is what the DOJ and the EU are trying to accomplish.
Don’t piss off the small phone fans at the DOJ.
Lol nice
The apple watch thing is kinda interesting.
So you make a watch and it has super tight integrations with OS level software on the phone.
I can’t imagine they can force apple to write an Android app, which doesn’t even have the same system level access as their OS app and provide some sort of degraded service.
Maybe they could force them to let it function in some limited way but where do you draw the line on forcing them to write android apps?
- You can use an Apple Watch without an iPhone.
- anyone can create and sell a Watch App - Apple maintains the store and basic functionality
- you can use another brand Watch with an iPhone - I see the apps
Epic was unsuccessful so I don’t have hopes for this
what issues do people here have with buying a phone not made by Apple?
did you read the article?
Yes. A laundry list of reasons to not buy an Apple phone. I had no trouble finding plenty of great alternatives, what problem are you running into?
Passing this would destroy Apple’s entire business, where they spend their effort and money deeply integrating their products to work together.
Instead, they’ll have to spend their time and money creating an API to let random Joe make a watch for an ecosystem they did nothing to create, foster, or maintain.
Maybe they shouldn’t have based their business on monopoly?
People don’t need to use an iPhone. A symptom of our declining society is expecting people or businesses to accommodate your personal interests instead of you making an adult decision.
A symptom of our declining society is expecting people or businesses to accommodate your personal interests instead of you making an adult decision.
A symptom of your declining society is expecting that the rules in place could be ignored.
It is true, nobody is forced to buy an iPhone but this not means that Apple could play in the game with a different set of rules from everyone else.
What existing rules? The rules designed for 19th/20th century oil companies that don’t apply to modern tech companies?
New rules are being written.
Apple could play in the game with a different set of rules
They’re playing a different game because they’re the ones who built the ballpark they’re playing in. Don’t like the game? Don’t go to the ballpark.
It’s so exhausting how you people simply can’t accept “don’t buy Apple” and leave it alone.
What existing rules? The rules designed for 19th/20th century oil companies that don’t apply to modern tech companies?
They can be old and technically it can be a stretch to apply them to a tech company, but they are still here.
New rules are being written.
That’s good
Apple could play in the game with a different set of rules
They’re playing a different game because they’re the ones who built the ballpark they’re playing in. Don’t like the game? Don’t go to the ballpark.
As long as the ballpark is not a problem for other people, ok. But if the ballpark is a problem for the people playing…
It’s so exhausting how you people simply can’t accept “don’t buy Apple” and leave it alone
“Don’t buy Apple” is not a giustification for Apple to do something that is illegal, at least from the DOJ point of view.
Man, can you fanboy any harder?
Apple has some aggressive “in-club” style marketing and exclusivity practices.
iMessage intentionally massively degrades user experience when a non-iMessage user is in the chat, to encourage their iPhone users to harass their friends into getting an iPhone too.
The cruelty is the point. They want their users to ostracize their friends into converting friends and family to their platform.
I hate to say it man, but you are talking to a brick wall. That don’t understand, and more importantly they don’t want to understand.
And I’m speaking to a bunch of incel teenagers who are baby raging about a green bubble and how their parents won’t get them an iPhone.
That’s literally an argument in the DoJ’s case, btw. A case led by incels.
And that tells me everything I need to know about your opinions. Horray for the block feature
Thanks for being my first, I guess
Boo fucking hoo, android has done it for years and is fine. Apple doesn’t want to do it because if they don’t they can charge as much as they want for things because you can only get it from them. If they put half as much into innovation as they do into walling everything off they might actually have new ideas instead of the exact same phone with minor hardware and software upgrades that makes it the exact same phone but with a heftier price tag each subsequent generation.
You don’t need to buy an iPhone, and if you don’t have one then this doesn’t affect you and you’re baby raging about nothing. If you do have one and are still mad, then perhaps evaluate how little self control you have over your purchases.
Lol, try and lecture all you want little troll, you are just making yourself look like even more of a tool and a child. I couldn’t care less either way what your opinion is because you have literally no idea what anyone else’s circumstances are and you think you are better. Go study more and do a little more growing up next time you think you have any leg to stand on in judging what others situations are.
To be fair, the unwalled garden of Android hasn’t really come back with anything compelling in a decade, either. Just iterative hardware improvements.
Which is fine. The space has matured. There will be other frontiers.
But at least this might result in a decrease of friction between users with different platforms.
I mean, I’m using the fold 3 which I am really liking and is definitely something new. But it is true more could be being done.
Passing this would destroy Apple’s entire business
I think that is, indeed, the point.
You think you want this, but you really don’t. If Apple is gone then Android is all that exists and THAT IS A REAL MONOPOLY.
I never said I wanted Apple gone, nor does their exploitative and abusive business model being stopped requires them to cease to exists. Get a grip, straw men don’t look good on sidewalks, and you look like a fool when you bring one out to fight with it.
You mean, like the business model that Android has been using for years?
Or Windows / Linux have been using for decades?
What a weird thing to paint in a bad light.
Android is an ecosystem made up of OEMs under the lead of Google, and all these OEMs have different business models. Google’s however, is an ad-based monopoly. Totally different business model. You referring to Android as a single entity shows how clueless you are about this topic.
Mobile is a different environment compared to desktop, so you’re comparing Apples to oranges.
