Here's a good article that discusses the Apple/Samsung situation. I love Apple, but I hate what they are doing. In the end, they will give themselves a bad name. What do you guys think?
Blah blah better hardware. Although there is a nod (in the article) to iOS being simpler to use.
Its not just about hardware. its about software too, and iOS is so much easier to use its not funny.
Android is typically un-intuitive.
If iOS has so little value it must be easy for these companies to make their own phone operating system right? Lets not forget samsung cant make any complex pieces of software, only small modifications and skins. But nobody except the big boys are doing it (Apple, Microsoft, Google).
Consumers typically don't understand the value of good software, until after they purchase their 'whatever' and cant figure out simple things (like how do i edit this phone number in my contacts list?), then they don't want to look like idiots for making a lame purchase.
The modified ROMs that are lawsuit friendly (removed patent infringing features), are the ugliest POS ive ever seen. Instead of the list/scroll bounce, on samsung phones you get a crappy gradient coming up from the bottom of the screen. wtf. I was looking at it thinking "what that hell is that?" then realised "oh its the 'I'm-not-an-iphone' feature".
It'll never be a monopoly, different -- yes, but monopoly, no. Its hard for a gargantuan corporation, known to work with simplicity and passion in almost all the work they do, to jeopardize their entire show.
The article you're seeing is perhaps written by an infant who probably hates Apple. The idiot's saying that Apple products can be used by a stupid person also. By stupid, I'm guessing he means a person with no knowledge about using the electronic gadgets. While its true, its also true that Apple products have almost the same functionality (heck even more in many cases) than its rivals' products. So what he effectively is saying that Apple products are bad because they're easy to use and have the same functionality and usage as that of its rivals'. You can guess his intellect from here.
Yes, Apple has taken inspiration from others, but so do others. They just don't copy stuff (unlike Samsung). Apple loves to come up with their own neat concept, and it works almost all the time. Competition constructs a healthy market, copying doesn't.
Articles say different things (like they know what's going to happen), but the truth is known to the corporation itself.
Whether they are or not, let's hope the U.S. federal government doesn't think so. I definitely don't want the same thing to happen to Apple that happened to AT&T in 1984.
Whether they are or not, let's hope the U.S. federal government doesn't think so. I definitely don't want the same thing to happen to Apple that happened to AT&T in 1984.
Though what happened to AT&T then needs to happen to them again. Permanently.
Apple won't be considered a monopoly because they offer one (of many) alternative OS's and devices in the mobile market. A company is a monopoly when they have driven all competitors out of the market and there are no choices. If you look at the Sherman Antitrust Act (or, by reference, the Clayton Antitrust Act) you will notice that the big determining factor in an Antitrust cases of the past has been either a.) control of the product and distribution channel (unfair ability to maintain monopoly) or b.) illegal bundling of new products in one that already has majority market share (unfair creation of new monopoly in new market, unfair leveraging of market position). AT&T violated scenario A, Microsoft violated scenario B when the bundled IE with Windows in the 90's. Google is in the process of breaking scenario B by inserting links to its own services at the top of its search product.
What about the app store? Its the only way to purchase apps on an un-rooted device. Surely this is a monopoly? Like how microsoft had to give browser options, there should be other app store options...(amazon for example, yes i know they're invested in android)
What about the app store? Its the only way to purchase apps on an un-rooted device. Surely this is a monopoly? Like how microsoft had to give browser options, there should be other app store options...(amazon for example, yes i know they're invested in android)
You are not forced to buy App Store apps in the slightest.
nobody forces you to use the internet either, but Microsoft had to provide browser options.
Not at all similar. If all potential operations to be undertaken by the device had to be considered when ruling on a monopoly, Microsoft would not have been allowed to bundle Paint, Notepad, Calculator, Minesweeper, or anything else in its OS. They don't. Therefore it doesn't. Therefore they can. Meaning calls of monopolistic behavior have to be specific, not generic.
What about the app store? Its the only way to purchase apps on an un-rooted device. Surely this is a monopoly? Like how microsoft had to give browser options, there should be other app store options...(amazon for example, yes i know they're invested in android)
There are two arguments that can be made to this statement. Firstly, the only way such a statement would relate to Microsoft's incedent would be if and only if the App Store only contained apps from Apple, Inc. (similarly, IE was a product of Microsoft and of Microsoft alone.) In contrast, the App Store is actually just a platform upon which any company can submit their apps and profit for themselves as well. In this way, iTunes and the App Store actually multiply and distribute the profits made by both Apple and any other artists, companies, or developers that participate. Secondly, Apple does not control the market for apps (though they arguably used to), nor do they make any direct attempt to do so. Developers do not have to create apps for the App Store. They can make them for the Android Market instead, and users have the option to choose from the iPhone or any Android phone (which are readily available with a much larger share of the mobile market than the iPhone).
And if anyone bought an iOS device thinking they can just get apps from anywhere, then they clearly didn't bother to take any steps to understand what they were buying. If that's the measure of a monopoly, then every game system (such as Wii, XBox, Playstation) would also be monopolies, since you can't legally sell a game for those systems without paying royalties.
AppleFanatic42
Posts: 1Member
Comments
- Spam
- Abuse
0 • 1Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
1 • Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
-1 • 1Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
1 • Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
1 • Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
0 • Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
1 • 1Vote Down 2Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
0 • Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
-1 • 1Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
-1 • 2Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
-1 • 1Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
-1 • 2Vote Down 1Vote Up •There are two arguments that can be made to this statement. Firstly, the only way such a statement would relate to Microsoft's incedent would be if and only if the App Store only contained apps from Apple, Inc. (similarly, IE was a product of Microsoft and of Microsoft alone.) In contrast, the App Store is actually just a platform upon which any company can submit their apps and profit for themselves as well. In this way, iTunes and the App Store actually multiply and distribute the profits made by both Apple and any other artists, companies, or developers that participate. Secondly, Apple does not control the market for apps (though they arguably used to), nor do they make any direct attempt to do so. Developers do not have to create apps for the App Store. They can make them for the Android Market instead, and users have the option to choose from the iPhone or any Android phone (which are readily available with a much larger share of the mobile market than the iPhone).
- Spam
- Abuse
1 • Vote Down 1Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
0 • Vote Down Vote Up •And if anyone bought an iOS device thinking they can just get apps from anywhere, then they clearly didn't bother to take any steps to understand what they were buying. If that's the measure of a monopoly, then every game system (such as Wii, XBox, Playstation) would also be monopolies, since you can't legally sell a game for those systems without paying royalties.
- Spam
- Abuse
0 • Vote Down Vote Up •- Spam
- Abuse
0 • Vote Down Vote Up •