The Justice Department has announced a sweeping antitrust lawsuit against Apple, accusing the tech giant of engineering an illegal monopoly in smartphones that boxes out competitors and stifles innovation
Bullshit. The App Store is anti-competitive. The hardware is not. Wrong thing to attack. It will likely fail as a result.
I’m beginning to agree with a take I saw online. Someone said Lina Khan’s tenure has been a failure because despite gesturing at all the right players, her FTC has failed to make progress because they’re calling the wrong plays.
You’d be right, if the hardware AND software weren’t made by the same company and locked to each other and that same company didn’t simultaneously have a massive market share
The App Store is anti-competitive. The hardware is not.
Not sure what that means, exactly. The hardware is not competitive because it is locked to a proprietary OS created by the hardware manufacturer. This is an arbitrary limitation that benefits no one but Apple, and stifles competition with other OS’s.
That’s without even mentioning the limitations on repairs that contribute to e-waste and costs consumers money unnecessarily.
It seems that the App Store and other walled garden restrictions are what the suit is about. The posted article is vague and confusing: first talking about an “illegal monopoly in smartphones” but then referring to the “walled garden”, etc.
The heart of the lawsuit centers around claims that Apple stopped smaller companies from accessing the hardware and software in its iPhones, which led to fewer options for customers.
referring to hardware monopoly power may be some legalese needed to meet the requirements to file an antitrust suit, or to head off defense arguments by making a distinction between Apple and other instances of walled gardens, like game consoles.
Someone said Lina Khan’s tenure has been a failure because despite gesturing at all the right players, her FTC has failed to make progress because they’re calling the wrong plays
All by design, it’s only a failure to us stupid prolies. They’re intentionally giving their corporate donors softballs that they know will never hurt their bottom line so that they can turn around come election season and say “Well, at least we tried!” and hope we don’t look any further.
FWIW, I don’t think this is failure is Khan’s fault. She seems to have spent her professional career developing anti-trust philosophy. The only issue is that the FTC is the state mechanism to protect the wealth funnel and there’s very little a individual can do within the Commission to protect consumers.
Bullshit. The App Store is anti-competitive. The hardware is not. Wrong thing to attack. It will likely fail as a result.
I’m beginning to agree with a take I saw online. Someone said Lina Khan’s tenure has been a failure because despite gesturing at all the right players, her FTC has failed to make progress because they’re calling the wrong plays.
You’d be right, if the hardware AND software weren’t made by the same company and locked to each other and that same company didn’t simultaneously have a massive market share
Not sure what that means, exactly. The hardware is not competitive because it is locked to a proprietary OS created by the hardware manufacturer. This is an arbitrary limitation that benefits no one but Apple, and stifles competition with other OS’s.
That’s without even mentioning the limitations on repairs that contribute to e-waste and costs consumers money unnecessarily.
It seems that the App Store and other walled garden restrictions are what the suit is about. The posted article is vague and confusing: first talking about an “illegal monopoly in smartphones” but then referring to the “walled garden”, etc.
This article notes that
referring to hardware monopoly power may be some legalese needed to meet the requirements to file an antitrust suit, or to head off defense arguments by making a distinction between Apple and other instances of walled gardens, like game consoles.
All by design, it’s only a failure to us stupid prolies. They’re intentionally giving their corporate donors softballs that they know will never hurt their bottom line so that they can turn around come election season and say “Well, at least we tried!” and hope we don’t look any further.
FWIW, I don’t think this is failure is Khan’s fault. She seems to have spent her professional career developing anti-trust philosophy. The only issue is that the FTC is the state mechanism to protect the wealth funnel and there’s very little a individual can do within the Commission to protect consumers.
Don’t want to upset that S&P100 number.