Epic Games, Spotify, Proton, 37Signals, and other developers had already signaled their displeasure with how Apple has chosen to adapt its rules to meet
Apple spent twenty years building the ecosystem Spotify and Epic want to exploit for free. At least Google had the gumption to rip them off wholesale instead of just crying about it.
From a strict, technical reading of the principles of business, i’m guessing Epic and Spotify will be encouraged to “pound sand”.
You have misunderstood me. You said “Apple spent twenty years building the ecosystem Spotify and Epic want to exploit for free.” I’m pointing out that the amount of effort Apple put into building the ecosystem is immaterial to whether they’re doing illegal things with it.
What you call “building the ecosystem” I’d call selling products to users that should be allowed to make their own choices. They could very well choose to stick with Apple, but why does Apple get to decide that for them?
It’s a part of Apple PR - many of their fans also buy their stock.
Then they show that loyalty bordering on madness and also support Apple owning its customers, because they subconsciously put themselves on the other side of the fence.
Of course consumers can make their own choices - to not buy Apple. If you want what apple has, buy it, if you don’t, don’t, but Apple shouldn’t have to allow third parties to affect their service, period.
Apple spent twenty years building the ecosystem Spotify and Epic want to exploit for free. At least Google had the gumption to rip them off wholesale instead of just crying about it.
From a strict, technical reading of the principles of business, i’m guessing Epic and Spotify will be encouraged to “pound sand”.
“They broke the law fair and square” is an odd defence.
Agreed, google should have lost.
You have misunderstood me. You said “Apple spent twenty years building the ecosystem Spotify and Epic want to exploit for free.” I’m pointing out that the amount of effort Apple put into building the ecosystem is immaterial to whether they’re doing illegal things with it.
What you call “building the ecosystem” I’d call selling products to users that should be allowed to make their own choices. They could very well choose to stick with Apple, but why does Apple get to decide that for them?
It’s a part of Apple PR - many of their fans also buy their stock.
Then they show that loyalty bordering on madness and also support Apple owning its customers, because they subconsciously put themselves on the other side of the fence.
A bit similar to Ponzi schemes.
Of course consumers can make their own choices - to not buy Apple. If you want what apple has, buy it, if you don’t, don’t, but Apple shouldn’t have to allow third parties to affect their service, period.
Absolutely do not support this view of “the company sold the product but they still own it”. Tim Cook isn’t handing out iPhones as a favor.