Regulators to Probe Apple's Exclusion of Google's AdMob

How are they even becoming one?

Their vertical integration (as you listed) ensures that your experience with their devices will be VERY subpar unless you stick in their eco system, or you're willing to hack either their devices or your own to get something working.

Furthermore, they've shown a repeated unwillingness to allow other devices or products in on this integration, such as blocking the ability to allow you to sync you device with third party software (at least legally, IE the software doesn't have to exploit something to sync), or allowing other devices to sync with itunes (even though they did initially)

They're using their market share to try and force the web to develop in a way they want, and they do whatever they can to make it harder for app developers...
(continues)

Sony even has their own brand of Micro SD, Samsung has a headphone jack on maybe two of it's handsets, the rest require the proprietary adapter that, oddly enough, you can't purchase ANYWHERE.


"In an era where Microsoft is dogged by the EU because they ship their OS with Internet Explorer, I'm pretty sure apple's far past what they would consider a "monopoly." The only difference is that they have a better marketing and PR department."

You are comparing a 97% market share to a 28% market share in their respective markets... I find it hard to believe they are even coming close to "monopoly" status.

On top of that, Apple has 28% of the SMARTPHONE market, that doesn't include feature phones and dumb phones that make iPhone s...
(continues)

Actually I'm not. I rarely, if ever, call a company a monopoly.

Because most large companies (including Microsoft) allow alternatives on their own devices and don't ACTIVELY try blocking things.

Actually I'm not. I rarely, if ever, call a company a monopoly.

In all fairness, you just published an 11 paragraph response to the question "How is Apple a monopoly" that led me to believe you thought they were a monopoly.

I guess I read into your comments and the comments of others above.

Either way, Apple has the right to control their own ecosystem and those components of it that come from outside sources. Far from a monopoly, Apple is a strong competitor to the companies a lot of people on this site believe to be better.

No, I think Apple is a monopoly, in the negative connotation of the term. Aka, they're using their market share to extert control over the REST of the phone market.

You said I was using the term so much that it was losing it's meaning, I was saying I RARELY consider something a monopoly, even though I consider apple to be one, or at least trying to be one.

They're not just trying to control their ecosytem, they're trying to control the media, web, and development fields OUTSIDE of their own ecosystem to make it into something of their own liking (aka, only accepting html5 for video streaming.. and I'm willing to bet ONLY on their h.264 codec, strong arming companies to follow their pricing guides, etc). This isn't developing for the...
(continues)

Apple won't allow blackberry, Android or WebOS to use flash either?

NO?

Wait, I get it, those three companies aren't allowed to use html5, that has to be it! HA!

NO?

OK, hold on, you're saying Apple is FORCING the media companies to sell their books, movies and music on their phones because there are no other media outlets?

NO?

Developers HAVE TO developer for Apple and are not allowed to develop for anyone else then right?

NO?

how is Apple a monopoly again?

True/False:

Apple allows any other device to sync with music that CUSTOMERS OWN that happens to be managed through itunes (this includes playlists)

False

Apple allows other companies to use their 32pin connectors?

False

Apple allows media companies to set prices for their own products sold through the store?

False

Apple writes programs and develops hardware that's compatible with current standards, or at least allows them to use programs that speed up the process of porting them over to apple's standards.

False.

Apple allows developers to write apps using a windows or linux machine?

False. They require that people purchase ANOTHER one of their products in order to develop applications for an unrelated device.

Additionally:

Apple has it written in their developer agreement that if you write an iphone app, that code is theirs and you CANNOT use a cross compiler to port it to a competing platform:

True

Apple will allow you to easily access the content you have on your device without requiring you to plug it in to a SPECIFIC computer running their hardware.

False

Locking a consumer into your products and services is one of the telling features of monopolies.

True (we're not talking apps here either.. I can understand that)

Apple will allow you to easily take your DRM protected content and transfer it to a non-drm format now that it is offered for no additional cost.

False (I have over $150 of music that will ONLY work in itun...
(continues)

Alright, lets play your game.

True/false

Apple places DRM on the music sold in iTunes:
False, The Entertainment industry required it until Apple negotiated another agreement.


Apple allows other people to use their 32 pin connector

True. You can design an accessory to be used for Apples iPhone and iPods with the 32 pin connector.

Apple allows media companies to set prices for their own products sold through the store?

False.

And why should they? Wal-mart, target, footlocker, sneaker king, old navy, well, pretty much ALL stores that sell products they don't make themselves negotiate and set the prices themselves, none of them are monopolies. Whats your point?

Apple writes programs and de ...
(continues)

1. But they do not allow customers to transfer DRM laden songs to non-DRM laden songs without paying an additional fee.

2. You're not this stupid, so stop pretending. Apple will not allow other companies to make DEVICES with 32pin connectors that can connect to anything but an ipod.

3. Because all those other companies BUY the products from the makers first and then resell them. All apple is doing is streamlining the purchase process, they are not reselling. My point is that Apple is telling companies they MUST sell at a certain price with no promised purchases. If you can't see the difference, maybe you are that stupid.

4. So for small time developers, if they commit to the iphone, they are STUCK on the iphone unless they w...
(continues)

Blackberry: Standard charging ports. You can get third party sync programs if you don't like the blackberry option. Alternate App stores, browsers, and themes all exist for the device WITHOUT requiring a hack of the device or voiding your warranty. No word on flash, but they just got webkit.


WINMO: Standard charging ports. Alternate App stores, browsers, and themes all exist for the device WITHOUT requiring a hack of the device or voiding your warranty. Support flash via skyfire, had flash developing for the platform, but it was dropped once Winmo7 was announced.

Android: Standard charging ports. You can get third party sync programs if you don't like drag and drop. Alternate App stores, browsers, and themes all exist for th...
(continues)

It seems like Apple shouldn't be able to put any pressure on ANYONE with that unified wall of competitors standing against them!


Good luck with spreading the "Apple is a monopoly" idea when you, yourself show that the only thing Apple monopolizes is their own product.

last I checked, controlling your own product is legal. Let me know when Apple starts requiring 32Pin connectors for blackberry's and Androids.

None of those other companies I listed are trying to force the entire media, web, and entertainment markets to fit their ecosystem.

THAT is why they are a monopoly. They are using their marketshare to aggressively manipulate the market.

Which is what i've been saying from the start. And yet every response you come back with is different, be is "everyone else does it.. oh, I guess they don't, so since there ARE other people, apple's not a monopoly."

You don't have to be the only player, or even the largest (by numbers) player to be monopolistic. Controlling your own product is like what apple does with the Mac. With the ipod/iphone, they're doing something else entirely.

Maybe I'm just stupid.

Oh well.

I hate not being able to buy music on my phone because I don't have an iPhone, or use apps on my phone because I don't have an iPhone, or pay fair prices for music, movies and books because I don't have an iPhone, or have a touch-screen because I don't have and iPhone....



oh wait, I can do all of those things without an iPhone, because Apple has not even come close to "monopolizing" ANY of the markets involved.

odd,

HOW IS THE APPLE IPHONE A MONOPOLY?????????

for real dude, this is getting annoying.

Because you refuse to read.

I'm not talking about the PHONE, I'm talking about what apple is trying to do to the market BECAUSE they have the phone.

And yes, it is getting annoying. But I'm kind of used to it with you

And it's working right? I mean, no one else can use mobile flash because Apple refuses to let them.........

Or is Google actually using flash as a selling point and benefiting off of it?

Sounds a little more like Apple knows the direction it wants it's product to go in and it's choosing to go that direction regardless of what it's competitors are doing.

By no stretch of definitions is Apple even close to being a "monopoly." Thats a ridiculous statement.

I guess boost Mobile is a monopoly now because they forced others to compete with $50.00 all-you-can eat plans... lol

Again, we're NOT talking about apple designing stuff for their phone, we're talking about how they are using that phone and marketshare to try and force the market as a WHOLE to change

Ok, you win, Apple is a monopoly because they are forcing the music/video/book companies to sell their products at lower prices to OTHER companies.....


I get it now! it's all coming together!

oh wait, that wouldn't be a monopoly at all now would it.

I need more help with this concept, not good at doublethink yet!

In economics, a monopoly (from Greek monos / μονοÏ”š (alone or single) + polein / πϔ°ÃŽÂ»ÃŽÂµÃŽÂ¹� �ŽÂ½ (to sell)) exists when a specific individual or an enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it.

Thats the definition I was reading as well.

So, we can agree that Apple does not have sufficient control over the cell phone, or even the smart phone market to significantly determine the terms on wich other individuals can have access to cellphones/smartphones?

because it seems like IN-SPITE of Apple not controlling everyone else they are wildly successful.

PS, I love how you finally boiled it down to "You're just an Apple fan-boy" and "go drink the kool-aid" I thought you were above that.

Here, I'll set myself up,

Go ahead and quote me saying anything about Apple being "the best" or "greatest cell phone company during this conversation!!!"

I'll bet you can't.

I am just saying you cannot call it a monopoly....
(continues)

No, they DO have a significant portion of the market's I'm talking about. Look at app sales. They're far and above number 1, so if you want an app to make money you pretty much need it on the iphone. Which is all well and good, until they LOCK that app code and tell you they own it, and it's illegal for you to use it as a source code for an app on another platform. or until they tell you you can't use a cross compiler to port your popular flash game to the iphone.

Or media. People want their content digitally. Itunes created a seamless way to get digital content to users. They negotiated a low price point for songs because songs were never really sold that way before. All well and good. but then they did TV shows, and NBC wanted ...
(continues)