• fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That was literally the point of this ruling. The EU only has the power to enforce things in the EU and they can’t force Apple to act differently outside of it.

    • piecat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Serious dumb question, how is it considered a monopoly? What forms the monopoly?

      The company? If so, what is the proposal? Apple HW team is separate company from SW team? Apple phones and Apple computers are separated?

      The app store? There’s only one Xbox store on the Xbox, one Nintendo shop on the switch or Wii. It wouldn’t make sense to require supporting competition on your hardware. Did N64 games work on the Sega Genesis?

      What is constitutes the monopoly and what’s the proposed fix?

        • wikibot@lemmy.worldB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Here’s the section for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

          Bleemcast! is an independently developed commercial emulator by Bleem! that allows one to load and play PlayStation discs on the Sega Dreamcast. It is compatible with most Dreamcast controllers and steering wheels, and leverages the Dreamcast’s superior processing power for enhanced graphics. It was created by using the MIL-CD security hole found in the Dreamcast BIOS.

          to opt out, pm me ‘optout’. article | about

    • Lung@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Well, not really, because you could use android, and it commands 70% of the global market share

      Also, the way the law is, you have to have both a monopoly & also be causing substantial harm to the public. I.e. you can have a monopoly if it’s really nice and more like a public utility. So after the Microsoft antitrust case (for basically same thing), it’s been very hard to justify breaking up tech companies or banks

      If a company acquires its monopoly by using business acumen, innovation and superior products, it is regarded to be legal; if a firm achieves monopoly through predatory or exclusionary acts, then it leads to anti-trust concern

      For example, business can defense that its business conducts bring merits for consumers

      (Wikipedia)

      What happened with Microsoft browser tie ins antitrust?

      Ultimately, the Circuit Court overturned Jackson’s holding that Microsoft should be broken up as an illegal monopoly. However, the Circuit Court did not overturn Jackson’s findings of fact, and held that traditional antitrust analysis was not equipped to consider software-related practices like browser tie-ins

      So in short, Apple’s legal / business strategy here is totally solid. Arguably helps users, defended by precedent, and doesn’t dominate market share. Of course they have to debate all this

      • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        if a firm achieves monopoly through predatory or exclusionary acts, then it leads to anti-trust concern

        Hey, ChatGPT …?

        Closed Ecosystem: Apple is known for its closed ecosystem, which can limit users’ choices. For instance, iOS users can only download apps from the App Store, and Apple tightly controls the app approval process.

        Proprietary Connectors: Apple often uses proprietary connectors and cables, such as the Lightning port, which can be inconvenient for users who want more universal standards like USB-C.

        Repairability Issues: Apple products are often criticized for being difficult to repair. For example, the company discourages third-party repairs and designs its products with components that are challenging to replace.

        • fulg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          To be fair, USB-C didn’t exist when Lightning was introduced, and it was vastly superior to Micro-USB.

          It doesn’t really have any reason to exist now…

          Agreed with your other points though!

          I have an old iPad that I try to reuse for another purpose and all the locks to stop me to keep using it make it such a pain in the butt, when the alternative is simply to enable developer mode on an Android tablet.

          Thankfully I remembered when buying a laptop and skipped the very enticing M-series hardware, because in 5-7 years that thing is a brick destined for the landfill.

                • TauriWarrior@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Obviously it would be updated? Why would it be obvious when Apple hasn’t updated it at all, it was introduced in the Iphone 5 where it had USB 2 speeds, the Iphone 14 also has lightning connection and has… USB 2 speeds.

                  10 years and no update. Seems more like you liking Apple to mucb to think rather then us hating them too much.

                • WallEx@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Ah right, obviously you would change the core specs, how stupid of me

          • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            To be fair, USB-C didn’t exist when Lightning was introduced

            Hmm, I wonder why that was?

            Lightning is a proprietary computer bus and power connector, created and designed by Apple Inc. It was introduced on September 12, 2012

            Design for the USB-C connector was initially developed in 2012 by Apple Inc. and Intel.

            So Apple helped develop USB-C but failed to integrate it into their products for a decade. Now, why would they do that?

            Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(connector)

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C

            • BURN@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Because it’s not a superior connector. Lightning is better as a purely charging port. It’s less fragile and doesn’t have a million competing implementations. One of the most frustrating things about USB-C is you can’t be sure if a cable is actually going to work.