Who is more monopolistic Microsoft or Apple? - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #1 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 02:08 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
Who is more monopolistic Microsoft or Apple?

Microsoft is regularly accused, and rightly so, of carrying on anti-competitive monopolistic behaviour.

Apple has very strict policies for apps and app development on the iPod/iPhone/iPad.

Can you imagine the uproar if MS announced that all Windows apps must be sold through the MS online store, they must be approved by MS and they must be developed on MS approved devlopment tools? Yet isn't this exactly what Apple is doing?

Does Apple run the risk of anti-trust litigation, particularly in Europe.

It may sound like I am anti-Apple but I love their products and have bought several iPods and I am a very early adopter on the iPad. But I wonder if they are setting themselves up for some legal troubles.
Wayne is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 02:11 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Last I looked Apple and Microsoft are competitors so by definition, neither is "monopolistic"



hugh is offline  
post #3 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 02:51 PM
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24,878
The "Who is more monopolistic Microsoft or Apple?" title of the thread is a bit misleading, so if we're talking about anti-trust monopolist I would just point to the vast volume of internal corporate emails found in court documents to say that the former certainly is, as judges and juries have already found. The latter company may dodge such anti-trust bullets due to Linux-based OSes that are appearing on an increasingly great number of devices across a wide variety of architectures and consumer goods:
  • Google Android
  • Intel/Nokia Meego
Many people see Microsoft losing ground quite quickly on several fronts (particularly in mobile) while Apple seems to be enjoying a period of great growth despite its consumer and developer "lock in" habits. I personally believe that sooner or later the EU will call Apple on the carpet regarding those practices, but Apple will just point to the other platforms and skate free.

Just a P.S.: while I can understand the allure of Apple devices to consumers, I would say that independent small developers are nuts to try to develop for such a closed environment. Android and Meego might end up too limiting too, but there hasn't been nearly the danger signs on them as have been seen due to Apple's arbitrary decisions.




Last edited by stampeder; 2010-04-19 at 05:21 PM. Reason: reworded a bit for clarity - my point remains exactly the same
stampeder is offline  
 
post #4 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 03:52 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
How is Apple a monopoly?

Last I looked Apple was in three major businesses: wireless phones, portable media players, and personal computers.

In the wireless phone business they are competing against Nokia, Samsung, LG, Google, Palm and Microsoft. Where is the monopoly?

In portable media players, they are competing against Microsoft, Archos Creative, Sandisk and others. In addition, there is nothing stopping any sizable company from building an music or video player tomorrow and selling it.

In computers, Apple competes against HP, Dell, IBM, Lenovo, and more.

Because their products run on proprietary software is not monopolistic. Most consumer electronics operate that way. My cable and satellite boxes are a closed system as is my printer, my telephone, my dvd player, my bu-ray player and so on.



hugh is offline  
post #5 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:12 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
Buying applications for an iPhone/iPod/iPad is a monopoly since your only option is the iTunes App store.

Why is Microsoft monopolistic when they bundle IE as part of their OS? There are options for OSes- you can buy a Mac or run one of dozens of flavours of Linux on that PC. And you could use browsers other than IE on your PC.
Wayne is offline  
post #6 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:14 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Dandelion City
Posts: 7,131
MS is much closer to a monopoly than Apple. MS marketing practices show that they want to force competitors out of business to gain a true monopoly and they have almost succeeded in certain areas. That is why they have been taken to court and have been penalized for anti-competitive practices. MS tried to manipulate the market by controlling supply chains and eliminating competing companies by means that are considered illegal in many countries. That's monopolistic in nature and is wrong on many levels.

Apple is more focused on keeping their systems closed and protecting their patents. That's good business for two reasons. It keeps competitors from cloning their products and cutting into their profit margins and marketing share. It also allows them to provide more stable, easier to maintain products that are easier to use. Apple would not be described as monopolistic since they have many competitors and win market share with product appeal.

At 20 I had a good mind. At 40 I had money. At 60 I've lost my mind and my money. Oh, to be 20 again. --Scary
ScaryBob is offline  
post #7 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:22 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Quote:
Buying applications for an iPhone/iPod/iPad is a monopoly since your only option is the iTunes App store.
No it is not a monopoly. A monopoly would exist if there was only one seller of wireless phones, one seller of computers or one seller of media players.

Licensing or controlling the sale of add-on accessories to a competitive product you own is not a monopoly.



hugh is offline  
post #8 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:28 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Dandelion City
Posts: 7,131
Quote:
Buying applications for an iPhone/iPod/iPad is a monopoly since your only option is the iTunes App store.
You have a choice of hundreds (maybe thousands) of phones, media players and laptop/tablet PCs. They all come with proprietary software as well. Try buying a PC without Windows from Dell, HP or almost all stores. It usually cannot be done and the reason is because MS has used it's market share to force other operating systems out of the supply chain with illegal practices. That's a monopoly. Compared to phones and media players, there are very few choices in PC operating systems. There was once many, some of which were considered to be better than Windows. The only real competitors left are Apple and Linux which have a small market share compared to Windows. Part of the reason is because MS told PC vendors that they would basically put them out of business if they didn't install Windows on all their PCs or if they offered a competing product.

At 20 I had a good mind. At 40 I had money. At 60 I've lost my mind and my money. Oh, to be 20 again. --Scary
ScaryBob is offline  
post #9 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:30 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugh View Post
No it is not a monopoly. A monopoly would exist if there was only one seller of wireless phones, one seller of computers or one seller of media players.

Licensing the sale of add-on accessories to your product is not a monopoly.
So if MS announced tomorrow that all applications that run on Windows would henceforth have to be approved by MS and could only be bought on MS' online store then that would be fine?

After all these are simply add-on accessories to MS' Windows product.

It's like the good old days - "DOS ain't done until Lotus won't run!"
Wayne is offline  
post #10 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:35 PM
Digital Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burlington
Posts: 24,794
I was thinking about this over the weekend and had the same thoughts about Apple.

I don't like the amount of control they have over their devices and the lack of flexibility (i.e. usb and sd drives).

All that being said, once all the tablets roll out this summer, I will be seriously considering the Ipad. I just need to read reviews of the other machines first.
james99 is offline  
post #11 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:39 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Wayne, you totally missed the point.

Apple does not hold a monopoly on wireless phones, portable media players or personal computers. They do however, license products that run on their products.

Once again, "Licensing the sale of add-on accessories to your competitive product is not a monopoly."


If Apple had never allowed third party apps to run on the iPhone or iPad would that have made them a monopoly. No, of course not. It just would have meant it was a standalone product.


If Apple were the ONLY wireless manufacturer in the world then you could argue it has a monopoly but as a consumer I can goto a Symbian, Blackberry, Android, Palm, Samsung or LG device.



hugh is offline  
post #12 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 04:44 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScaryBob View Post
Compared to phones and media players, there are very few choices in PC operating systems. There was once many, some of which were considered to be better than Windows.
What were the other OSes that were available for PCs? I remember OS/2 but I don't remember too many others since Windows 3.1 was released in 92. Once upon a time there was CP/M but I believe that had pretty much died out before Windows became pre-eminent and I don't believe that Windows was even a full OS until Win 95 came along - previous versions of Windows were just GUIs on top of the DOS operation system.
Wayne is offline  
post #13 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 05:02 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kincardine ON.
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugh View Post
Licensing or controlling the sale of add-on accessories to a competitive product you own is not a monopoly.
I get that, and because of that I choose other devices.

But the point is it kind of stinks that Apple devices are locked to the Apple store (without hacking anyways), and Apple's whims of what applications they let on the store. Then again, that control is what makes the Apple expierience so good.
classicsat is offline  
post #14 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 05:12 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
classicsat, I agree that Apple can be heavy handed but as long as I can buy a Blackberry, Android, Palm, MS mobile, Android or Symbian phone then they are simply another competitor in what I would consider to be a fairly competitive marketplace.



hugh is offline  
post #15 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-19, 05:29 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 597
As a developer for both the Mac and programs for the iPhone, I can say both systems (open market for the Mac and closed ecosystem for the iPhone) have their advantages and disadvantages.

As a Mac developer I could make anything I wanted without restrictions. This is good because I can get as inventive as I wanted. I'm not sure if this made me any extra money as getting the general public knowledgeable about shareware applications from small developers is difficult. Spending money on advertising doesn't generally return much. So it's a difficult business to make a lot of money, unless you get lucky and get a million dollar idea - which I haven't yet.

As an iPhone Developer I am restricted to what I can build. However, the market is more aware of small time developers making little apps so it's easier to get to your market - cause they already know about it. Sure it's frustrating at times staying within the sandbox that Apple has created, however I'm getting older and I'm not that interested in getting ultra-innovative with development. I'm generally satisfied with the limits (I do have my own iPhone apps that I use personally that would never make it into the app store).

I believe the closed ecosystem model will make more money for small time developers such as myself. Especially with the iAd addition to the iTunes music store. I have worked on 3 titles for the iPhone with other companies on contract and they were pleased with the end product and the reach the iTunes music store has given them.

I look forward to releasing my first title for the iPad later this year. Time will tell if this system makes me more money - which is the ultimate goal for me anyways.

Best DYI TV antenna plans - I use the Bi-Quad Indoor TV Antenna
hkaye is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome