This is after Apple showed up the DOJ with app store rules that frankly should apply everywhere (ease of cancelation / clear subscription terms) as well as tracking rules, payment method rule and login rules that allow for lots more actual privacy and more.
Of the entire internet, with its endless horrors beyond Apple's control, the DOJ has decided to go after a small green patch that users trust. This is more an indictment of the DOJ than anything. Apple's phone market share is small, but the trust / spending on apple are crazy because it's one of the few places online that doesn't just screw you over.
And hey, I've tried to report online fraud issues for businesses I worked with - it's a total joke. The DOJ gives two craps for even totally obvious scams.
Then all the scam calls
Facebook has been screaming bloody murder over Apple’s regulations making it difficult for them to monetize user fare.
These companies are not your friends, and don’t for a second believe that their push for more open regulations has anything to do with user “freedom”. These companies are only concerned about apple limiting their freedoms to prey on users.
> Of the entire internet, with its endless horrors beyond Apple's control, the DOJ has decided to go after a small green patch that users trust. This is more an indictment of the DOJ than anything. Apple's phone market share is small, but the trust / spending on apple are crazy because it's one of the few places online that doesn't just screw you over.
The fact that the most valuable consumers willingly lock themselves behind this walled garden, when there were and are plenty of open alternatives is a pretty glaring indictment of the state of the tech industry. Unfortunately predatory and user-hostile companies are the norm in our industry, and consumers have adjusted their spending habits accordingly.
Match used the love letter scammers to turn non-subscribers into subscribers. What they did was block the scammers from messaging paid accounts, but kept them on platform to generate likes and messages to nonpaid accounts even though they had been flagged as scammers. The free users had to upgrade to see the messages from these scammers. So it was very intentional.
Match did something like 500,000 subscriptions from users within 24 hours of a user receiving a message from a scammer. Even better, if match DID delete the scammers profile, the user would pay to upgrade only to be told profile was unavailable, but no refunds were available.
I loved the "free subscription" match offered - 6 months free! The fine print was that you had to have a fully public profile with a primary photo approved by match, had to upload that photo in seven days, had to message 5 users per month and could only get through the claim process in a 7 day window out of the 180 day free trial! So yeah, another ridiculous scam
I could go on and on. The "consumer harm" by forcing match to play by Apple's rules is really "big business harm". And the folks on apple can afford to go elsewhere, these are not poor folks starving. Who has the time for the scams online - I got tired of spending time dealing with them (2 experiences I went to the mat on with plenty of resources). When I deleted an app recently on my iPhone apple REMINDED me to consider deleting a related subscription! That really does not happen in normal DoJ internet land.
The irony of the DoJ claims that Apple is the big bad consumer harm player on the internet (which is PACKED with love letter, phishing, sex-storation and more scams most enabled and many easy preventable if companies wanted to) is kind of comical.
Sure samsung knows how to make individual components, hell even put them together, that’s about it. Samsung does such a good job apple is a customer when it doesn’t matter as much too.
and to clarify when I say security there is of course the national security apparatus angle but also things like spam, fraud, cyber security, crime etc. All of these will happen and as governments grapple with addressing them unfortunately the easy button tends to negatively impact privacy versus things like providing better funding/training for law enforcement and regulatory bodies
That you take reasonable care of your customers privacy does not entitle you to turn around and exercise monopolized control over that market, your competitors, or the consumers.
A straight A student doesn't get to break the law on the weekend just because he gets good grades.
When looking at the many many thousands of businesses online and their behavior - you have decided that APPLE (with a much smaller market share than google) has come up with an approach (protecting users on their app store / platform) that is so horrible in its impacts on other businesses that the full weight of the govt should be brought to bear to tell them how to run their business.
This is the SAME govt by the way that absolutely screws folks over with its OWN billing process at the IRS where 90% of calls get an immediate disconnect, mail will sit unopened for 2 years, and millions of docs will be shredded without ever being looked at.
What the govt and you fail to understand is that users may not see the market power apple wields as a negative. In fact, in a world where the user force can basically never stand up to big corp voice (of Facebook or Match.com or whomever) apple is another big player that can. Is this altruistic? Far from it, it's a business play - and one that I'd love to see rewarded vs destroyed.
The reality is the DoJ hates apple for many reasons. They absolutely shut the DoJ down on a phone unlock case. They have pretty clearly created end to end encryption with iMessage. So yes, between facebook, match and biden/doj political stuff - they are going to be targeted. If you think this is a careful result of looking at places of greatest user harm and pursuing them, think again.
No, I explicitly mentioned that. Users are obviously harmed by lack of competition in pricing and with product release schedules and support mechanisms that are designed to extract the maximum amount of revenue from them.
It's not as if Apple hasn't been known to engage in precisely this behavior with many of their product lines.
> This is the SAME govt by the way
Again, you're making asserts that may be true, but you're not reliably connecting them to your overall point. Yes, the government itself sometimes gets it wrong, does this enjoin them from ever attempting to get it right?
They can only go after Apple, but only once they've fixed the IRS phone system?
> may not see the market power apple wields as a negative
I'm sure heroin users don't see the market power that heroin dealers hold as a negative, either. This isn't a useful measure and it entirely ignores their monopoly position in the labor and supply markets as well, which have historically been pernicious and poorly publicized but real problems that monopolies present.
> Is this altruistic? Far from it, it's a business play - and one that I'd love to see rewarded vs destroyed.
Just because half your publicly traded business seems to comport to some imagined idealism does not excuse you from following the letter of the law in any other domain. Al Capone used to run soup kitchens with free food, and it worked for a time, but it ultimately didn't save him either.
So, it's great that they get many things right, but it's also great the FTC is on their back ensuring that they get the other things right and aren't abusing their monopoly position as well. I fail to see how we are deprived as citizens by any part of this process.
> If you think this is a careful result of looking at places of greatest user harm and pursuing them, think again.
I don't think you've been paying attention to the the FTC, staff changes, or the politics surrounding it for the past 2 years, knowledge of which really undercuts the government conspiracy narrative you're attempting to peddle here.
The chinese android phone you celebrate will ship with one generation back android and NEVER get updated. So if you look at devices holding value, iphones are WAY up there. iOS 15.5 will include updates all the way back to things like iphone 6S.
Users see through this with the govt. In many places, including potentially the US, users will trust Apple MORE than they do their govt. Let that sink in for a bit. People think their own politicians are likely more corrupt than Apple (!).
In terms of your claim around user harm - apple has a clear annual product release schedule that is HIGHLY predictable. I wouldn't call that a user harm. They offer by FAR the longest support options, and some of the best support in terms of retail store access - and if you want you can do applecare with theft and loss protection as well. The experience (I've used it once) is very good, absolutely crushes the companies you and the FTC are supporting. I was in and out in 15 minutes.
In terms of my paying attention to FTC et al, I'm pretty sure I've been around this a LOT longer than you have been. I like the idealism you've got, but give it some time - you'll see it's not a govt conspiracy, just selective enforcement of easy targets for political and other reasons.
Other businesses absolutely hate this (ignoring the fact that they themselves poisoned the well outside of apple with endless scummy behaviors). So they are trying to stop apple from being able to do this. Ie, they want to be able to get payment flows and stuff off apple.
Apple's behavior per the DoJ is supposedly causing "consumer harm" - but the reality is DOJ takes a totally blind eye on consumer harm unless that harm also much more directly hits the bottom line of other billion dollar businesses with much worse behavior (ie, online dating folks / gaming folks etc). Then it's all hands on deck.
What's left is basically folks online doing things like scam baiting to even start to hit actual horribly destructive fraud rings online. And they barely make an impact as this is really the territory the govt should be active in.
The DoJ is pissed because Apple wouldn't cripple iMessage and on-device encryption for them. The iCloud 'hole' isn't enough.