Hacker News Reader

Comment by kadoban | Hacker News Reader

> If the consumer is choosy and doesn’t like the options available then there is a market opportunity for new entrants.

And if new entrants can't enter the market because the existing monopolies make it impractical, then what?

This is the actual problem to be solved. The bureaucracy of forcing the hand of tech companies every time consumers scream loud enough is a shitty solution.

And that is exactly the problem that is being solved. It's not about "consumers screaming", but companies, consumers and governments realizing that anti-competitive behavior is harming everybody except the gatekeeper. The solution is competition. Since Apple is such a great and innovative company, they surely won't be afraid of competing on merit.

It just props up the monopoly. Appeased consumers have no reason to buy other products. There is no financial motive for Apple to do good because they can do bad until government forces their hand, and they have no reason to fear competition. It’s an admission we’re all at the mercy of Apple until daddy government steps in.

The fact that even a whiff of potential competition incentivized Apple to half their tax for specific cases shows that anti-trust regulation works and that it's the only thing that will ever force a gatekeeper to reconsider their anti-competitive business practices.

>It’s an admission we’re all at the mercy of Apple until daddy government steps in.

That has always been the case when market participants become too dominant e.g.

United States v. Paramount Pictures (1948)

United States v. AT&T (1984)

United States v. Microsoft (2001)

Anti-trust regulation would have dealt with Apple, Google and co by now if the lobbying weren't so out of control compared to previous times.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com