This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
except only loosing 568m is just "the price of doing business" for them and it's not much of a deterrent to make them stop. they made more than that by doing this so it's still a net profit
While true, 568m is a significant cost of doing business. Also remember that a punitive action should not make the company go bankrupt, it should make them rethink.
And if they don't, the fines will go higher, until they do rethink.
I mean that would imply they stood to gain $568M by not allowing 3rd party app stores. Seems unlikely.
one of the most profitable companies in the world, it seems very likely
How much money do you think Google loses to 3rd party app stores? Considering they've been allowed from the beginning and are also one of the most profitable companies in the world?
Companies don't do shit that costs them money for no reason.
There are only two reasons a for profit company would do something, for profit or because the law is making them.
Well I think it's fair to assume that they not only didn't know for certain that they would be charged/fined but also how long it would take for that to happen or how much it would be. And they rolled the dice. They're definitely greedy but they're not omnipotent.
Likely. I guess I should clear up what I'm trying to get at, companies that large and monopolistic spend immense amount of resources doing everything they can to stifle competition because it's profitable to do so. They made the move knowingly approaching if not downright crossing the line, because their analysis showed them it would turn out to be profitable. Will we be fined? Probably not. If we do, can we afford it and still turn a profit?
Sorry, I don't understand how that's supposed to answer my question?
I missed. Meant to be aimed at your first comment up there
Imagine if Microsoft required all software developers to give them 30% of their earning
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/publish/publish-your-app/why-distribute-through-store
Flexible revenue sharing options that let developers choose their own commerce platform and keep 100% of the revenue for non-gaming apps, or use Microsoft’s commerce platform and pay a competitive fee of 15% for apps and 12% for games.
I guess their rates are lower. Currently.
EDIT: And as @Eggyhead@lemmings.world points out, that's for Windows, not the XBox. For the XBox, they do run an exclusive store and apparently do 30% there as well.
continues using Linux
$568m is a day Apple will never get back!
Microsoft does with their Xbox, though. Don’t they?
Yes but I don’t believe consoles are a target of the DMA or this investigation. While would be nice if consoles were opened up and forced to allow side loading and alternative stores, I think there’s an argument that they’re single purpose appliances - a PlayStation is sold to you with the intention of it being a gaming box and not much else.
A smartphone or tablet though is at this point a general purpose computer, and it’s reasonable to expect to have the same freedoms and open environment that you would on a PC. And Apple’s argument that they can’t open up the iPhone because security or whatever doesn’t really hold water, because the Mac exists and is both secure and open.
Microsoft is actually the least problematic of the console racket (Sony, Nintendo and MS), games release simultaneously to pc and they offer cross compatibility. Maybe the EU will address it eventually, but i guess mobile takes precedent given that everyone has a cell phone.
Tim Apple to Trump
You know what to do, papito....
