form your previous posts ive gathered you think the "basic issues" are

1. That this is a political issue and pandering to poors.
This is not the case because similar cases have been brought against most, if not all, of the major tech giants under various regimes over the years for abusing network effects. Also, obtaining an iPhone has never been easier. In fact, low switching cost for new users is part of the anticompetitive ploy the DOJ is accusing Apple of abusing.

2. This is hurts Apple
Well no shite. If they are using abusing network effects to boost their bottom line and market share, of course removing that practice will hurt both of those for them. If you really believed that Apple was solely thriving on their platform/device superiority, then the outcome of the case should have little effect on Apple.

Points you are refusing to address directly:
1. How this is bad for the consumer.
2. Why the grounds for the case is valid or not.
3. Whether you believe the DOJ should be able to try to prevent anticompetitive behavior in markets, and why.

1 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by TigerGman

Center of the Universe

Member since Sep 2006

11524 posts

Posted on 3/31/24 at 2:48 am to Fat Batman

quote:
form your previous posts ive gathered you think the "basic issues" are

Dude, first you misquote me and until you can show me where in the anti trust laws "social stigma" on certain demographics can be a basis for anti trust litigation this argument with you has become pointless.

Again this is word for word from the DOJ:

quote:
Many non-iPhone
users also experience social stigma, exclusion, and blame for “breaking” chats where other participants own iPhones. This effect is particularly powerful for certain demographics, like teenagers—where the iPhone’s share is 85 percent, according to one survey.

Hate Apple all you want, you'd have to be blind to not see how this is embarrassing leftist policy driven dribble from the Biden Administration.

They are saying if a company makes a product that is so successful that "social stigma" "exclusion"and "blame" attach to certain "demographics" who basically can't afford it but are being compelled by social stigma to buy it, then, the government can step in and put a stop to it.

That's not what anti trust laws were enacted for.
This is an absurd overreach and obvious pandering by the liberal left.
It smacks of DEI bullshite and is one hell of a slippery slope to defend cause cause certain demographics LIKE teenage android users are looked down upon due to their text messages being Green.

And ask yourself what other demographics are they referring to when they say "like" teenagers?

This post was edited on 3/31/24 at 3:20 am

2 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Tech Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board