【Hacker News搬运】U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

hackernews

Title: U.S. sues Apple, accusing it of maintaining an iPhone monopoly

美国起诉苹果，指控其维持iPhone垄断地位

Text:

Url: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/technology/apple-doj-lawsuit-antitrust.html

很抱歉，尝试使用 webscraper 工具抓取指定 URL 的内容时遇到了连接超时的问题。由于无法获取原始内容，我无法直接对其进行分析或翻译。如果您有其他请求或需要帮助，请告诉我。

Post by: jcfrei

Comments:

bigtones: Here is the non-paywall link to the full NYT article I shared:
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/technology/apple-doj-lawsuit-antitrust.html?ugrp=c&unlocked_article_code=1.eU0.rOGs.FT-h0cSMdBpB&smid=url-share" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/technology/apple-doj-laws...</a>

bigtones: 以下是我分享的《纽约时报》文章全文的非付费墙链接：<a href=“https://；&#x2F；www.nytimes.com&#x2F！2024&#x2F：03&#x2F，21&#x2F技术&#x2F苹果doj诉讼反垄断.html？ugrp=c&amp；unlocked_article_code=1.eU0.rOGs.FT-h0cSMdBpB&amp；smid=url share”rel=“nofollow”>https://&#x2F；www.nytimes.com；2024；03；21；technology；苹果司法部法律</一

Fripplebubby: For folks who don't have time to read a 90 page document, the case rests on specific claims, not just the general claim that iPhone is a monopoly because it's so big. Here are those claims:1. "Super Apps"Apple has restrictions on what they allow on the App Store as far as "Super Apps", which are apps that might offer a wide variety of different services (specifically, an app which has several "mini programs" within it, like apps within an app). In China, WeChat does many different things, for example, from messaging to payments. This complaint alleges that Apple makes it difficult or impossible to offer this kind of app on their platform. Apple itself offers a "super app" of course, which is the Apple ecosystem of apps.2. Cloud streaming appsSimilar to "super apps", the document alleges that Apple restricts apps which might stream different apps directly to the phone (like video games). It seems there are several roadblocks that Apple has added that make these kinds of apps difficult to release and promote - and of course, Apple offers their own gaming subscription service called Apple Arcade which might be threatened by such a service.3. Messaging interoperabilityProbably most people are familiar with this already, how messages between (for example) iOS and Android devices do not share the same feature-set.4. SmartwatchesOther smart watches than the Apple Watch exist, but the document alleges that Apple restricts the functionality that these devices have access to so that they are less useful than the Apple Watch. Also, the Apple Watch itself does not offer compatibility with Android.5. Digital walletsIt is claimed that Apple restricts the APIs available so that only Apple Pay can implement "tap to pay" on iOS. In addition to lock-in, note that Apple also collects fees from banks for using Apple Pay, so they get direct financial benefit in addition to the more nebulous benefit of enhancing the Apple platform.

Fripplebubby: 对于那些不喜欢；我没有时间阅读一份90页的文件，案件取决于具体的主张，而不仅仅是iPhone是垄断的一般主张，因为它；它太大了。以下是这些声明：＜p＞1&quot；超级应用程序&quot 苹果对他们在应用商店上允许的内容有限制；超级应用程序”；，这些应用程序可能提供各种不同的服务（具体地说，一个应用程序中有几个“迷你程序”，就像应用程序中的应用程序一样）。在中国，微信做了很多不同的事情，例如，从消息到支付。该投诉称，苹果公司很难或不可能在其平台上提供此类应用程序。苹果本身提供了一个“；超级应用程序&quot；当然，这就是苹果的应用生态系统 2。云流应用类似于“；超级应用程序”；，该文件声称，苹果限制了可能将不同应用程序直接流式传输到手机（如视频游戏）的应用程序。苹果似乎增加了一些障碍，使这类应用程序难以发布和推广——当然，苹果提供了自己的游戏订阅服务Apple Arcade，该服务可能会受到此类服务的威胁 3。消息互操作性可能大多数人已经熟悉这一点，例如iOS和Android设备之间的消息不共享相同的功能集 4。智能手表除了Apple Watch之外，还有其他智能手表，但该文件声称，苹果限制了这些设备可以访问的功能，因此它们不如Apple Watch有用。此外，Apple Watch本身不提供与Android的兼容性 5。数字钱包据称，苹果限制了可用的API，因此只有Apple Pay才能实现&quot；点击支付”；在iOS上。除了锁定，请注意，苹果还向银行收取使用Apple Pay的费用，因此除了增强苹果平台的更模糊的好处外，他们还可以获得直接的经济利益。

aabajian: The blue background on messages sent between two iMessage users has to be one of the most brilliant vendor lock-in strategies. It is an artificial form of discrimination. I feel a slight annoyance whenever a non-Apple user forms a group chat as I know that person will limit the messaging functionality.In my opinion, the "monopolistic" aspect of it comes down to the fact that they tied it into an otherwise open messaging system - SMS. You cannot separate SMS messages from iMessages (to my knowledge). So, the only way to know a message was sent via SMS is the green background for incoming messages and the green background plus the "sent via SMS" for outgoing messages. This creates a disdain for SMS, and anyone who uses it over iMessage. It is such a strong feeling, that having green messages makes you "uncool", especially in the younger crowd.On the other hand, I think the long-term sequalae of the blue-green message is to push people to use stand-alone apps like WhatsApp and FB Messenger. I think it'll be a hard sell at this point to convince a jury that iMessage is an overt monopoly.The main question I want addressed is: If SMS messages can be directly shown in iMessage, and are not secure, then the argument of not allowing "insecure" 3rd-parties to integrate with iMessage goes out the window. All I want is Android messages to be shown in iMessage. Sure we can make them green, but at least they will be sent over the data network and not SMS.

aabajian: 两个iMessage用户之间发送的消息的蓝色背景必须是最出色的供应商锁定策略之一。这是一种人为的歧视形式。每当非苹果用户组成群聊时，我都会感到有点恼火，因为我知道这个人会限制消息功能 在我看来；垄断性的“；它的一个方面可以归结为他们将其绑定到一个开放的消息系统SMS中。（据我所知）你无法将SMS消息和iMessages分开。因此，知道消息是通过SMS发送的唯一方法是输入消息的绿色背景和绿色背景加上“短消息”；通过SMS发送”；用于传出消息。这就造成了对短信以及任何通过iMessage使用短信的人的蔑视。这是一种强烈的感觉，拥有绿色的信息会让你&quot；不冷却”；，尤其是在年轻人群中 另一方面，我认为蓝绿色信息的长期后果是促使人们使用WhatsApp和FB Messenger等独立应用程序。我认为；在这一点上，要说服陪审团相信iMessage是一个公开的垄断，将是一件很难的事 我想解决的主要问题是：如果短信可以直接显示在iMessage中，并且不安全，那么不允许的论点是&quot；不安全”；与iMessage集成的第三方退出了窗口。我只想在iMessage中显示Android消息。当然，我们可以让它们变绿，但至少它们将通过数据网络而不是短信发送。

brink: Apple frustrates the hell out of me with their deceptive tactics to create walled gardens while pretending not to. They feign ignorance to keep you stuck and create the illusion of open doors out of their walled garden that are actually broken and they have no interest in fixing.I've been paying for iCloud for my wife's iphone for the last several months because of how difficult Apple makes it for us to export our photos. Copying them off the phone with a usb cable is nearly impossible if you don't have a macbook, exporting them off of the website is nearly impossible if you have over 1k photos.. meanwhile google takeout allows me to download all of my photos in my browser in a couple clicks. In my experience, it feels like Apple makes getting out of their walled garden as difficult as legally possible.

brink: 苹果公司用他们的欺骗性策略制造围墙花园，却假装不这样做，这让我非常沮丧。他们假装无知，让你陷入困境，并在围墙花园外制造一种打开的门的幻觉，这些门实际上已经坏了，他们没有兴趣修复 I-；我一直在为我的妻子支付iCloud的费用；因为苹果公司让我们很难出口照片，我们在过去几个月里一直在使用iphone。如果你不使用usb电缆从手机上复制它们，几乎是不可能的；我没有macbook，如果你有超过1千张照片，几乎不可能将它们从网站上导出。。与此同时，谷歌外卖允许我在浏览器中点击几下就可以下载所有照片。根据我的经验，这感觉就像苹果公司让走出他们的围墙花园在法律上尽可能困难。

amadeuspagel: > In 2010, a top Apple executive emailed Apple’s then-CEO about an ad for the new
Kindle e-reader. The ad began with a woman who was using her iPhone to buy and read books
on the Kindle app. She then switches to an Android smartphone and continues to read her books using the same Kindle app. The executive wrote to Jobs: one “message that can’t be missed is that it is easy to switch from iPhone to Android. Not fun to watch.”This attitude explains a lot. This logic applies to every app that's available on both iPhone and Android, and to every web app.

amadeuspagel: &gt；2010年，苹果公司的一位高管给当时的首席执行官发了一封电子邮件，内容是关于新产品的广告Kindle电子阅读器。广告的开头是一位女士，她正在用iPhone买书和看书在Kindle应用程序上。然后，她切换到安卓智能手机，继续使用同一款Kindle应用程序看书。这位高管在给乔布斯的信中写道：“不能错过的一个信息是，从iPhone切换到Android很容易。观看起来并不有趣。”这种态度解释了很多。这个逻辑适用于每个应用程序；在iPhone和Android上以及每个网络应用程序上都可以使用。