back to article Apple, Google urge monopoly watchdog to leave them alone

Apple and Google have defended their business practices in letters to the UK Competition & Markets Authority, while rival companies and third-party developers continue to push for mobile market reforms. The UK CMA, in the midst of its mobile ecosystem market study, on Friday published feedback the agency had solicited about …

  1. Tessier-Ashpool

    Meddling regulators

    Meddling regulators shouldn’t put too much weight on the opinions of moaning developers who are slap happy eager to embrace each and every Chrome standard everywhere. Funnily enough, the Developers Alliance agree (somewhat ironically) that the status quo should essentially be preserved.

    “We come to the ironic conclusion that we cannot support the CMA’s narrow developer objective even though it is couched in developer self-interest because it ignores the health of the ecosystem, its critical role in market creation and stewardship, and its role in connecting consumers to market participants.“

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Meddling regulators

      "Funnily enough" (as you put it), Google is a founder of the Developers Alliance.

      1. Tessier-Ashpool

        Re: Meddling regulators

        One founder amongst many others. What's your point?

        1. doublelayer Silver badge

          Re: Meddling regulators

          Their point appears to be that, because it was founded by someone with a particular point of view, that perhaps it isn't the best impartial decider of what developers think. Having looked at the articles on their home page, it's pretty clear they're taking a stand against the calls for competition. It's got two pinned sections about it and a few recent articles.

          In my quick scan of their website, I agree with some of the things they're saying. They are, however, not even trying to pretend to be impartial. Their opinion should be placed in the same bucket as their controllers. I haven't found a good list of exactly who directs them to advocate as they do, but that Google is in the list doesn't surprise me at all.

  2. ShadowSystems Silver badge

    I want the keys to the Orbital LART...

    I want to rain one ton iron bollards down on Apple & Google HQ to render them into smoking glassy craters.

    "Appeal THIS you bastards!"

    *ThudThudThud BoomBoomBoom SmokePlumes*

    Sigh... I know I'm Not Allowed, but DAYAM do my fantasies make me smile like Loki with the Universe Eraser Button in hand.

  3. LDS Silver badge

    Apple and Google should hire Lavrov...

    .... he's the right man to pull their utter lies forward with full arrogance.

  4. Howard Sway Silver badge

    must go beyond the acceptance at face value of often self-serving complaints

    So says Apple, whilst demanding that the regulator accepts their own enormously self-serving complaints at face value.

    1. big_D Silver badge

      Re: must go beyond the acceptance at face value of often self-serving complaints

      Using Apple Pay for App Store payments adds a level of security for users of software from smaller or unknown organisations and, for smaller and unknown organisations, it provides them with an easy way to implement payments in their apps...

      On the other hand, it ruins the experience, if you already have a relationship with a big, reputable company, where Apple is providing nothing more than an alternate payment service.

      E.g. Kindle app, Audible App... For both of those, I already have a good relationship with Amazon, therefore I don't need the "safety" of the Apple payment service. But, I can't buy books for Kindle or Audible, I have to leave the app, go to a web browser, log on separately and pay there.

      If they included payment in the app, the books would be 30% more expensive. For what? Apple doesn't store the books, the books don't go over their network etc.

      I get it, that the Store costs money to run, but really, that much? I bought a game for 2,99€, that's it, that's all I paid for it, so Apple got just under a Euro for it. On the other hand, if I bought my books through Audible & Kindle Apps, I'd be paying Apple over 100€ a year for the privilege. Why? Why are the Kindle and Audible apps 100x more expensive for Apple to maintain?

      They aren't. But, they have to also cater for free apps, they argue. Fine, but even so, that 100€ a year would be gouging!

      The same is true for large platforms, like Spotify, Netflix etc. Heck, with Amazon, I can buy a print copy of a book in their Amazon app, but the Audible and Kindle versions of the books aren't even available there!

      Drop the fee to a more reasonable amount and charge bigger developers of popular apps a static fee per user for hosting their apps, with a small surplus to cover free apps from small developers.

      To be honest, apart from the likes of the Amazon apps, I'd be more than happy to pay something extra to use the Apple/Google payment services for the smaller apps I use and, given the option of using Apple/Google Pay or a third party payment service, I'd probably use the default 99% of the time, but at least I'd have a choice.

  5. hoola Silver badge


    So two absolutely mega-corp monopolies (is that a duopoly or something) want the regulators to leave them alone.

    Who would have though that. The reason we have reached this stage is precisely because the regulators have been bamboozled and off the ball with companies like this.

    Google, Apple along with the likes of Amazon, Microsoft Facebook etc all need hauling in and hammering for many different reasons. The acquisitions that keep happening, all seen as acceptable individually are handing these companies unbelievable levels of power, control and influence.

    Sadly it is my view that they are so big, the regulators impotent and politicians so clueless, nothing is going to happen.

    1. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: Monopolies

      what we're seeing is the inevitable result of failure to regulate a free and FAIR market (aka "level playing field") - such an environment always tends towards monopolism and stifles innovation.

      It's not capitalism, it's mercantilism and it's harmful to everyone involved except the 0.1%. Adam Smith was one of the people who argued against allowing such behaviour

      1. HildyJ Silver badge

        Re: Monopolies

        “People of the same trade seldom meet together that the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public or some contrivance to raise prices.” Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations.

        Couldn't have said it better myself.

  6. msobkow Silver badge

    What a shock: the monopolists want to keep their monopolies (and to keep gouging consumers because they have no alternatives.)

    1. RM Myers

      ...and to keep gouging consumers because they have no alternatives.

      I'm fairly sure both Apple and Google are willing to gouge consumers even when there are alternatives. The $999 Apple monitor stands come immediately to mind.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Apple and Google have defended their business practices"

    You can bet they lie about *everything*. All the way and to the hilt. That's a fact: Professional criminals and PR people, more or less same thing, always lie.

  8. Foster

    To be honest I am very happy that Google and Apple have their monopoly. The cost of apps is so small I just like knowing that I can be assured that it is unlikely I will catch any software covids or whatever, or my bank details being passed on through security that is laxer than Apple's and Google's. The biggest moaners about how the two are milking them, blah blah blah, offer nothing I am interested in or will ever be likely to be. Let's leave Apple and Google to get on with it as it is.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022