"No pre-installled apps"
-
Apple Pre-Installed Apps Would Be Banned Under Antitrust Package
Apple Inc. would be prohibited from pre-installing its own apps on Apple devices under antitrust reform legislation introduced last week, said Democratic Representative David Cicilline, who is leading a push to pass new regulations for U.S. technology companies.
Cicilline told reporters Wednesday that a proposal prohibiting tech platforms from giving an advantage to their own products over those of competitors would mean Apple can’t ship devices with pre-installed apps on its iOS operating platform.
“It would be equally easy to download the other five apps as the Apple one so they’re not using their market dominance to favor their own products and services,” the Rhode Island Democrat said.
The proposal is part of a package of bipartisan bills that would impose significant new constraints on how tech companies operate, restricting acquisitions and forcing them to exit some businesses. The House Judiciary Committee will mark up the five bills in a hearing next week, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the committee’s chairman, said.
Cicilline said the self-preferencing prohibition would also apply to Amazon.com Inc.’s Prime subscription service because it disadvantages some sellers who rely on the e-commerce platform.
When asked whether Microsoft Corp., which was subject to an epic antitrust case in the 1990s, would be subject to the measures, Cicilline said it would be up to the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to make that determination. The legislation sets out several criteria, including at least 50 million monthly active users in the U.S. and a market captitalization of $600 billion.
Why stop at the phone? Just sell a computer with an OS and nothing else.
@george-k said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rhode Island Democrat
Most people in Rhode Island are still using Windows 3.1.1
-
The argument would go like what Microsoft claimed when defending itself from anti-trust suits about bundling Internet Explorer with Windows: "It's not an app, it's part of the operating system."
When asked whether Microsoft Corp., which was subject to an epic antitrust case in the 1990s, would be subject to the measures, Cicilline said it would be up to the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to make that determination.
It appears Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
If he wants to take this to its logical conclusion, he should prevent them from selling it with an operating system installed, and require that others are made available.
I was only joking
-
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
@george-k said in "No pre-installled apps":
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
Ever used brew? Every semi-decent ecosystem will automatically install dependencies and even allow multiple versions of the same app to coexist (to avoid "DLL hell").
-
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
@george-k said in "No pre-installled apps":
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
No way to download and install one if no browser.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
If he wants to take this to its logical conclusion, he should prevent them from selling it with an operating system installed, and require that others are made available.
@doctor-phibes said in "No pre-installled apps":
If he wants to take this to its logical conclusion, he should prevent them from selling it with an operating system installed, and require that others are made available.
Excellent point.
That's what Linux is all about, right.
(.....BRICK....)
-
@george-k said in "No pre-installled apps":
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
No way to download and install one if no browser.
-
@george-k said in "No pre-installled apps":
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Rep. Cicilline does not have a good grasp of the effect of his proposal. It's like proposing some new fuel efficiency standard without knowing whether it applies to GM or Toyota.
Yep.
If one is invested into the ecosystem of Apple, or Android, or Microsoft, would the device still work without the built-in browser, calendar, etc?
It should.
Ever used brew? Every semi-decent ecosystem will automatically install dependencies and even allow multiple versions of the same app to coexist (to avoid "DLL hell").
@klaus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Ever used brew? Every semi-decent ecosystem will automatically install dependencies and even allow multiple versions of the same app to coexist (to avoid "DLL hell").
I use "brew". As far as Unix package management goes, I like it. Let's use it as an example for this discussion.
The first step to install "brew" is to issue this command line in the terminal:
/bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)"Right from that very first step, it requires a shell like "bash" and another command line utility like "curl".
With some strict definition, "bash" and "curl" can be considered "applications" rather than "operating system". If the system vendor is not allowed to bundle "bash" and "curl", you will have a very hard time to get to "brew."
I quite believe that there is a reasonable delineation to separate what can be bundled and what cannot be bundled in a way that balances usability and anti-monopoly concerns. The Microsoft anti-trust case teased out many things that can guide us towards that delineation. It does not inspire confidence when a law maker who proposed a new bill to govern bundling has no clue whether that proposal applies to Microsoft, let alone how it applies to Microsoft.
-
@klaus said in "No pre-installled apps":
Ever used brew? Every semi-decent ecosystem will automatically install dependencies and even allow multiple versions of the same app to coexist (to avoid "DLL hell").
I use "brew". As far as Unix package management goes, I like it. Let's use it as an example for this discussion.
The first step to install "brew" is to issue this command line in the terminal:
/bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)"Right from that very first step, it requires a shell like "bash" and another command line utility like "curl".
With some strict definition, "bash" and "curl" can be considered "applications" rather than "operating system". If the system vendor is not allowed to bundle "bash" and "curl", you will have a very hard time to get to "brew."
I quite believe that there is a reasonable delineation to separate what can be bundled and what cannot be bundled in a way that balances usability and anti-monopoly concerns. The Microsoft anti-trust case teased out many things that can guide us towards that delineation. It does not inspire confidence when a law maker who proposed a new bill to govern bundling has no clue whether that proposal applies to Microsoft, let alone how it applies to Microsoft.
@axtremus said in "No pre-installled apps":
With some strict definition, "bash" and "curl" can be considered "applications" rather than "operating system".
What definition would that be? A shell to start OS commands has been part of basically every OS in the last 50 years. The ability to download (curl) and install applications is also a core functionality of an OS. Even embedded systems such as routers have those commands preinstalled. Obviously there's no sharp definition of what is core OS functionality and what isn't, but these two are pretty close to "core".
