Is Apple a Monopoly?

Tailosive Tech Streamed: March 22nd, 2024

Episode Transcript

(00:02):
Well, another day, another lawsuit, and welcome back to Taylor Setech
Live on YouTube. Everybody, hopeyou're doing well out there, because Apple
ain't. They're trying to have agood day, but they just can't catch
a break. It seems like everygovernment is cracking down on them. Who's
next. We've had European Union threatenedto break them up for them to allow
all stores and sideloading. Now we'vegot Apples being sued by the Department of

(00:27):
Justice their home turf. The UnitedStates government now is going after Apple,
in my opinion, in traditional classicUnited States government form, for the dumbest
reasons out there. I mean,does Apple use monopolistic practices in some way,
shape or form. I mean,there might be some arguments to be
made, particularly when it comes topreventing third parties from advertising certain things that

(00:52):
compete with their own services. Yeah, a little bit here and there,
But that's not what the Department ofJustice is bringing up. No, their
lawsuit is more about how the AppleWatch only works with iPhones and how it's
hard to send text messages to Androidusers, even though Apple has already announced
RCS support is coming later this year. I guess it wasn't soon enough because

(01:15):
the US government is upset that youhave to learn different user interfaces if you
stop using an iPhone. So yeah, it's a pretty big joke. I
don't understand how there isn't anything elsebetter for the Department of Justice to work
on. I didn't really want todo a video on this because it's so
easy and cliche, I guess,and repetitive to complain about the government just

(01:40):
because I don't know. There's somany issues with the government as is.
But yeah, now Apple's got moreDepartment of Justice jumping on their back.
But I feel like the argument thatthey're using in the lawsuit is quite weak.
Apple has actually had to publicly confirmthat they did work on us on

(02:01):
trying to make Apple Watch compatible withAndroid for about three years, and I
guess they just couldn't get the systemright. They probably realized they would have
to bring so many Android apps.You got the activity app, you've got
the Apple Watch app is that it, Oh, well, would texting work

(02:22):
with it? Because we have amessages app on the Apple Watch. I
guess you could try to sync themessages app for Wachos with whatever the default
messaging app is on Android. Nah, that probably wouldn't make sense. It'd
be easier to just have an Imessage app. Well, j Money,
thank you for thirty months of support. I might get a fourteen inch M

(02:42):
three pro MacBook Pro thoughts. Yep, Burckhart beat me to it. Feel
like there is gonna say you shouldhave gotten an M one pro for cheap,
he said, I might get.He hasn't gotten it yet, burke
Hart, I would look around forI would shop around for some deals if
you're worried that the M one prois too old and two pros cheaper now
as well. I guess it dependson I don't know. It depends on

(03:08):
what you're looking for. I don'tknow how you're going to use it,
but I might recommend Not everyone agreewith me on this, but I might
recommend the non pro fourteen inch MacBookPro, which is very confusing. Thanks
for all these names. Third partydigital wallets is a terrible, terrible idea.

(03:28):
Yeah. I think the DMV refusedto support the digital driver's license in
the wallet app, but then theymade their own DMV Digital License app,
which sucks and has a terrible userinterface, and they support that. Oh
my god, I hate the DMV. You're probably gonna need Apple Health,
oh true, for health tracking data. So they'd have to develop about four

(03:51):
different Android apps, all of thisfor nothing, all of this so that
they can lose more potential revenue.But yeah, I don't I don't understand
it personally. This whole argument ofApple having a monopoly on iOS is I
think so who said it yesterday?Someone explained it pretty well. It's like

(04:12):
saying Coca Cola has a monopoly onSprite. You know, Sprite is owned
by the Coca Cola company. Butit's this I think it's this fundamental disagreement
that governments seem to have that thegeneral public may or may not agree with.
I don't agree with, but thefederal government seems to have this mindset
that a tech product, if itbecomes successful enough, like the iPhone or

(04:33):
you know, the iOS app store, if it's popular enough, then it
is now just a public inherent good, like it's our right to have access
to the iOS app store. AndApple has too much control over this like
public. They treat it more likea utility. They treat it like the
iPhone is now electricity, Like youcan't we can't have one company in control

(04:57):
of all of the electricity, right. Well, no, that's actually what
we have here with PGENI. Thatsucks. No, the Department of Justice
isn't going to do anything about realmonopolies. But you know, real monopolies
that are jacking up the electricity pricesand there's nothing we can do about it
because there's no other utilities to changeto. Let's not worry about that,
let's focus on Apple. If anything, it's kind of an indirect compliment the

(05:21):
fact that so much of the DepartmentDepartment of Justice is convinced that buying something
other than an iPhone is just notan option. There's a bunch of there's
a bunch of bunch of arguments beingmade both from the European Union and now
in the US that are just about, well, you have complete control over

(05:43):
whatever's on my phone. Well,that's just when it's an iPhone. We
have control over iPhones. But well, what if I want to download something
that's not approved from the iOS appstore? Okay, then I guess buy
an Android phone. I can't buyan Android phone. Then I'd have to
read learn how the user interface works. That's far too much work. It's

(06:04):
like everyone just acknowledging how bad Androidis. Yeah, we're not worried about
the Google monopolies. They saw yourvideo about Android falling, Drew, this
is your fault. Oh dang it. Now you're pushing it back on me
simply so, I says, Thankgod, the government is stepping in so
my iPhone doesn't run as seamlessly asit does right now, Thank you government.

(06:27):
God. I love a big government. They're so smart. Jmundy says,
I was looking at getting the normalM three MacBook Pro, but I
want the USBC port on the right. Okay, then, yeah, I'm
still gonna fall back on. They'reeither M two Pro or M one Pro.
The M three Pro doesn't have thatmany advantages. Will I ever bring
Telos of tech Ultra. I didfor a while, and I felt bad

(06:50):
about it because I offered it asa perk for people who wanted to collab.
But I think people were expecting theirchannels to take off if I came
on them. I don't think theydid, so I felt awkward about it.
So I decided that's just too muchmoney to be routinely charging any fan.
I appreciate any support you guys provide. You helped me out just by

(07:12):
watching so Taylus of tech Max ishonestly quite outrageous as it is, but
Apple should buy up to her.I agree with you. Apple having a
monopoly over secure messaging in the USis true, though I don't think that's
true. I mean, they havethe most simple secure messaging, but you
can use other messaging platforms. Iwould say Meta has a monopoly, more

(07:36):
so because the most popular messaging appin the US is not I Message,
So how could it be a monopoly. It's the only you're convinced that there's
no other texting service that is secure. Just because Meta owns WhatsApp, that
means it's not secure. I thoughtI was into encrypted encrypted now on WhatsApp,

(07:56):
whereas I'm not sure if it's thatway with I Message, because it's
only secure if you're texting other iPhones, So if you're using the Messages app
to text other Androids, it's not. Yeah, So you're saying Apple is
the only company who has figured outa way to send messages securely, and
therefore, because they're the only companythat have figured that out, they should

(08:18):
be forced to offer all of thosetexting services on Android for free, even
though that brings them no revenue,It doesn't help them do anything. It's
just, oh, they should justgive all that away. Who do you
think is the most monopoly, Apple, Google or Meta? I would say
Google has practically a monopoly on theInternet that like search engines. I mean,

(08:41):
you can use other search engines,but I guess no one else does.
I mean, you have the option, So I don't even think it's
really a great case to be madeas a monopoly. I think the government
spends far too much time on thosetech companies and not on true monopolies like
utility companies are far more susceptible tobeing monopolies. Like where I live.
For example, PG and E raisedthe prices of electricity by about thirty percent

(09:07):
at the start of this year,which you know, when a lot of
people drive electric cars, that canbe a huge Imagine if your gasoline just
went up, your gas bill justwent up thirty percent, and you couldn't
stop it. One day, you'repaying you know, three dollars a gallon.
Now you're paying four dollars a gallonover the you know, just over
a week, and there's there's noregulation on that. Or the same thing

(09:30):
with internet service providers. There's abunch of places where Comcast is the only
internet provider in Comcast is of courseevil and horrible, and they have terrible
customer service, and they intentionally raisetheir prices and hope that you don't notice,
and you call and complain, andthen they lower them back again.
There's a bunch of monopolistic companies likethat that I could think of, but

(09:54):
no, I don't even think.Maybe you could argue Google has a monopoly
on video content online just because ifyou want to post content and monetize it,
YouTube is pretty much the only option, and they control a lot of
what you can and can't post onYouTube. I'm grateful for that, but
there's really no alternative for someone whowants to post video entertainment. I would

(10:18):
say iOS, I think in theUS is at about sixty percent market share,
But if anything, to me,that's proof that it's not a monopoly.
It's a duopoly between iOS and Android. Android still has a fairly large
percentage of the market and offers alot of different things that iPhones don't offer.
I know a lot of people thathate iPhones and don't want to use

(10:41):
them, So imagine if gas wentup thirty percent overnight and you couldn't do
anything about it. That literally happenedin twenty twenty two. Yeah, but
at least you've got multiple options topull from. Again, I don't think
that's right, but oil is alreadyheavily subsidized as I guess. I had

(11:01):
an EV then, so I don'tremember. PGENI is regulated by the Public
Service Commission, cracks some more government, well not enough. They're not doing
anything about it. They just wokeup and said, let's raise all the
prices like crazy. Why wouldn't youswitch to a thirteen mini lightning? That's
the only reason. It's not aboutmarket share. Well, are you gonna

(11:22):
say any company with monopolytic monopolistic practicesis evil even if they have less than
one percent market share? Should thegovernment and get involved? I mean,
how many Android smart watches only workwith Android? I'm pretty sure that's how
the pixel watch works. But theDepartment of Justice isn't suing Google for making

(11:43):
sure the pixel watch only works withThey're a victim of their own success,
Department of Justice. Because you haveencrypted messaging, you are legally required to
help Meta and Android with their weakersecurity messaging services. See that's the funny
thing. I'm pretty sure Meta hasto end encryption on WhatsApp. WhatsApp is
far closer to being a you know, market share one type thing. Google

(12:09):
has a huge, huge advantage overall the other search engines. It's kind
of impossible to use anything else.I don't know if you want, if
you want to access a lot ofsmartphones, I guess you've got to play
by Apple's rules. But I thinkit's a it's a difficult economy. I

(12:33):
mean, that's that's the funny thingis that's not really what the Department of
Justice is going after with the lawsuit. But if you're going to make the
argument for monopoly, the app storestuff is a much better, uh,
much better argument to be made,because you're trying to argue that, like
smartphones have been so successful now,they're so popular now that if you develop

(12:54):
an app or a service or somethingand you want it to be accessible on
smartphones, you have to play byApple and Google's rule. But funny that
Apple gets all of the criticism andGoogle's just eh. But I guess maybe
it's because sideloadings easier on Android.The funny thing about dooj wanting Apple Watch
and Android. Is that it hurtAndroid watch sales a lot and not make
any iOS user switch. That's funny. It would probably You're right, It

(13:18):
would probably result in Apple watch salesdoing better and that Apple would be even
more of a monopoly. Is that? What's the end result here? If
this is all Apple news becomes overthe next ten years, is just more
and more governments cracking down on Apple. Are they gonna get broken up?
I'm kind of interested in that subject. How would we break apart Apple?

(13:39):
If we had to break them up? Would you turn AirPods into its own
business and then the iPhone into itsown business? Would Vision Pro become its
own separate company? I don't know. Google announces AI government laws at Apple
announces AI rumored collab with Google.I can't keep up with these myths which

(14:03):
he thinks Android being a competitor meansApple is a monopoly, but making so
many excuses to why Google and YouTubeare monopoly even though there are ten times
more video site options to choose from, Well, there's no there's probably one
hundred different versions, but none ofthem are going to have the CPMs You
need to actually generate income, whichis why I don't personally think like I
just said, I don't think Googleshould be broken apart as a monopoly.

(14:28):
But I'm saying if you were lookingat a big tech company. The question
earlier was asking specifically between Apple,Google, and Meta, who's the closer
to monopoly, I would say youhave a better argument to be made with
Google because of their domination with searchand purely if we just look at market
share, iOS versus Android is fairlysplit down the middle. But it's not
like YouTube is sixty percent in Twitchis like forty percent. No YouTube is

(14:52):
like ninety five percent of you know, monetized online video con of all the
revenue generated YouTube is like not evenNo one comes close to YouTube in regards
to where to find online I guessit's TikTok now too, so you've got
to compete with that. But it'sa very very different you know, one's
very short form focused, ones verylong form focused. It's almost apples and

(15:16):
oranges. They're trying to bleed moreinto each other. Again, what I
acknowledge in the case of Google andYouTube, and the same way I acknowledge
it with Apple in the app store, is that it's not easy to run
a site as large as YouTube,all of the servers to pay for all
of the advertiser revenue to take in, and know how to distribute it among

(15:37):
the videos. It's not easy tojust get that up and running. In
fact, we've seen with examples likeVimeo, they actually punish people when the
video gets too big. They say, you have to pay us, or
we're gonna take this video down becauseit's causing us too much traffic and our
servers can't handle it. So mypoint is for a giant, you know,
worldwide site as successful and as bigas YouTube to actually function, you

(16:00):
kind of need a giant, multibillion dollar, trillion dollar company to be
powering the whole thing. I know, it's on one hand it's like,
well it's too big, let's breakit up. So we have like fifteen
different video sites to distribute the adrevenue from, but not one small company
is actually capable of maintaining all ofthat server on the back end, maintaining

(16:22):
all of the different monetization programs,and making sure that you know, you
don't have creators that shouldn't be monetizedgetting monetized, because that ticks off the
advertisers. They don't want their adsbeing shown on certain types of content,
so there has to be some moderationinvolved. It's just a big mess.
And in the same way, Iknow that too late. How do I

(16:45):
feel about ADO I did a videoon ad blockers. I think they're not
they're not illegal, but they're morallywrong and they don't result. If everyone
used an ad blocker, that wewouldn't be There would be no YouTube.
It would just shut down. Thereis a situation in where which the world
can work with a combination of adsand paying to get rid of ads,
because the creators you watch need toget a cut, otherwise it's not worth

(17:08):
their time to post stuff. Thedistributor needs to get a cut because it's
not free to maintain this whole website, send out updates and make sure that
everybody on earth can watch whatever videoyou want within a matter of minutes.
That's not free to maintain. That'snot free to ensure as always working.
So the distributor needs a cut,the creator needs a cut. AD blocker
just involves no one getting a cut. So the more people that use ad

(17:29):
blockers, the worse the ads get. The less people that use ad blockers,
the more the creators get paid,so there's not really a sufficient end
goal with ad blockers. It's thesame to me. Ad blocking is kind
of the same concept as pickpocketing oryou know, shoplifting. It's like we'll,
you know, we'll stealing a candybar from seven to eleven make the

(17:51):
company go bankrupt. No, butthat doesn't mean it's you know, okay.
YouTube Premium is the best ad blocker. I agree. YouTube Premium supports
the creators you want to watch.It gets rid of the ads, assuming
the creator isn't too sponsor heavy,which I know is a different problem,
but that's just why I don't watcha lot of creators that are too sponsor
heavy. But I'm pretty sure thenext version of Chrome is gonna significantly limit

(18:14):
ad blockers. Good. I'm infavor of it. I mean, I
don't understand why people get upset bythat. Like, no, why is
Google cracking down on ad block what? Why do you think you think they're
gonna be okay with it? Good? YouTube should come up with another idea.
They should pull all of the moneyfrom this guy. What do you
think about Netflix with ads? It'sa simple concept. If it's cheaper,

(18:40):
it's free with ads that usually advertisement. No one really likes ads. You
just have ads as another form ofpayment. If you don't want to pay
for this service, then you watcha commercial and that's how you paid for
it. I don't agree with adblockers, but at the same time,
I can see why people use them. YouTube has way too many ads and
YouTube premium is way too expensive itI understand the desire in the same way

(19:03):
I understand why someone might want toshoplift something. Okay, now you can
get a candy bar for free.Does that make it right? No?
Not really. There's not a solutionin which everybody just switches to ad blockers.
That's how the whole site falls apart. We just answered the question the
video title with yes, So iOSand ipedoes get actively better, I don't

(19:26):
think. I don't think breaking upApple would actually make it better personally.
I think the reason Apple software andhardware is so good is because it's all
so well integrated, and then youhave cross collaboration between the teams, not
ipedos. There's no ipedos team thatdoesn't exist. If you want YouTube to
go broke, then don't use theservice. Oh my god, No,

(19:51):
I'm not sorry. I'm not puttingup with that I don't want to hear
about that. It's like, Okay, if you want to take down YouTube,
stop using it, because it's mylivelihood. You wouldn't know who I
was. You wouldn't know who Iam if it weren't for YouTube. I
wouldn't have a job if it weren'tfor them. I've a seething hatred for
ads, but I want to supportmy favorite creators and services. I'm more
than willing to pay and feel goodabout blocking ads. Well, the best

(20:15):
way to do that is through YouTubepremium, that's for sure. And by
the way, the more people thatuse ad blockers, that's why the ads
on YouTube get worse, is becausethere's more people using the site's services but
not not paying for it through adsor through YouTube premium, so you're just
pushing the ads onto someone else.It's kind of it's kind of rude in

(20:37):
my opinion. They should lower YouTubePremium's price so they get more subscribers.
I wish, but there's a there'san equilibrium point where it's like, this
is how much it costs to supportthe creators. This is how much it
costs to maintain the back end.So yeah, it would be nice if
the iPhone was a dollar instead ofa thousand. But it's just not it's
not feasible. I hate regulation,but I do want someone to force Apple

(21:03):
to open up their products to makethem better. I mean, I'm in
favor of basically Apple doing what theywant. Personally, I don't think they've
reached the size where that's the wholeconcept of with a monopoly is that people
have lost the ability to choose,Like you cannot choose anything other than Apple,
and I think that is the casewith like utility companies or a lot

(21:25):
of internet service providers, where simplybased on where you live, you cannot
go with another company. This isthe only brand you can use for internet
access, or electricity, or gasor water. This is the only company
you have there. But treating theiPhone itself or the iOS app store as
the only way to use a phoneor the only app store you can possibly

(21:48):
use, I don't see that.I don't look at the iPhone as a
utility. I still looked at itas a product. If you don't like
it, you don't have to buyit. There are still plenty of people
in my life that do not buyiPhones. Hate to break it to you,
but they're still perfectly capable of texting. They can still text, they
can still communicate, they can stillget the job done, they can check
emails, they can watch videos.This concept that the iPhone is like the

(22:11):
only way to use a smartphone,I just don't buy it. Yeah,
the best way to do it isYouTube Premium Family. That's what we do
as well, and then we splitit between the six people, So we
end up paying about four dollars amonth for YouTube Premium. That's a lot
cheaper. That's Getting rid of YouTubeMusic wouldn't change anything, because when you

(22:33):
get rid of ads on YouTube,could you could YouTube music. The app
is just a UI, it doesn't. All it is is pulling YouTube videos
that are songs because people just uploadmusic to YouTube as a video or as
an album. So YouTube Music isnot some like additional back end cost.
All YouTube Music is just an appthat makes it look like a Spotify or

(22:56):
like an Apple Music app, butit's still just pulling from the same YouTube
servers. That's why they let youswitch between. So taking out the YouTube
Music part of the subscription wouldn't reallychange anything. The point is there's a
certain price you have to pay inorder to cover people's lack of ad watching,
whether it be listening to music orwatching videos. So I don't see

(23:18):
how removing the music app would changeanything because you could just open the YouTube
app and play the play the musicvideos. People upload them like that.
So there's something more to this thanclaiming it's a monopoly. Google won't limit
ad blockers because there's a clear signto the DJ that they're a monopoly.
I don't think ad blockers are protectedunder I mean, you don't have to

(23:41):
use Google Chrome, right, youcan use another browser if you want,
But I'm guessing that browser is goingto make substantially less money because the only
people who are going to use thead blocking supportive browser are the people who
don't want to pay for things.If Apple allowed third party marketplace, they
could have avoided the whole thing,but because they know they're monopoly when it

(24:02):
comes to iOS entry, they didn't. Well, here's my point. iOS
market share is growing, and especiallyif we look at the difference between consumer
spending, people are way more comfortablespending money with the iOS app store than
they are on other app stores.So the revenue generated from the mobile app
marketplace, Apple has a huge chunkof that market. So what it means

(24:26):
is Apple has done something right withthe iOS app store to make it feel
safe, to make it feel reliable, to make customers feel more willing to
spend money on that app store.And when you have a more open,
less regulated, more side loaded altstore or whatever, more third party app
marketplace, people are less likely tospend money on that app store because they

(24:51):
don't feel as comfortable with it.They feel like there's more malware, they
feel like there's more scams. Soit's funny to me that THEOS app store
is the most successful and everyone's askingwhy can't Apple be more like the more
unsuccessful platforms that resulted in people spendingless money. In reality, sure,
it's frustrating that you got to payApple the fifteen percent fee or whatever.

(25:15):
Again, all of this to say, the Department of Justice isn't really going
after the app store. They're goingafter Apple Watch iPhone compatibility and texting,
which has really already been solved withthe RCS compatibility thing that Apple already agreed
to. But the app store isa much more interesting argument, which is
why I know people want to fallback to that because it's actually there's a

(25:38):
better case to be made there.But I would make the case that if
it was more open and it wasn'tas well regulated and it was more like
other platforms, it probably would haveresulted in consumer spending less money on the
app market, which means developers andthe businesses that develop apps would have less
revenue. So there is I thinka case to be made that maybe having

(26:03):
a more lockdown first party approach tothe app market. Because the iOS app
store has been far, far,far, far more successful than the Apple
App Store on the Mac. It'slike, well they did it with the
Mac, yeah, and it wasn'tas good. That didn't take off as
well. They're not asking you toallow every app on their store. They're

(26:23):
asking you to allow the user toput any app store they see fit.
Who's asking it's not the Department ofJustice. I don't know what who's asking.
You can't argue in bad faith thatApple can't have monopoly on their own
software. But once they ship outthat phone, it's not theirs. It
belongs to the user and they getto decide what goes on their phone.

(26:45):
I mean, I don't think that'sexactly true. It's the same thing as
like you can buy a song,that doesn't mean you own the distribution rights
to that song. It means youcan play that song on your headphones in
your car, But that doesn't meanyou own the royal. Apple still own
owns the royalty. They get todecide what software gets to be booted up
on that phone. So while yes, you own the phone, Apple's not

(27:08):
be forced or required to make softwarechanges based on your will. And if
you don't like it, don't buyan iPhone. I keep falling back to
this. If what makes you feellike you are forced to buy an iPhone
like you cannot buy another phone thatallows you to do sideloading. Buy the
fairphone. People, If you reallywant a more repair ability focused, open

(27:29):
platform that lets you install what youwant to install, why aren't you'll buy
in fairphones. Fairphones look great.It feels like they prioritize everything you want.
I think you should support the companyyou want with your money. People
don't understand that Apple is selling aplatform itself rather than individual products that work
with any platform or service. Ijust think that it's the operating system in

(27:53):
the platform that's part of the reasonit's done so well. It's super successful.
And then we can, and thenthe Department of Justice is angry that
it was successful. It should bemore like the unsuccessful platforms. It's like,
how dare you give consumers what they'reasking for? Apple built the house
and they're renting it to you.Yeah, that's pretty much a better way

(28:15):
to look at it. According toFerrari, if you buy their cars,
you can't modify them in any way. Well, I mean, you can
do what you want. The government'snot going to come in your house and
arrest you for you know, jailbreaking your iPhone or whatever. But Apple's
not forced to make it easy foryou. That's the difference. This uses

(28:38):
the product that you could use itexactly how you want it. Apple's not
going to break in. The pointis Apple's not allow Apple's not being forced,
at least in the US. Yet. Apple is not forced to make
sideloading and alt stores easy. That'smy point. If they design the software,
they're still in charge of that.If you want to rip apart the

(29:00):
phone and turn it into some Frankensteinthing, you can do whatever you want
with it. They're not going tostop you, but they're not required to
help you. Fairphone got rid ofthe headphone Jack, Oh my god,
Oh that's hilarious. Remember Google createsthe engine that most browsers are based on,
so ad blocking being limited would bemore widespread. Well, why does

(29:21):
everybody want to use the Google engine? It's a ridiculous ploy to sell fair
buds. It was ridiculous. Ohso even fairphone is doing what Apple does.
They're kind of forced in Europe toopen it up. But that's as
we're seeing malicious compliance. If thishappened ten years ago with the EU have

(29:44):
demanded to allow jail breaking, that'skind of another way to look at it,
I guess. But no, jailbreaking is not illegal, just to
be clear. I mean, it'sharder and harder to do. But again,
if you don't like it, don'tbuy an iPhone. The idea that
Apple should be forced to allow anysoftware feature you want, I don't know.

(30:11):
I think there's a certain level ofentitlement people have with it of just
like I own it. It's mine, so let me do anything. Let
me pirate all of the movies.If I can't do it, why would
you stop me from pirting all thecontent? Why would you stop me from
scamming people? You know, It'slike if these are the terms and conditions
you agree to when you have anApple ID. This is what happens.

(30:37):
If you don't agree to those terms, then okay, that's how the free
market works. But my point is, this is what a lot of people
are actively choosing. The companies thatallowed the freedom of choice, that allowed
the more open platform, they didn'tperform as well. The general public didn't
want that, they didn't choose that. They chose to go with the more

(30:59):
locked down, closed off ecosystem becausethat one felt better, that felt safer,
and they felt more comfortable spending theirmoney there. So government's basically forcing
companies to make worse inferior hardware andsoftware. In my opinion, it's like,
if this didn't work, then Idon't think the companies would do it.

(31:22):
But if it doesn't work, andif it annoys the consumers enough,
then they won't buy it. That'show free market works, right. The
company that prioritizes the software and featuresthat matter to them will either reap the
benefits because lots of people want that, or they will suffer the consequences because
people don't like that, so thesales will decline. It feels like an

(31:48):
attempt to punish Apple for being successful. Apples a private company and should design
products and services as it sees fit. No one is forced to buy from
Apple. I agree subconsciously, youstill think of these things as Android,
and all things Android is bad.No, dude, I have an Android
phone. I've never said I hateAndroid. I said I think iOS is

(32:12):
better. I love the Pixel eightI almost switched to it because it was
so good, but there are somany great, cheaper alternatives with great hardware
on the Android side. I reallydon't see Android as bad. I just
see it as different, and Isee iOS is prioritizing more of what I
care about, And I acknowledge thesame thing with Google managing YouTube. I

(32:34):
acknowledge that building a reliable and bigplatform with your own hardware and your own
software running on it, it's noteasy. It's not easy. It's not
you know, it's very complicated tobuild out the whole ecosystem and the whole
market and everything, which is whyI think it's fair for Apple to take
a cut. It's the same waygrocery stores take a cut of third party
products that they sell. Walmart takesa cut of all the items in there,

(32:59):
and then they have in house brandstuff that's cheaper this This happens with
lots of businesses, and it justextended on into the app store market as
well. I love this phone,by the way, a giant brick.
I wish more companies would make crazy, crazy brick phones like this. It's
like a month long battery life.I love this thing, but for my

(33:22):
day to day life and for continuitycamera like I'm doing right now. Because
Apple had great collaboration between the teamsof we had the same company and control
of mac os in the same companyand control of iOS, they were able
to make this simple system where Ican just select my iPhone as an option,
put it up here, and boom, and now I have an external
camera for my Mac. It's frombeing all that native, built in integrated

(33:47):
software and hardware that made this workso seamlessly and so smoothly. Instead of
relying through some cheap, crappy thirdparty app, which I've tried to do
on this and then they have watermarkseverywhere they want you to pay to get
rid of it. No, Instead, Apple, through their ecosystem, was
able to make this simple, intuitivefeature work naturally without the need of downloading
a third party app. Or whateveroptions are good. I don't think all

(34:13):
companies should be forced to run theexact same way. Apple's dominance in the
US market is solely due to theirsuccess in the smartphone space, and now
they're being punished for being so goodat it. Yeah, pretty much easier
for surveillance. Oh yeah, well, if you don't want government surveillance,
I hate to break it to you, but you got to live in a
cabin in the woods without electricity.Whether it legally qualifies as a monopoly,

(34:36):
I don't know, but obviously it'sApple. But obviously Apple's dominance in the
US market warrants some scrutiny from regulators. USA has been willfully behind on consumer
rights. I think maybe to me, the best argument was when they were
prohibiting Spotify from just advertising in theApp Store, Like obviously other app devs
can advertise, But when Spotify wantedto run a promo for Spotify Premium,

(35:00):
Apple just straight up said no,you can't advertise that, basically because it
competes with Apple Music. And Iwas like, Okay, that's kind of
selective. I was like, thatseems a little bit over the line.
So there's an argument to be madethat they make some unfair practices, but
none of what the Department of Justiceis really pushing has been logical to me,
Like the Apple Watch should be compatiblewith Android, which is funny because

(35:25):
that would probably we can Android watchsales if it was, or that because
it's hard. The bill was ridiculous. They were bringing up that. Well,
the firephone tried to come out,but it couldn't compete with the iPhone,
so all the competition died because noone wanted to buy the firephone.
So it's like, now you're madat Apple because the firephone failed, or

(35:47):
you're mad because there's a different Peoplesaid, if I stop using an iPhone
and switch to something else, theuser has to learn a different user interface.
It's like, oh no, it'sApple's fault that the iPhone user interface
is so good. Now if Itry to learn Android, I'll be confused.
Darn you Apple, And yeah,Google does the exact same thing.

(36:09):
I would say, leave the governmentout of tech it. Yeah, Phil
Collins is saying leave government out oftech. Enlisteners a real monopoly. I
would argue that there's a lot ofmonopolies. It's not so much in the
big tech space. Depends on thefield, but there's a lot of internet
service providers and utility companies that Iwould argue is much much closer. I

(36:32):
know a lot of people that likethe Windows Phone, but I guess not
enough did because they killed it off. It's just funny that Apple gets blamed
for killing off something that Microsoft failedat. Now Microsoft and Amazon's failure is
being pushed on Apple. Yeah.Surprisingly, the Department of Justice was not
going too much over the app store. They were mainly just talking about ecosystem

(36:52):
compatibility, and they were complaining thatwhen you text someone that doesn't have an
iPhone, it's all pixelated, andit's like, yeah, well again,
you can most people. The mostcommon messaging app in the US is not
I Message, by the way,it's Facebook Messenger, and that hosts all
the pictures and videos you send forfree, so most people are using other

(37:13):
messaging services anyway. But that problemhas already been alleviated with Apple announcing ARCS
support, which is coming later thisyear, so you will be able to
send high quality pictures and videos andstill have all the reactions. So I
Message for Android users should be improved, or the texting I should say,
between Android and iOS should be alot better. Some have argued it's because

(37:36):
the ecosystem locks you in, butI don't even think that was a good
argument. I mean, you canuse a ton of Google services on Apple
hardware. To be honest, Imean, there's things that lock you in,
I guess, but it's usually it'snot so much of a lock as
it is. It's just so convenient, and the alternative is just to not
have those kinds of features. Likeif I bought a Chromebook and pixel phone,

(38:00):
I wouldn't have this continuity camera feature. So is Apple wrong for locking
me into the ecosystem with that coolfeature? I don't know. I don't
think it's Apple's fault. And yeah, most of the world uses WhatsApp,
which is not owned by Apple.The Firephone is part of their claim.
They used the Firephone as an exampleof like see they stifled the competitors.

(38:22):
Firephone failed because the iPhone was better. Drew has become way less partisan about
Android versus iOS. He's been fairand open mind mid towind testing the Pixel
Thank you, Michael, I appreciateyou saying that I noticed Amazon, Google,
and Meta all spend significant amounts morefor lobbying than Apple could. This
be the result. Well, thereare some antitrust cases against them too,

(38:45):
But yeah, Apple's been cutting backon all their employees and all their spending.
Choosing convenience is Apple's fault. Yeah, Apple made a better platform.
How dare they can use a pixelas a USB webcam on pretty much everything,
including a MacBook? Yay good,that's great, That's wonderful. But

(39:07):
I like to do it wirelessly.So that's Apple's fault for letting me have
that option be wireless. I thinkit's more the physical products. They're saying
lock you in. They're saying it'snot as easy to switch platforms because it's
expensive, But that goes both ways. Yeah, I don't know why that
falls on Apple. If I buya pixel and a pixel Watch and I

(39:28):
want to switch to an iPhone,now I have to buy an Apple watch
because the pixel Watch won't work oniOS. So is that Google's fault?
Does the government? Should the governmentget involved? Now? There's so many
things the government could be doing better, like public transportation or health This is
the last thing I think they shouldbe wasting their time on. Healthcare,
especially in the US, is agiant train wreck. Public transportation also doesn't

(39:52):
get enough priority. There's so manyother things. I feel like, are
the military spends way too much moneyin general? Will they blame kindall tablet's
failure because of the iPad? Yeah, that's kind of the argument they're making.
Thank you Chris Norton, by theway for the super chat that was
totally unnecessary. Very kind of you. Yes, due, Apple is wrong

(40:12):
for trying to make their features easyto use no matter what hardware you get
from them. I guess they're madthat Apple doesn't put you know, like
the W one air pods chip whereyou know, you open the lid and
it pops up and you hit connect. They should supply the silicon to their
competitors. I mean, they letthe find my network be open. I
think there's been some proof of Applebeing more open minded on their standards and

(40:36):
stuff. They let Apple Music workon cars that don't have CarPlay now they
made it kind of easier to accessfor the masses. Same thing with the
find My Network. Like I said, you can integrate devices and chips into
things that Apple doesn't make. Iagree those two things are more important,

(40:57):
far more important than these big techcompanies which are just forcused on trying to
make the better, more easier touse product. Yeah, let's say healthcare,
public transportation, and lowering military spending. That's you know, if I
was president, that would be myfocus. Those three things are probably far
more crucial and far more important thanHey, I have to use a different

(41:21):
interface if I stop using an iPhone. If you really care about sideloading,
don't buy an iPhone. That's that'show I feel. But some people want
a more closed, locked in,well optimized operating system. Some people want
those safety parameters. So are wesupposed to eliminate the option for the general

(41:42):
public? Are we supposed to eliminatethe option to have a first party controlled
experience if we want to have amore closed off ecosystem if someone wants that,
which a lot of people do.A lot of people don't want to
have to download the meta app Storeand the Epic Game Store, and you
know, people don't want to haveto have sixteen different launchers. That's what
happened on Windows. To be honest, that's one of the reasons I've never

(42:05):
said I hate Android. I havesaid I hate Windows on the record.
Part of the reason is because there'dbe like fifteen different games and they would
all want you to download their ownlauncher because and that weakens the experience.
It makes it more clunky, Itdoesn't make it as simple or intuitive,
even though each developer is going,well, if we put our game on
Steam, we have to pay thirtypercent to Steam. If we put our
game on Epic, we have topay twelve percent to Epic. So instead

(42:28):
you add all these different game libraries, you got fifteen different and then every
time you turn on the computer ithas to load every single one of them.
We got more updates for you toinstall. So rather than that,
Apple said, let's keep it simple. Let's make just one app store that
controls the whole platform. And thenthat platform ended up becoming the best one.
So it seems like maybe people wantedRichard, thank you for the Super

(42:50):
ten. Didn't Nokia have fifty percentmarket share when Apple released the iPhone.
Apple created a better product than consumersresponded by buying it. Ugh, Nokia
stupid monopoly at fifty percent. Well, let's look up definition of monopoly just
so we're clear on that. Whatwill come first another lawsuit for Apple or
the new iPads? Probably another lawsuitat this point, Apple selling the M

(43:14):
chips to others like nothing, Google, Microsoft would be interesting if they want
to. I've got no problem withthat. It's the company's choice in my
opinion. But if they would liketo keep their silicon in house and have
only them access it, I thinkthat's also their choice. But then you
can get different deals on games.Again, it's your choice. If you

(43:36):
want to do that, you can. But if another company decides no,
we just want to have one appstore, so you don't have to have
fifteen different launchers, Okay, youbuy the product that fits you best.
We reached a point where all thecompanies were doing the exact same thing.
I guess maybe get a regulator involved. But now we have very different companies
doing very different approaches to software.I only have Minecraft launch. Didn't think

(44:00):
that was a thing. Another game. I got my girlfriend of Windows laptop
so she can play the SIMS.Turns out the launcher isn't supported with that
laptop. Ooh fun. So nowit's just oh it works on Windows.
Oh no, it's not that simple. Which windows are we talking about here?
Thank you for the super chat,by the way, Richard, that
was very kind of you. Yeah, I for the most part, and

(44:22):
in favor of the free market.I mean, there's certain times where the
government should get involved. I justI don't personally believe this is one of
them. For Apple Watch compatibility,and if you're worried about texting being inferior
on non Apple devices, RCS isgoing to solve eighty percent of those problems.
Hey, if the government getting involvedresults in the wallet app coming to

(44:45):
Android, is that how this isgoing to end. It's like companies have
to have advantages over each other.That's the point of competition, right.
The whole point of having companies competeagainst each other is one company has advantages
and they try to enhance those advantages. So Apple's advantage was designing their own

(45:07):
silicon, designing their own software,trying to make it more efficient, more
powerful. So they leaned into themore creative outworks of like audio engineering and
video editing and software engineering, andWindows leaned more into the let's have open
platform game devs will feel more comfortablebringing their games over here. So now

(45:28):
Windows advantages is more in the gameaccess, all of the different libraries you
can access, and way more gamesupport, way more customization. You can
put it on any hardware you want. So they both lean into the different
demands of the market. Apple leanedinto one demand, Windows and Microsoft lead
into another same thing. Google founda different demand for the market of having
more control over your home screen orthe apps on your phone, and so

(45:52):
Android leaned into that. Apple leanedinto the simplicity of just making sure everything
worked and trying to keep things consistent. So, yeah, no competition means
no growth. I agree. Ithink it's important that all these companies actually
have very different approaches. I don'tthink we should have Google try to be
more like Apple, and I don'tthink we should have Apple try to be

(46:13):
more like Google. They should justtry to figure out what their audiences care
more about and lean into those advantages, and then you can buy the one
that fits your advantage's best. Andif a product doesn't sell all that well,
it's probably because it's not leaning toomuch into other it's not leaning into
a demand. There's not a lotof people asking for whatever that product or

(46:34):
services. Unreal cousin says, whatdo you mean about Apple Music without CarPlay?
Do you mean without your phone becauseI play Apple Music on my twenty
thirteen car. Yeah, well,I mean in the old days, it
was hard to get like native AppleMusic support in the infotainment without Bluetooth or
without car play. But now likeTesla's, for example, have Apple Music

(46:55):
support. Portia's got Apple Music supportstreaming straight to the car. You don't
have to have your phone, youdon't have to have CarPlay. It just
you log in on there and itworks. Samsung Notes now won't sync to
any Window device that isn't a GalaxyBook. Really frustrating. You can own
a fifteen hundred dollars Samsung phone andthey want to upsell a Galaxy book.

(47:15):
Get the government involved with sounds wrong. No Apple users want all the Apple
features. No. macOS is infinitelysuperior to Windows. As an os,
I feel like most people I know. I know I've said this a million
times, but I'm gonna say ita million more. Most people I know
that like Windows they like it becauseit has some third party software that they

(47:38):
need, whether it be a videogame or a work application that's not available
on mac Whereas I know a lotof people that like mac Os just as
an os. It's not about well, I like macOS because it has final
cut. It's like no, Ilike macOS because of how they designed this
or how it integrates with my phone, or how it supports this, or

(47:58):
how they designed this. I seemore appreciation for the actual design with mac
os and with Windows it's usually well, I like Windows because it runs blah
blah blah. Google probably does havea monopoly on browsers. Chromium browsers make
up a huge majority. Basically Firefoxis the only non chronium alternative, along
with some forks. But yeah,I mean it works, which is probably

(48:21):
why it's so popular. So that'sthat's where I take issue. Is like
when people have no other options andare getting price gouged, I just I
refuse to believe that. I havea hard time believing that there's a lot
of people out there just living inthe I have to buy an iPhone.
I have to use an iPhone.There's no alternative. It's like, there's
probably a cheaper alternative. As someonewho's reviewed Android phones, you can get

(48:44):
way better hardware for way less money, and then people, well, I'm
bullied into buying it. It's like, Okay, I don't think the government
should get involved because of you know, someone trying to peer pressure you.
All right, get the nukes.Sigmund June super chat it is there benefits
to the US economy. If Appleloses to the Department of Justice, surely

(49:06):
a weekend Apple isn't beneficial at atime the economy is already in a state
of decline. Yeah, I don'thonestly know what the Department of Justice's end
result is. Probably just to slapApple with a bunch of fines so they
can collect a few billion dollars.They probably know that if they go after
Apple they'll get a lot of moneyout of it. So yeah, I

(49:29):
don't think there's much. Let's see, Windows had its glory, it's over
now. Pixels just are now gettingvideo out. You can sink messages between
all devices if they're all Pixels witha Google account, but have to use
messages for Web otherwise a feature thatonly works with other Pixels. How dare
they They should be forced to addthat compatibility with Ilios Microsoft being as viable

(49:53):
if you like reward programs, butthat's it rewards program Yeah, I agree.
I think. I think if webroke up Apple into separate companies,
it would probably just make the hardwaremore distorted and more confusing. Is Google
funding the Department of Justice with this? I hope not. Whenplus does that

(50:14):
a little bit as well, ordid it seems to be the obvious direction
Everyone is going, well, yeah, it's just it's not evil or something.
It just makes sense that if you'rein control of hardware and software,
or if you have control of bothends of the user experience, you can
probably come up with some advantages thatno one else could. You know,
makes sense to me. A lotof people like mac os because the terminal

(50:36):
app gives you access to the Unixcommand's line and all that Unix terminals tool.
Yeah, it's again, they havetheir advantages. You buy the one
that fits your advantages, the onethat matters to you. When Hen says
I thought the whole thing was restrictiveaccess to APIs. I love my Garment
smartwatch because it's better front doors,but without notification management, it's more annoying
than the Apple Watch. I couldsee them cracking down on that. I

(51:01):
suppose a restrictive access to APIs.I guess the debate is like, well,
if Apple wants to give certain advantagesto their Apple Watch, is that
inherently wrong? Like? Are theywrong to want their product to have advantages
over the competition, or should theymake sure that anytime they come up with

(51:22):
a new feature for their AirPods orfor their Apple Watch, they have to
also make sure that all of thosesame features are available on all of the
competitors hardware, which is going totake more time, more software development and
already understaffed software team. Are theytrying to make iOS like Android? That's
what's going to be the difference betweenthem. I guess. I mean they're

(51:45):
not mad at Android. It seemsI bought all Google Nest stuff, ended
up returning it after I realized itwas limited. Yeah, it would be
real funny if Apple's lawyers are watchingthe stream and taking notes. I'll do
it. Apple, you can payme. I'll be your lawyer. A
little bit off topic, but doyou think that there will be an iPhone
sixteen plus or is the mini willcome back? There's no current evidence that

(52:07):
the minis are coming back, soyeah, there will be a sixteen plus
most likely. Honestly, Google wouldhave conflicted feelings about this lawsuit. In
some ways it could help them,but in other ways they could be next.
Yeah. I was gonna say that'sa good point. There's a lot
of things that they're mad at Applefor doing that. Lots of other companies
are also doing It's just Apple's themost successful company doing it, so that's

(52:29):
probably why the DOJ is going afterthem first. And then if they knocked
down Apple a few pigs, theneverybody else probably falls in line. It's
I don't think providing API access tojust the Apple Watch or something, but
you can offload text messaging stuff.I remember using a Fitbit with my iPhone

(52:50):
and I could get notifications on that. There were certain notification features that I
don't think the Fitbit had next tothe Apple Watch. But still, should
Apple be forced to make sure everyfeature is available? You know? Do
they have to bring the activity ringsto the third party competitors? Now?
You could just take a note onkeeping it would sync with an iPhone and

(53:13):
an Android on Windows or Mac.I don't really even like it that much,
but it's convenient enough if you havea lot of devices. So much.
Should sue Apple for killing the miniiPhone? Please that I would get
behind that lawsuit. Bring back themini phone? Michael Pepper, Texas.
Seems like the irony in this allis that they don't want each company to
have specific features limited to each company. Isn't competition existing only when there are

(53:36):
differences, right, It's like,okay, where are the differences supposed to
be just in the logos or thehardware. It's like, we want all
software to be compatible with all hardware, and all of the features are the
same. So you just you buythe pixel watch because it's round, or
you buy the Apple Watch because it'ssquare. That's the only You're not allowed

(53:58):
to give yourself too much of anadvantage. Yeah, I don't think anyone
actually believes that. I think they'rejust going after Apple because they know they're
big and successful at this, theyknow they can slap a big fine on
them. I don't think that anyoneactually believes we need to get to a
point where every phone has the exactsame APIs and as the exact same app
stores, and it doesn't matter whichone you use, they all work the

(54:21):
same, and every watch and everyheadphone works with every I think that makes
it a little too there's only hardwareadvantages. But I don't know. I
think that makes it a bit boring. Even says thank you for the stream,
I'm stuck in a boring meeting.I'm sorry. I might have to

(54:43):
end it a little early, though. In fairness, Google and Microsoft have
both been heavily scrutinized by regulators acrossthe world, especially Windows in Europe.
I guess anybody that's too successful isjust going to get penalized for it.
I suppose the popularity of Apple vicesamong members of Congress far outstrips that of
any other brand. A survey byThe Hill has found of the one hundred

(55:06):
and two lawmakers whose officers responded tothe Hills question, that makes sense.
I I like my iPhone, butthey're just mad that their iPhone isn't doing
some other Android feature because they don'twant to switch to Android. It's easier
for me to sue Apple and turnthem into Android than it is for me
to get a different phone. Yeah, I agree. I mean you could

(55:30):
argue a lot of utilities and alot of you know, QR code scanning
and boarding passes and digital payment systems, and now I guess you could argue
that smartphones are slowly becoming more ofa right than a privilege, Like it's

(55:50):
honestly probably going to be easier ina few years to take away someone's driver's
license than it is their phone.If it's not an iPhone, it's not
an iPhone, that's right, Randomchannel says, if I'm quite honest,
with Apple being repair guy unfriendly andone thousand dollars computers with eight gigs of
RAM, I find it hard torecommend MAX compared to your average Window PC,
especially for talking gaming. Sure,don't recommend them if you don't want

(56:14):
them. I've never tried to convincesomeone who's used a PC that they should
switch to Mac, just to beclear, because I understand how many differences
there are between the platform. Ihave, however, had lots of people
with MAX ask me which Mac theythink they should get. I've also never
told people on this channel that theyshould switch to iOS from Android. I've

(56:35):
always said, if you have anAndroid phone, it's not worth switching ecosystems
because it's a pain in the butt. But I don't think that means the
government should make it easy to switchecosystems. I don't. That's just a
bunch of forceful work that's probably goingto complicate the systems further. There's other
phones out there. Government is wastingtheir time on the dumb lawsuit. The

(56:57):
US government uttered joke at the well, they've not just a point. The
US government was designed from day oneto be slow and unsuccessful. The founding
fathers were annoyed with the tyrannical governmentthey were working with, so they were
all about, how do we makesure that a government can't have too much

(57:19):
power and can't come up with lawstoo quickly. So the whole US federal
government, basically from the ground up, was designed to be very inefficient and
slow. No, you don't haveto apologize. I agree with you.
I think most governments in general suck. They all have problem Most large entities
that are run by humans suck.I think we need to give users choice

(57:40):
if the user wants to get theirapp somewhere else than the app store.
To be fair, Apple has lostcontrol of the app store. You can
get scammed in the app store.Yeah, I think you have a choice
to not use an iPhone. Doyou think that's not an option? But
if Apple wants to keep it tojust the iOS app store, I think
that's their choice, and if youdon't like it, don't agree to the

(58:01):
terms. I don't think we shouldget rid of the option to have them
closed off first party controlled ecosystem.If someone wants it, which a lot
of people clearly do. It's sixtypercent market share. The government watched one
too many videos of I switched toThey need to look at internet service provider

(58:22):
monopolies and the lack of real competitionbetween carriers. I agree. I think
those are much much closer to beingmonopolies because they just jack up the prices
for no reason. But anyway,I'm going to have to sign off about
here, guys, but I appreciatethe conversations. I know a lot of
you are probably just never going toagree with me, but yeah, most

(58:45):
of the government uses iPhone. That'swhy they're suing Apple. They probably don't
know who to see if they usean Android. It's not like people don't
know that when they buy an iPhone, they're limited to what's in the app
store. Yeah, exactly. Andif they're annoyed by that, then okay,
there's a Aren't you taking away anadvantage of Android by making alt stores

(59:05):
and sideloading available on ioas? Wouldn'tAndroid now lose a lot of their advantages?
Maybe they'll maybe their market share woulddecrease further. I don't know.
It's just kind of an endless loopconversation, But appreciate your guys' support,
and I hope you have an excellentrest of your day. Take care all.
Bye bye,