On 2024-03-26 18:59, Indira wrote:
> Cameo wrote:
>
>>> Articulate how Apple is supposed to have committed a crime
>>>
>>
>> Besides, nobody is forced to buy Apple products. There are plenty of
>> alternatives.
>
> Did not a single one of you dumb Apple nut cases read the DOJ brief?

By all means: quote a few pertinent sections...

On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!

You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?

On 2024-03-27 04:04:41 +0000, Oscar Mayer said:
> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>
> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?

No, but the morons at the US DOJ apparently do.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 19:56:25 +1300, Your Name wrote:

>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>
>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>
> No, but the morons at the US DOJ apparently do.

The DOJ's case has nothing to do with Apple's trademarking practices (which
is the only thing "unique" about any Apple iPhone product ever created).

None of you understand the DOJ's case, probably because you never read it.
Admittedly, it's 62 pages, and most is dedicated to the evils of messages.

But the app store restrictions are in there also - if you'd only read it.
But you won't read it as you still think an app store is unique to Apple.

On 2024-03-27, Oscar Mayer <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>
> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?

You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app stores.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger wrote:

>You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>stores.

Who thinks that?

--
"Some folks are wise and some are otherwise." ~ Tobias George Smolett

On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>stores.
>
> Who thinks that?

Don't think for a second that those reading this thread won't see that
you and Arlen are snipping context to purposely try to hide the FACT
that you said this, which is what Arlen responded to.

Here's the context restored, just for you:

> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-27, Oscar Mayer <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
>>>> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-03-26, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Alan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you don't like the Apple products, simply go and buy Microsoft,
>>>>>>> Android, etc. products instead. There's a massive array of other
>>>>>>> choices for the dumbasses to use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or iMessage Samsung Pay
>>>>>> or Google Pay are not accepted by most vendors that accept Apple
>>>>>> Pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> How is that Apple's problem?
>>>>
>>>> You said there were other choices.
>>>
>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>
>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>
> You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
> stores.

Who thinks that?

If anyone needs evidence that badgolferman is every bit a shifty troll
as Arlen, here it is, in black and white.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2024-03-27 07:04, Oscar Mayer wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 19:56:25 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>
>>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>>
>>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>>
>> No, but the morons at the US DOJ apparently do.
>
> The DOJ's case has nothing to do with Apple's trademarking practices (which
> is the only thing "unique" about any Apple iPhone product ever created).

Did any smartphone have anything LIKE the interface that the iPhone had?

Did any smartphone offer customers a way to purchase apps in a way that
made them feel secure enough to turn apps into a major thing?

>
> None of you understand the DOJ's case, probably because you never read it.
> Admittedly, it's 62 pages, and most is dedicated to the evils of messages.
>
> But the app store restrictions are in there also - if you'd only read it.
> But you won't read it as you still think an app store is unique to Apple.

What app stores existed BEFORE the iPhone?

Jolly Roger wrote:

>On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>>You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>>stores.
>>
>> Who thinks that?
>
>Don't think for a second that those reading this thread won't see that
>you and Arlen are snipping context to purposely try to hide the FACT
>that you said this, which is what Arlen responded to.
>
>Here's the context restored, just for you:
>
>> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> On 2024-03-27, Oscar Mayer <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-03-26, badgolferman
>>>>>><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you don't like the Apple products, simply go and
>>>>>>>>buy Microsoft, Android, etc. products instead. There's
>>>>>>>>a massive array of other choices for the dumbasses to
>>>>>>>>use.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or
>>>>>>>iMessage Samsung Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by
>>>>>>>most vendors that accept Apple Pay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How is that Apple's problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> You said there were other choices.
>>>>
>>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG
>>>>THEM!!!
>>>
>>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to
>>>Apple?
>>
>> You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>> stores.
>
> Who thinks that?
>
>If anyone needs evidence that badgolferman is every bit a shifty troll
>as Arlen, here it is, in black and white.

Wow! You've really gone off the deep end. Now you're making shit up
to prove your delusions. It must suck to be so defensive about a
conglomerate who doesn't even know you're alive.

On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>
>>>>You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>>>stores.
>>>
>>> Who thinks that?
>>
>>Don't think for a second that those reading this thread won't see that
>>you and Arlen are snipping context to purposely try to hide the FACT
>>that you said this, which is what Arlen responded to.
>>
>>Here's the context restored, just for you:
>>
>>> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-03-27, Oscar Mayer <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-03-26, badgolferman
>>>>>>><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you don't like the Apple products, simply go and
>>>>>>>>> buy Microsoft, Android, etc. products instead. There's a
>>>>>>>>> massive array of other choices for the dumbasses to use.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or
>>>>>>>> iMessage Samsung Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by most
>>>>>>>> vendors that accept Apple Pay.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How is that Apple's problem?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You said there were other choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>>>
>>>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to
>>>> Apple?
>>>
>>> You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>> stores.
>>
>> Who thinks that?
>>
>>If anyone needs evidence that badgolferman is every bit a shifty troll
>>as Arlen, here it is, in black and white.
>
> Wow! You've really gone off the deep end. Now you're making shit up
> to prove your delusions.

The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
weak trolls suck.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>>>> stores.
>>>>
>>>> Who thinks that?
>>>
>>> Don't think for a second that those reading this thread won't see that
>>> you and Arlen are snipping context to purposely try to hide the FACT
>>> that you said this, which is what Arlen responded to.
>>>
>>> Here's the context restored, just for you:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-03-27, Oscar Mayer <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 27 Mar 2024 02:50:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-26, badgolferman
>>>>>>>> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you don't like the Apple products, simply go and
>>>>>>>>>> buy Microsoft, Android, etc. products instead. There's a
>>>>>>>>>> massive array of other choices for the dumbasses to use.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or
>>>>>>>>> iMessage Samsung Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by most
>>>>>>>>> vendors that accept Apple Pay.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How is that Apple's problem?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You said there were other choices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to
>>>>> Apple?
>>>>
>>>> You loser trolls actually think Apple Pay and iMessage are app
>>>> stores.
>>>
>>> Who thinks that?
>>>
>>> If anyone needs evidence that badgolferman is every bit a shifty troll
>>> as Arlen, here it is, in black and white.
>>
>> Wow! You've really gone off the deep end. Now you're making shit up
>> to prove your delusions.
>
> The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
> reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
> again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
> weak trolls suck.
>

I trimmed because I was referring directly to a statement you made. It is
Usenet etiquette to trim when the post gets too long. I also didn’t call
you names or make shit about you. It was a direct simple question. You
accused trolls of believing something silly and I asked who were they.

You really need to chill out and stop being so defensive and combative.
Nothing anyone says or does in this newsgroup will damage Apple in any way.

On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
>> reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
>> again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
>> weak trolls suck.
>
> I trimmed because I was referring directly to a statement you made.

Nope. You trimmed to remove context. Here's the exchange you are
desperately trying to pretend didn't happen:

You: Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or iMessage Samsung
Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by most vendors that accept Apple
Pay.

Someone else: How is that Apple's problem?

You: You said there were other choices.

Me: How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!

Arlen (trying to move the goal post and change the topic): You wacky
nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?

> It is Usenet etiquette to trim when the post gets too long.

It's troll behavior to dishonestly trim in order to remove context.

> I also didn’t call you names

You need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to troll as a hobby.

> You accused trolls of believing something silly and I asked who were
> they.

You are low-key defending Arlen trying to move the goal post. And it's
obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

> You really need to chill out

I'm perfectly calm. You're the ones getting all worked up over colors
and similar nonsense due to your irrational hatred of all things Apple.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2024-03-27 14:04:00 +0000, Oscar Mayer said:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 19:56:25 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>>
>>> You wacky nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>>
>> No, but the morons at the US DOJ apparently do.
>
> The DOJ's case has nothing to do with Apple's trademarking practices (which
> is the only thing "unique" about any Apple iPhone product ever created).
>
> None of you understand the DOJ's case, probably because you never read it.
> Admittedly, it's 62 pages, and most is dedicated to the evils of messages.
>
> But the app store restrictions are in there also - if you'd only read it.
> But you won't read it as you still think an app store is unique to Apple.

There are lots of "app stores" for various devices and operating systems.

There is *one* legal Apple App Store for Apple devices, and for iOS,
iPad, Apple Watch, and Apple Vision devices, that's the only proper way
to install your apps. There are other app stores you can use, but the
legality is questionable (as is their content) and often requires
stupidly 'jailbreaking' the device, which a pointless waste of time for
all bit a tiny niche minority of users.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:52:03 +1300, Your Name wrote:

> There are lots of "app stores" for various devices and operating systems.

I know that. You know that. More important, the DOJ knows that too.
It's just one of the wacky Apple nutters who said this, and I quote:

"How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!"

That nutter has no idea that simply putting a trademark on something
doesn't make it unique - especially when everyone has an app store too.

> There is *one* legal Apple App Store for Apple devices, and for iOS,
> iPad, Apple Watch, and Apple Vision devices, that's the only proper way
> to install your apps.

You know that. I know that. Apple knows that. Even the DOJ knows that.
You need to tell that to the wacky Apple nutters who do not know that.

> There are other app stores you can use, but the
> legality is questionable (as is their content) and often requires
> stupidly 'jailbreaking' the device, which a pointless waste of time for
> all bit a tiny niche minority of users.

You know that. I know that. Apple knows that. The DOJ knows that.

You need to inform the wacky Apple nutters that the DOJ legal case is not
about whether or not the wacky nutters like the way Apple restricted them.

On 2024-03-27 16:16, Oscar Mayer wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:52:03 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>
>> There are lots of "app stores" for various devices and operating systems.
>
> I know that. You know that. More important, the DOJ knows that too.
> It's just one of the wacky Apple nutters who said this, and I quote:
>
> "How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!"

A statement made about things OTHER than their app store.

On 2024-03-27 14:45, badgolferman wrote:
>> The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
>> reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
>> again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
>> weak trolls suck.
>>
> I trimmed because I was referring directly to a statement you made. It is
> Usenet etiquette to trim when the post gets too long. I also didn’t call
> you names or make shit about you. It was a direct simple question. You
> accused trolls of believing something silly and I asked who were they.
>
> You really need to chill out and stop being so defensive and combative.
> Nothing anyone says or does in this newsgroup will damage Apple in any way.

Jolly Roger's assessment in his reply is spot on.

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
>>> reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
>>> again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
>>> weak trolls suck.
>>
>> I trimmed because I was referring directly to a statement you made.
>
> Nope. You trimmed to remove context. Here's the exchange you are
> desperately trying to pretend didn't happen:
>
> You: Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or iMessage Samsung
> Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by most vendors that accept Apple
> Pay.
>
> Someone else: How is that Apple's problem?
>
> You: You said there were other choices.
>
> Me: How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>
> Arlen (trying to move the goal post and change the topic): You wacky
> nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>
>> It is Usenet etiquette to trim when the post gets too long.
>
> It's troll behavior to dishonestly trim in order to remove context.
>
>> I also didn’t call you names
>
> You need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to troll as a hobby.
>
>> You accused trolls of believing something silly and I asked who were
>> they.
>
> You are low-key defending Arlen trying to move the goal post. And it's
> obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature.
>
>> You really need to chill out
>
> I'm perfectly calm. You're the ones getting all worked up over colors
> and similar nonsense due to your irrational hatred of all things Apple.
>

I see you trimmed my response and left out the most important part! You owe
me another irony meter.

On 2024-03-27 18:12, badgolferman wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-03-27, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The quoting that you and Arlen desperately trimmed is factual, as anyone
>>>> reads the thread can easily see, idiot. Maybe Arlen is impersonating you
>>>> again, maybe you're just low-level trolling as usual. But ether way, your
>>>> weak trolls suck.
>>>
>>> I trimmed because I was referring directly to a statement you made.
>>
>> Nope. You trimmed to remove context. Here's the exchange you are
>> desperately trying to pretend didn't happen:
>>
>> You: Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or iMessage Samsung
>> Pay or Google Pay are not accepted by most vendors that accept Apple
>> Pay.
>>
>> Someone else: How is that Apple's problem?
>>
>> You: You said there were other choices.
>>
>> Me: How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!
>>
>> Arlen (trying to move the goal post and change the topic): You wacky
>> nutters actually think an app store is unique only to Apple?
>>
>>> It is Usenet etiquette to trim when the post gets too long.
>>
>> It's troll behavior to dishonestly trim in order to remove context.
>>
>>> I also didn’t call you names
>>
>> You need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to troll as a hobby.
>>
>>> You accused trolls of believing something silly and I asked who were
>>> they.
>>
>> You are low-key defending Arlen trying to move the goal post. And it's
>> obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature.
>>
>>> You really need to chill out
>>
>> I'm perfectly calm. You're the ones getting all worked up over colors
>> and similar nonsense due to your irrational hatred of all things Apple.
>>
>
> I see you trimmed my response and left out the most important part! You owe
> me another irony meter.
>

Except according to you... ...trimming is just etiquete... ...right?

On 2024-03-27 23:16:59 +0000, Oscar Mayer said:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:52:03 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>>
>> There are lots of "app stores" for various devices and operating systems.
>
> I know that. You know that. More important, the DOJ knows that too.
> It's just one of the wacky Apple nutters who said this, and I quote:
>
> "How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!"
>
> That nutter has no idea that simply putting a trademark on something
> doesn't make it unique - especially when everyone has an app store too.

They were being sarcastic / joking. It also wasn't about the App Store
- hence the world "products" in there.

The US DOJ, thanks to greedy whiners like Epic Games, are basically
saying Apple, Google, Meta, etc. cannot have proprietary things
(devices and services) because that makes it a "monopoly" ... which is
complete and utter nonsense. The US DOJ obviously has zero
understanding of how businesses or the tech industry works. Any judge
who gives this idiotic court case more than two seconds of their time
is a moron who shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge. :-\

On 28.03.24 06:40, Your Name wrote:
> The US DOJ obviously has zero
> understanding of how businesses or the tech industry works. Any judge
> who gives this idiotic court case more than two seconds of their time
> is a moron who shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge. 😕

But you know? Arrogant and stupid idiot and Troll.
You do not understand the case at all. Especially you do notunderstand
what a monopoly is in this context and what creates one.

--
"Ave Caesar! Morituri te salutant!"

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Your Name wrote:
>
>> On 2024-03-26 06:35:58 +0000, Enrico Papaloma said:
>>>
>>> At least three proposed class actions have been filed since Friday
>>> in California and New Jersey federal courts by iPhone owners who
>>> claim Apple inflated the cost of its products through
>>> anticompetitive conduct.
>>>
>>> The lawsuits, seeking to represent millions of consumers, mirror the
>>> Justice Department's claims that Apple violated U.S. antitrust law
>>> by suppressing technology for messaging apps, digital wallets and
>>> other items that would have increased competition in the market for
>>> smartphones.
>>>
>>> https://www.reuters.com/technology/consumers-sue-apple-taking-page-u
>>> s-justice-department-lawsuit-2024-03-25/
>>
>> Oh dear, even more greedy brainless morons jumping on the bandwagon.
>> :-(
>>
>> If you don't like the Apple products, simply go and buy Microsoft,
>> Android, etc. products instead. There's a massive array of other
>> choices for the dumbasses to use.
>
>
> Are there realistic alternatives to Apple Pay or iMessage? Samsung Pay
> or Google Pay are not accepted by most vendors that accept Apple Pay.

Of course. The vast majority of payment transactions do not use Apple pay.
Especially in-store.
https://www.finder.com/international-money-transfers/apple-pay-statistics

It's like you complaining that you can't make Visa payments without having
a visa card and stamping your feet saying that that isn't fair.

Are you really not aware of alternatives to imessage? I currently have
three on my phone. There are others.

Enrico Papaloma <enrico@papaloma.net> wrote:
> At least three proposed class actions have been filed since Friday in
> California and New Jersey federal courts by iPhone owners who claim Apple
> inflated the cost of its products through anticompetitive conduct.
>
> The lawsuits, seeking to represent millions of consumers, mirror the
> Justice Department's claims that Apple violated U.S. antitrust law by
> suppressing technology for messaging apps, digital wallets and other items
> that would have increased competition in the market for smartphones.
>
> https://www.reuters.com/technology/consumers-sue-apple-taking-page-us-justice-department-lawsuit-2024-03-25/

I do find it interesting that the americans love the free market - which
doesn't work as the public think - and hate regulation, but then get all
sour when companies favour profits/shareholders over their customers.

The DoJ has a chance to set a precedent for big tech's abuse of the market
with Microsoft in the 90s. The right-wingers got involved via the Bush
administration and here we are. Obscene megacorps that are so big they can
manipulate every aspect of our lives with no oversight (in the US). This
will never happen because of the shitshow called "US politics" , but the
americans could do the whole world a favour by massively changing the
corporate environment for these types of companies.

In my eyes Apple are the least bad one, but I'm certainly glad to be in
Europe where some of the big tech's bad practices are limited.

On 2024-03-27 19:16, Oscar Mayer wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:52:03 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>
>> There are lots of "app stores" for various devices and operating systems.
>
> I know that. You know that. More important, the DOJ knows that too.
> It's just one of the wacky Apple nutters who said this, and I quote:
>
> "How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!"
>
> That nutter

Turning someone's sarcasm into something else is ... desperate?

--
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:54:03 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

>> "How dare a company make unique products and services! HANG THEM!!!"
>>
>> That nutter
>
> Turning someone's sarcasm into something else is ... desperate?

Maybe I misunderstood the poster who was making that sarcastic comment?

It appeared to me that the poster was trying to claim Apple makes unique
products, but if you say it was sarcasm, then I agree with him & with you.

An app store isn't unique - it's a commodity.
A messaging app isn't unique - it's a commodity.

If it was sarcasm, then the person who made that statement agrees with me
that Apple does not make those products unique simply by preventing
integration and competition as a messaging app and an app store are
commodities, which the DOJ argues Apple lies about why they control it.

It's up to the judge to decide if the DOJ is correct that Apple is lying
about why Apple severely controls these commodities versus if Apple is
telling the truth that they prevent integration to "protect" the consumer.

Thank you for explaining that the poster didn't mean what he had said.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:48 +1300, Your Name wrote:

>> That nutter has no idea that simply putting a trademark on something
>> doesn't make it unique - especially when everyone has an app store too.
>
> They were being sarcastic / joking. It also wasn't about the App Store
> - hence the world "products" in there.

Maybe I misunderstood the poster who made that sarcastic comment then.

I knew it was sarcasm, but if the sarcasm was aimed at claiming Apple made
unique products - I can refute that by simply asking you two questions.

1. How is an app store unique? (It's not unique. It's a commodity.)
2. How is a messaging app unique? (It's not unique. It's a commodity.)

> The US DOJ, thanks to greedy whiners like Epic Games, are basically
> saying Apple, Google, Meta, etc. cannot have proprietary things
> (devices and services) because that makes it a "monopoly" ... which is
> complete and utter nonsense.

I agree with you that the DOJ's case is that Apple restricts innovation &
competition because Apple severely controls every aspect of the iPhone.

Whether or not the DOJ will win its case is up to the courts to decide.

> The US DOJ obviously has zero
> understanding of how businesses or the tech industry works.

We will need to disagree on that because it's clear from reading the DOJ
case that the DOJ doesn't believe a word Apple says in why they control it.

In fact the DOJ says Apple is lying about the reason they restrict it,
which shows an underlying understanding (if the DOJ is right) about Apple.

> Any judge
> who gives this idiotic court case more than two seconds of their time
> is a moron who shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge. :-\

The DOJ is arguing that Apple is lying about the reason Apple severely
controls the commodities on the iPhone and Apple in turn will argue that
they severely control those commodities to "protect" the consumer.

In the end, it will up to the judge to decide who is telling the truth.