Apple under preliminary antitrust investigation over iPhone, triggered by complaint from Adobe
By Nilay Patel 
posted May 4th 2010 11:53AM
posted May 4th 2010 11:53AM
We'd heard a somewhat sketchy report from the New York Post yesterday that the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission were considering launching an antitrust inquiry into Apple and its various iPhone-related practices, and now it's being confirmed by Reuters and the Wall Street Journal, who say the inquiry was triggered by complaints from Apple's competitors and app developers -- specifically Adobe, according to Bloomberg. The DOJ and FTC are currently deciding which agency will take the lead in any inquiry, but if and when it gets underway there are a few issues at play: the first is obviously Apple's decision to block Flash and other middleware from app development, and the second is Apple's new iAd platform, which comes with its own changes to the iPhone developer agreement that could potentially lock out third-party ad and analytics services like AdMob -- itself under regulatory scrutiny due to the Google acquisition -- and Flurry.We'd also imagine regulators will take a close look at Apple's App Store policies in general, but from a distance looks like the focus is on mobile advertising: both Apple and Google have made aggressive moves into the space in recent months, and both have come under regulatory scrutiny. We'll just have to wait and see how this one plays out -- there's still no official word from either agency on what's happening, and the timeline of any potential investigation and lawsuit will be measured in months and years.
@HighestRanked2 my my you are a well trained little iSheep aren't you? You'd never guess this, but I am a Mac user too but at least I am wise enough to see when poor decisions are being made and when wrongs are committed. If you did any investigation you would see that HTML5 completely sucks compared to Flash and eats processor time like a hog even for the most simplest of things. I am sure it is easy for you to overlook when you are blinded by your shiny Apple toy, however, most of the HTML5 crap does not even run very well on an a desktop let alone an iPhone or an iPad (with the exception of video). Meanwhile, the stuff beginning to come out for Android and FP10,1 rocks! Face it, the iPhone era is over, they are way to closed. "Third rate developers?!!!". Wow what an arrogant holier-than-thou Apple fanboy statement. This has nothing to do with laziness you moron, what developer in their right mind wants to be told what tools to use no matter what, this does not effect just Adobe in case you haven't noticed. Furthermore, Apple has done nothing for the web compared to Flash. The functionality and capabilities would not even exist today. It does not matter if the software is proprietary, it is absolutely the best tool for the job and I have no problem supporting that. In fact the SWF is open and you can develop it without even touching an Adobe product of you like. Please stop listening to Jobs, open your eyes and get your facts straight.
@kaarn Said "SWF is open and you can develop it without even touching an Adobe product of you like."
Citation needed. Last time I looked to develop a full application you needed to use Adobe products.
@HighestRanked2
Your argument makes no sense and you are missing the point completely. First of all did you miss the point about HTML5 being a processor hog for even the most simplest things? Actually, you need to get of the HTML5 kick, it is quite irrelevant. Just because Apple supports HTML5 does not make them a proponent of open source or open standards or open anything for that matter. Did you also happen to ignore the fact that they will be making quite a bit of money from the H.264 video codec implemented in HTML5? In fact, Apple is not a proponent of anything open unless it makes them money. You should not be so easily fooled little iSheep. Is the iPhone OS open source? Well, no. Android is, and they do not put any type of anti-competitive bull restrictions on developers. That's truly open, get it? You will see the iPhone fade into 2nd compared to Android. But don't worry little iSheep, people will still think you are cool, although your content is so limited.
@sbeckstead
Oh my, there are just a ton of alternatives for you to build a SWF that have nothing to do with Adobe. The first that comes to mind is Swish, a commercial product, but then there is haXe which you can download for free. All kinds of tools. I suppose if Adobe used the same kind of sorry business practices as Apple they would have tried to kill Swish a long time ago by saying you could only publish a SWF from Flash. However, the SWF format is openly published and they don't put any restrictions on who makes them or how. Clearly a much more respectable company. Apple on the other hand chooses to engage in the sorriest of business practices as of late, blatantly targted at Adobe. It is interesting how there were several different compilers which could build iPhone apps, all happily being accepted in the App store, but nearly to the minute when Adobe released a Flash version which produced a NATIVE iPhone app, Apple updated their SDK to say no. Does it get any more clearly anti-competitive and targeted than that? Really pathetic and far too obvious.
@HighestRanked2 Agree. Android isn't that open as most people belief: Read http://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2010/04/is-android-evil/
@HighestRanked2
You completely ignore what anyone says and then continue to spout your moronic garbage. I think someone else had said your posts completely lack substance, and guess what, they were right? How many times have I told you the SWF is open to the public? How many times? Let me say it again, it is open and completely available to the public from Adobe. Did that get through your thick skull? Let me say it one more time....the SWF is open. It is a well published specification, little iSheep. One more time, in case you weren't listening....the SWF is open. Anyone can make one and publish it how they see fit. You totally missed the point of my post again, your degree of stupidity is mind numbing. Let me try again: By Android being open source AND THEY ARE NOT PUTTING RESTRICTIONS ON DEVELOPERS OR CONTENT, that is why it is truly open and the obvious choice for any intelligent developer which I am sure excludes you so let's not even bother debating the point any more.
@kaarn
I don't think you understand the meaning of "open". Let me ask you one simple question: Who owns flash?
Need clarification? Fine. Does a single company completely control flash, or is it maintained by a standards committee formed of multiple companies and people? The answer to those questions should be enlightening for you.
@kaarn But Flash video is often H.264 presented in a Flash player, Apple will "make money" as you put it anyway.
Your argument = total fail.
I think Apple decision to deny Flash will cause them to loose a lot of customers. They want to fool us with iAd by putting it in the same time with multitasking, so you can't have the latest OS with multitasking without ads. Thumbs down Apple!
We made an article related here, http://www.itsagadget.com/2010/05/steve-jobs-and-apple-hate-adobe-flash-too-much.html
@gadgets
I don't know about you but apple is dominating the mobile market. I don't see them losing many customers anytime soon
@gadgets
Since iAds is 100% optional, you don't have a point. Obviously you can have OS 4 without ads. You would have to be pretty stupid to think otherwise.
Everytime i'm on a website that uses flash for anything, I can move my mouse and watch the video pause.
I don't like flash at all. Flash isn't very secure for one thing. I'm sure at some point everyone will be cursing flash on the iPhone.
Yeah! Go get 'em Adobe! I think apple should enable flash as an experimental feature, buried 5 layers down, with no support.
AT LEAST GIVE US THE OPTION
we will see what Jobs will do about this , his fight against Adobe and flash , just doesn't make sense.
The problem with removing all the restrictions is a crap marketplace. I went from having a 2 iPhones for 2.5 years to getting a android phone. Android looks awesome on paper but garbage apps. 1/10 of them didn't work and some would freeze the phone.
I have to say I like that apple has a stringent approval policy otherwise people would be making apps to access things we as consumers don't want being used.
@Lemacfar
Whatsa matter? Couldn't find an iFart app? Talk about crap applications. Hey, it's everywhere, the app store is not immune. At least with Android you could go view an iFart widget online for free if you wanted, rather than have to pay in the app store. On the other hand, if you need Apple to do your thinking for you and have Uncle Jobs tell you what you do and don't want, that's your choice....it's all about freedom of choice...or is it?
@kaarn
Uh, yeah you missed the point. A lot. He said the apps didn't work, crashed and froze the phone. That is a much bigger problem that having fart apps available in the store (which you can choose not to download). The reason apps from the app store don't quit, or freeze the phone or crash is specifically because of Apple's control over the APIs and the store.
Your argument is really pathetically stupid. Andoid apps aren't regulated and generally suck, can cause your phone to crash and freeze, and your response to that is that the app store has fart apps?
Wow. The Android store has fart apps too, the difference is that they will crash your phone.
That is an interesting business practice, if you miss the boat with your bloat cry and cry some more - christ I did not think it was possible to hate Adobe this much, but it is. What a bunch of useless wankers.
I think companies should be able to do whatever they want with their own products, and the piggyback companies should respect that. This is like what happened when Microsoft was forced to do the browser ballot in Europe. As nasty as it is, Apple should be able to do what they want with their product line. The user then has the most rights to do what they want. If they want Adobe's flash for example, they could remove Apple's OS from the hardware (and void their warranty) and put in an alternative like Android. You could almost think-up a way for Apple to counter this with another Anti-Trust case saying that Adobe has been aligning itself with Google by anti-competitive means. This sort of garbage is like fighting with generic patents (I'm looking at you Apple & Microsoft).
@delicatessen lama
Yeah I don't think most users know how to install Android on an iphone as the iphone doesn't even give you that option. It's not like installing a different operating system on a PC.
@HighestRanked2 Lol it didn't sink in for him the first time
@victor is right. All Apple has to do is bring a Nintendo Wii, a Sony Playstation 3, a Microsoft XBox to DOJ and say, "We'd like our developer tools create cross-platform apps that run on these platforms. Can you force these companies to override their developer agreements?"
@bluelobe
Ding! That is the heart of this issue.
@bluelobe
Huh? I don't think video game consoles are meant for people to create apps for them.
@chilipalm
Not the point. The point is that you can't sue Sony because Xbox discs don't work in a PS3. There is nothing illegal with that. Sony and Microsoft own their respective hardware and software (OS), and are free to disallow their competitor's games from running on their hardware.
It's exactly the same with Apple and the iPhone/iPod/iPad. Apple is under zero obligation - ZERO - to allow flash on their devices. Bringing an antitrust lawsuit against them for that is only proving that they don't know what constitutes antitrust.
@Jack
Why would you want to disallow competitor's games on your hardware? If Sony makes God of War no longer exclusive to PS3 and decides to make it for the Xbox, you think MS would say no?
@chilipalm
Again, you're missing the point. This has nothing to do with writing a game for multiple platforms. Read more carefully. I said putting an Xbox disc into a PS3. Not putting the PS3 version of a game into a PS3, or putting an Xbox version of the same game into an Xbox. I said putting an XBox DISC into a PS3.
Do you get it now? Xbox discs don't work in PS3s. And Sony is under zero obligation to ALLOW Xbox discs to work in PS3s. Just like Apple is under zero obligation to allow flash to run on the iPhone.
@Jack
Flash is software. Discs are hardware. Bad analogy. This is about software. I don't think apple has a problem rejecting flash since apple doesn't have a competing product for it on the iphone. But it is questionable to reject apps that are competitive to other apps developed by or accepted by apple. Just like Microsoft's problem with Internet Explorer, you can't make people install one software and not allow a competing product.
@chilipalm
I am astounded that you still don't seem to grasp what we're talking about here. Are you in denial or something?
The software ON the discs is software. The software on an Xbox disc is incompatible with the software in a PS3. NOW do you get it? Or am I going to have to continue to explain the same thing over and over again? I mean for god's sake most 10 year olds would have gotten it by now.
Apple's policies regarding apps that duplicate functionality is totally and completely irrelevant to this discussion. This discussion is about how Adobe is complaining to the feds that Apple is committing antitrust violations by refusing to allow Adobe to peddle their crappy bloatware on the iPhone.
Think you can stay on track, or are you going to non-sequitur into something else?
Now, what Microsoft did was to disallow you to uninstall IE in Windows. That is why they got slammed with an antitrust lawsuit (and lost). Apple has done nothing even close to that.
In the case of the iPhone, Apple owns the hardware and the software. Apple doesn't have to allow you or anybody else to do jack shit on it. If they don't want to allow flash, they don't have to allow flash. You may not like that, but that doesn't make it illegal.
It is completely and entirely within Apple's rights to dictate what can and cannot be installed on an iPhone. Since Apple owns the entire widget, they get to make the rules. That's how it works.
@Jack
Haha Jack why do you have your panties in a bunch? I already said I don't think apple has a problem rejecting flash.
@Jack Really your the one that doesn't understand. The bigger problem is not Apple not allowing flash, its that they will not allow people to develop things made with other programs, like if Adobe made a tool to convert a flash application to run on Iphone without flash.
It would be like saying that if a company made a program that could take the code for a game and compile different versions from that one codebase to run on Xbox 360 and PS3; and MS or Sony not letting any arbitrarilly not allowing these games because of that compiler. It is like Apple changing the user agreement for the Mac to say that you can't use Python or Java applications on your Mac since thats pretty much exactly how those languages work (one code base can be used for multiple hardware and OS platforms)
@bluelobe AMEN
@chilipalm Just like any store, and owner can determine what is sold in his/her store for whatever reason they want. Should Target be sued because their magazine section doesn't carry porn? No they can make that decision and you can either go with it, or boycott the store. But it's not illegal. This case has no legs and Adobe is behind it 100%.
@ddddd Google for WebGL. Of course standard HTML5 can't. But when talking about "HTML5" people usually mean HTML5, JavaScript, CSS3, WebGL, Web Workers, SVG and all the other things that come along with it...
@ddddd Google WebGL
Obviously some people don't like a few of the decisions apple's made regarding it's platform, but I hardly think it's grounds for anti-trust. People rooting for apple to lose in this need to check their motives... this is mostly adobe trying to get even with apple for all the bad press about flash (which honestly, I think SJ and co were stupid to bring up and make into such an issue when it was unnecessary.)
@ddddd
I like how you keep saying Apple should be sued. Why is that, exactly? What is your reasoning? I'm sure your keen legal mind can come up with something, right?
Show me what Apple is doing that's illegal.
Here's the real picture.. Every company that puts out a product has some proprietary requirement of their development partners that must be followed in order to insure the best possible performance on that piece of equipment.
I don't care who you look at, MS, Apple, Sony, Nokia, Google or even non mobile players. You think Ford allows their parts suppliers to use the same production and specs for a piece that would be sold to GM?
There's TRULY no open or cross platform anything out there. Everything is in one way or another customized at some point in the development cycle.
Finally, if you don't like certain requirements or restrictions, you don't have to buy it. Same thing could have been said about MS..what Bill should have said to congress is...ok...85% of the world's corporations use our product and have invested hundreds of billions over the years..why don't you tell them you are shutting me down...and I'll make sure to send out a note saying "no more support, no more products forth coming, I'll shut my doors, live on my measly banked dollars. You can thank your government for looking out for your best interest" Bill.
I thought this was hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/v/3hqFTx8rLsg
It's a tablet running Android. Listen to how many times the guy mentions flash, as if flash is the one defining feature that will make that tablet not suck.
But the best part? When the browser CRASHES because of FLASH. And these dumbasses still can't figure out why Apple doesn't want flash on their devices.
Total bullshit. Although I'd like to see Flash on an iPhone and iPad Adobe sucks snot on this issue. There is nothing illegal about Apple prohibiting Flash on its mobile devices.
But then it is understandable if you have ever dealt with Adobe on licensing issues, they are terrible in terms of customer service. AND the new Photoshop CS5 costs $199 for a mere single rev level upgrade. Greedy bastards. I'm sticking with CS4.
See this article
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/05/former-u-s-labor-secretary-defends-apple-on-antitrust-issues/
I'm pretty sure Apple didn't invent the concept of controlling what apps go on their phone. Could you install whatever you wanted on your RAZR? No. If I make a piece of hardware, I damn well can control what goes on it. If Apple had not invented the App Store to begin with, I imagine no phones would have them today. Therefore, they should be lauded with introducing the concept of browsing and installing vast amounts of apps on a phone. Instead they're being sued. If you don't like their product, don't buy it.