How is
Apple not subject to anti-trust investigation/legisation by US Congress? Given the multiple strategies Apple use to obstruct third party parts or recycled Apple device parts being used in repairs and upgrades of their hardware products, it leads one to assume that, at core, this is a text book case of anti-competitive strategies being deployed?
Given their anticompetitive pricing on cloud storage, which can be easily bypassed but often isn't due to the Finder dependencies on iCloud it's clear that a company of the scale of Apple could price their could offering to their existing customers on Apple devices at the lowest $/GB in the world, but no, they price it at the highest $/GB in the world, even without the added features other providers add (cross-platform software installation not being the least of these, encrypting, file-versioning etc etc). Given that it took the EU parliament to force Apple off lightening connectors on iPhones and peripherals (pencils, keyboards etc) ensuring they win more royalties on their exclusive rights to Lightening™ and sell ore of their own USB2Lightening leads.
components such as these are blocked in multiple ways by Apple and it's beyond any reasonable justification*
- DRAM used to upgrade or repair Mac computers, given the predatory pricing of upgrades to RAM (overpriced compared to non-Apple PCs) when they sell a Mac new. This has the effect of incentivising a buyer to buy more RAM than they need or would otherwise buy to "future proof" the purchase against macOS upgrades and third party software becoming more demanding in the years ahead.
- SSD used to upgrade or repair Mac computers, given the predatory pricing of upgrades to RAM (overpriced compared to non-Apple PCs) when they sell a Mac new. I seen countless MBP reviews where the host recommends maxing out the SDD for professional MBP users like musicians, video editors/VFX professional etc, just to future proof it for 4 or more years.
- third party replacement parts for repairs, all kinds of parts from most often used in repairs like batteries to screens, touch layers, to the more obscure parts that can brick an iPhone or iPad. Apple makes these components, even when identical to their own third party components in every way, show as "verified" even though it's clearly working and disables Battery Health info in settings because of it.
- Louis Rossman has documented many of examples Apple's ********ery when it comes to impeding repairs from removing vital into from a repairs perspective from their circuit board schematics, to obscuring the identity and specs of even tiny parts that are industry std components, to up to the registration of components to ensure they need verification to operate same as Apple Original. All of this is to make repair of APpe devices at Apple shops unlikely due to their uncompetitive pricing policies, and likelihood of someone buying a new device in preference to repairing their current device (which is Apple's preferred solution or they would price their repairs out of the market, or obstruct the #rightToRepair movement at every turn).
* Justifications like "oh, markets are implicitly fair, Apple built themselves a business and can exploit their customers a will" or "dur, capitalism" as per the failed edifice that is Neoclassical Economic theory and practice. Markets and capitalism only came into existence with Legisation being passed by national governments with create the legal structures upon which markets exist and couldn't exist without. Legislation such as property law, regulations around trading, labour-hire regulations, corporations law, Financial sector law. And Apple is probably in breach of some of these, but given USA on both sides of the aisle are trying to start a cold war with China, even while the import Trillions of dollars in goods each year, they wont go after the Wall St darling that is Apple.
main points summerised here:
“property law as basis for modern markets (ChatGTP 4.o-mini)” shared from iCloud Drive
