-->

My Blog

Latest blog

Casey Newton / The Interface:
A recap of antitrust hearing, which was messy but overdue and showed us the beginning of Congress holding powerful tech CEOs to account based on actual evidence  —  Well, we had an antitrust hearing.  —  A long one, too.  The House Judiciary Committee's investigation into the market power of Amazon …



from Techmeme https://ift.tt/30dU5Ol
Star Wars, Kingdom Hearts, Resident Evil and more.

from CNET News https://ift.tt/3fgftGF
Rep. Jim Jordan's outburst, "Amazon heroin" and calls to break up Big Tech.

from CNET News https://ift.tt/2P86sF7

Cho Mu-Hyun / ZDNet:
Samsung reports Q2 earnings with sales of ~$44.5B, down 5.6% YoY, but an operating profit of ~$6.8B, up 23.5% YoY, as demand for memory chips increased  —  Samsung posted 8.15 trillion won in second quarter operating profit, with its semiconductor business contributing 5.43 trillion won of that.



from Techmeme https://ift.tt/2X71SLW

Apple CEO Tim Cook defended the company’s App Store commission structure in his sworn testimony before the House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday. He claimed the majority of the apps pay no commission at all, with others paying either 15 or 30 percent, based on the specifics of their particular situation. He said developers were all treated equally and that Apple wouldn’t raise commissions, because it had to compete for developer interest in its platform as well.

But the documents shared by the House subcommittee as part of their investigation indicate that exceptions to Apple’s rules have been made — notably, with Amazon’s Prime Video app. In addition, Apple may have never raised commissions, but discussions weren’t off the table. It had once even considered raising commissions to 40% in particular situations.

The lawmakers had come to the hearing armed with internal Apple emails and interviews from App Store developers who argued that Apple doesn’t uniformly enforce its rules and plays favorites. But their questioning of Cook over App Store fees, combined with a format that limited execs’ ability to respond at length, initially seemed to reveal little in terms of new information about Apple’s practices.

For instance, when asked directly about how the App Store worked, Cook simply restated the store’s published rules — that is, for app developers who have to pay commissions, they pay only 15 or 30 percent. The current guidelines require 30% for apps selling digital goods or services, with a drop to 15% in year two for subscription apps. The rules also document a carve-out for “reader” apps like audiobook apps, streaming services, news publications, and other competitive products which have the option of forgoing in-app purchases.

 

Cook also squeezed in a mention about how the vast majority of App Store apps, 84%, pay nothing to Apple in commissions. It’s the remaining 16% that pay, he noted.

And when asked if Apple was the sole gatekeeper as to what gets published on the App Store, Cook agreed that it was — given that the App Store was a “feature of the iPhone, much like the Camera and the chip is.” He clarified that Apple’s control over apps only extended to native software applications, not web apps, but denied Apple treated developers unfairly.

“We treat every developer the same. We have open and transparent rules,” Cook said, in his testimony. “It’s a rigorous process, because we care so deeply about privacy and security and quality. We do look at every app before it goes on,” he added.

But emails in 2016 between Apple SVP Eddy Cue and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, shared here on the House Judiciary Committee’s website, indicate that Apple, in fact, appears to have negotiated a special deal with Amazon over its Amazon Prime Video app for iOS and Apple TV.  In an email dated Nov. 2016 — before the 2017 launch of the Prime Video tvOS app —  Apple agreed to take only a 15% revenue share for customers that signed up in the app using Apple’s payment mechanism. (Typically, subscription apps don’t drop from 30% to 15% until year two.)

Apple this April confirmed  it had a special program for Prime Video and a small handful of other apps, which were subscription video entertainment providers. The program allowed those companies to rent or sell movies and TV shows to customers using the payment methods the companies already had on file, as well as more deeply integrate with Siri. But Apple hadn’t said that this special program would include a reduced commission on subscriptions or any other in-app upsells, as these emails confirm were points of discussion.

This wouldn’t be the first time Apple saw its commission structure as having some room to flex.

When Cook was questioned as to whether there was anything that could stop Apple from raising commissions to, say, 50%, the CEO responded that Apple had never increased commissions since day one. He also argued, when asked if anything could stop it from doing so, that competition for developer interest would stop it from raising its cut.

“There is a competition for developers, just like there’s a competition for customers. And so the competition for developers — they write their apps for Android or Windows or Xbox or Playstation,” said Cook. “We have fierce competition on the developer side and the customer side which is essentially — it’s so competitive, I would describe it as a street fight for market share in the smartphone business,” he added.

But in internal emails from 2011, Apple did discuss raising commissions — all the way to 40% for the first year of recurring subscriptions. “I think we may be leaving money on the table if we just asked for about 30% of the first year of sub,” Cue had written at the time.

Of course, Apple didn’t go so far as to actually make that change in the years that passed. But these emails indicate there’s more to Apple’s thinking — and its discussions around the commission structure — than the even playing field Cook testified to.



from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/30ZQ2UL

While much of today’s Congressional grilling into the anticompetitive practices of the big tech giants focused on their core businesses, Amazon’s hardware also came in for close inspection during the hours-long interrogation.

It was a small but significant exchange, because it touched on the breadth of the company’s services and how dominance in one area can mean potentially anti-competitive behavior in another part of the tech giant’s business.

For Maryland’s Representative Jamie Raskin, both Amazon’s best-selling Echo and the Fire TV devices became targets thanks to recent reporting on the company’s business practices and negotiations regarding both devices.

The Echo is the company’s foray into the smart home market that’s widely seen as the next major battleground in consumer technology. It’s one of the most widely adopted pieces of Amazon’s technology and has captured about 60% of the smart home market, according to Raskin.

The congressman hammered Bezos on two points about the Echo. The first was the company’s pricing scheme which had the Echo priced well below the cost to produce the device making it all but impossible for other tech companies to compete.

The Echo’s wide adoption has also led Amazon to engage in other anti-competitive behavior, Raskin asserted — some of which was outlined in previous questioning from Colorado Rep. Ken Buck citing a Wall Street Journal report that Amazon had used its investment unit focused on its Echo product and Alexa voice assistant to copy technology coming from small startup companies.

But beyond its appropriation of another company’s intellectual property, Amazon also used the Echo platform to promote its own products over competitors when customers used its voice services.

“Is Alexa trained to favor Amazon products?” Raskin asked.

Bezos responded that he wasn’t sure if Amazon had specifically trained the Alexa to default to Amazon services or to promote the company’s own brand of products, but that he wouldn’t be surprised. “It wouldn’t surprise me if Alexa sometimes does promote our own products,” the Amazon chief executive said.

Raskin also took Bezos to task for the company’s recent negotiations with WarnerMedia, the production studio, streaming service, and network giant. Specifically, he was concerned with how negotiations around the distribution of WarnerMedia’s HBO Max service on the company’s Fire TV devices included discussions around Amazon’s access to WarnerMedia productions.

“You’re not only asking for financial terms but also for content from Warner Media,” Raskin said. “Is it fair to use your gatekeeper status role in the streaming device market to promote your position as a competitor in the video streaming market with respect to content?”

Bezos responded that the negotiations were “normal commerce,” but Raskin tried to make the case that the negotiations over access to the Fire was yet another way in which the company’s leverage in one market impacted its ability to exercise unfair advantage against a competitor in a different industry. 

You’re using your control over access to people’s living rooms essentially,” Raskin said. “You’re using that to obtain leverage in terms of getting creative content that you want. Are you essentially converting power in one domain into power in another domain where it doesn’t belong?”

The comments and line of inquiry from Raskin were part of an intense bout of questioning that seemed to hone in on the purported topic of the hearings — the anti-competitive and potentially monopolistic power wielded by four of the nation’s largest tech companies. Facebook, Apple and Alphabet were all raked over the Congressional coals in bouts of questioning, but it seemed that the most sustained criticism on anti-competitive behavior was reserved for Bezos and Amazon.



from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/30YSPOa

Microsoft last week launched a preview of a new enterprise-only option that blocks Windows' telemetry from reaching Redmond's servers.

The option wasn't given an official label in the July 23 announcement, but at the sign-up site was defined as "The Data Processor Service for Windows Enterprise" – a mouthful even for Microsoft, known for interminable titling.

Marisa Rogers, the privacy officer responsible for Windows and Microsoft's browsers, pointed out that enterprises and other organizations – universities, for the most part – now have two choices when it comes to what their PCs report to Redmond. "Enterprise customers had two options in managing their Windows 10 diagnostic data: 1) allow Microsoft to be the controller of that data ... or 2) turn off diagnostic data flows altogether."

To read this article in full, please click here



from Computerworld https://ift.tt/30aocpA

Feel Free To Write Imam Uddin

Get In Touch

Drop me a line, or give me a heads up if you have a plan for your Online Business! Simply write to me or find me in google. Also can contact with me on all popular social meadia by @imamuddinwp . I'd love to hear from you! My inbox is always open! 😎

Get In Touch!

NextGen Digital Welcome to WhatsApp chat
Howdy! How can we help you today?
Type here...