Apple is accused of anticompetitive practices in India
The unlocked iPhone 4 is sold through two carriers, Airtel and Aircel, as well as other retail stores. Airtel and Aircel offer discounted data plans to offset the initial cost of the iPhone 4, and make use of their new 3G networks. We imagine this might be what has been construed as an anticompetitive practice.
A journalist visited one of these carrier's retail channels, and found no evidence of carrier-coercion. When the journalist asked about carrier exclusivity, the employee said that "If your operator can provide you a micro SIM, you can use it on the iPhone 4."
Additionally, there are complaints regarding the inability to purchase iPhone apps outside of the App Store. Good luck with that one, India.
12. AndroidOS (Posts: 100; Member since: 21 Jun 2011)
I smiled because I wish it was like that everywhere lol.
I give it...... 5 years before we're all going to manufacturers websites and designing our own phones to have delivered to our house and be chosen by the carrier we want.
And that day will be Godly. :)
15. r2212xx (Posts: 41; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)
It's actually that way in India since the dawn of mobile phones and carriers in the country. Although it's not illegal but it's permitted if the consumer on his/her will signs a contract with the carrier for a phone. It gets noncompetitive (anti-competitive) if the carrier offers a reverse subsidy which means a consumer is able to recover almost 99% cost of the handset over a period of time via schemes and offers of the operator. Now that might sound as good news but the ones who actually benefit the most from this are the operator and the mobile phone company. And that is what the Competition Commission has objected to.
32. iDroid8 (Posts: 155; Member since: 16 Oct 2012)
i just wish india also had phones available through carriers, like going into an airtel or aircel store instead of going into some samsung or nokia one....
atleast then subsidized phones would be possible-like the UK or the US of A
3. aimbdd (unregistered)
the first part makes sense... (if apple was actually doing that) the second one... well... good luck with that.
4. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
This is an obvious sign that all carriers want the iphone. Can you imagine how the sales figure of the iphone would be if it's on every carrier? That's the only reason why people still buy android devices. It's due to the iphone's limited availability :)
5. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)
i dont think so... idk i wudnt get an android but a lot of people do irregardless of the iphone... but yes, all carriers do want the iphone...
11. AndroidOS (Posts: 100; Member since: 21 Jun 2011)
I agree that everyone carrier wants the iPhone.
But the comment about people only buying Android because of the iPhones limited availibilty is wrong. lol
But I will say that Android sales are affected buy the iPhone because people tend to want to play with their toys more, and that's what Android is all about. :)
20. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
I will prove myself right when the ip5 gets released on Verizon this September. Watch how it would dent the figures of android users on Verizon, and you guys will know that I am right.
Just think about how the ip4, almost after a year of release, was still able to significantly impact the user percentage within Verizon. How much more when the ip5 comes out?
26. AndroidOS (Posts: 100; Member since: 21 Jun 2011)
You're theory occuring (if it does) won't prove that Android phones are second choice devices, it will just prove that more people want the iPhone -.-
Will it happen? Maybe, maybe not.
Let's not count out the Samsung Galaxy S 2. :)
24. saiki4116 (Posts: 371; Member since: 31 Mar 2011)
do u how much these carriers are selling iphone4(32) in India?
its 42000INR approximately 933$ while recently released SGSII is being sold at 30000 INR.
the price difference is mainly present since samsung has manufacturing units here in India,while for Apple it is not case and that is plainly importing
25. Rohitraut (unregistered)
here its a different story in India. the iphone here is very expensive starting at Rs 40,000. whereas android handsets are available right from Rs 9000(samsung galaxy pop). so Even a 20,000 Rs phone is well featured and enough for most of the people. and in 40,000 u get a well advacned laptop. thts y iphone isnt a huge success here in India
28. SteveJobsEvilTsin (unregistered)
I bought Android due to the iPhones limited capabilities. It was available in plentiful quantity.
6. Sniggly (Posts: 7199; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
"Apple is accused of anticompetitive practices" and nobody is surprised.
9. iwebdroidberry7 (Posts: 230; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)
Just make your profile name "IDontLikeApple" and call it a day.
22. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
You should be thankful sniggly that Apple is only carried by a few carriers, which is by the way the reason why they are being accused of anticompetitive practices. Think of how the iphone sales would even be bigger if the iphone is being sold under every carrier :)
27. Bob (unregistered)
You're post makes no sense to me and I don't find any relevance in it
7. ardent1 (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Sniggly, you shouldn't confuse US Anti-Competitive practices (such as the Sherman Act, The Clayton Act, etc) with those abroad, respectively. If you do that, then you are simply putting your foot in your mouth yet again.
13. Sniggly (Posts: 7199; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Yet again, eh? I'm not talking about laws. I'm talking about Apple doing just about anything it can not just to beat the competition, but to be the only game in town and not even let anyone else in to compete.
17. ardent1 (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Sniggly, Apple is giving customers a great value proposition. The tablet market has been around for 10 years prior to the iPad; the Microsoft tablet PC started in 2000. Apple didn't invent the smartphone either, it just made a better product. The same goes for MP3 players as well.
You come across like the other manufacturers who got caught with their pants down. It only took Apple 15 months or so to overtake RIM.
18. Sniggly (Posts: 7199; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I'm talking about how Apple tried to get jailbreaking declared a felony, how they have sued every single one of their major competitors for everything ranging from the name of a service to the shape of the phone. I'm talking about Apple's work to ensure that their products are the single most obvious object in stores and online. How they sue everyone for copying them but have no problem shamelessly ripping off of their competitors. And how about that neat little policy of leaning on their business partners to ensure that their coffers are the only place with significant profits?
They make products that work. Great. But Apple has a hissy fit if their products and services aren't presented first, second, third and fourth ahead of their competitors. And God forbid if someone else starts making more money than they do.
19. ardent1 (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Sniggly, you are being unctuous. First, you talk about anticompetitive practices, then you switch gears on how Apple is the bad guy for protecting its own intellectual property rights. How is Apple's addressing jailbreaking being anticompetitive? That is a HUGE stretch. Apple developed the AppStore and has a trademark on said name and Amazon is trying to benefit from Apple's sweat equity.
Let's example Apple's history of ripping off from its competitor: Apple's iPad ripped off the PC tablets, Apple's iPods ripped off existing MP3 players, Apple's iPhone ripped off existing cumbersome, ugly, hard to use smartphones, etc.. Here's the fact you continue to miss ... Apple is a SOFTWARE company that also makes hardware, but what separates Apple's products and the key to their success is the software. Google copied Apple's pinch to zoom technology.
So please get this simple point: APPLE is all about the SOFTWARE -- the fact the physical product is aesthetically beautiful, and polished is secondary.
Apple is leaning on its suppliers because the suppliers haven't passed on enough of their savings to Apple. Apple has given their suppliers a lot of business and in some cases, capital to build new plants.
21. vishu9 (Posts: 252; Member since: 03 Mar 2011)
In case you weren't around for the last few days let me remind you...ur sweet Apple was juts forced to pay $40 billion as royalties to Nokia in the copyright infringement case. Surely this proves that Apple is not all good..its a fiercely competitive industry and every company wants to make you pay them...its just that many a times apple's methods seem a little too rigid..or authoritarian if you will
31. ardent1 (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
vishu9, where in hell did you get your facts when you wrote: "Apple was juts forced to pay $40 billion as royalties to Nokia in the copyright infringement case."
If you really, really believe that then you are really, really stupid. That is one of the dumbest comments one can make.
23. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
I think you misunderstood this article sniggly. If you really think about it, Apple is limiting themselves to only a couple of carriers, when they can be on all carriers and even have bigger sales figures. So how can you say that they want to be the only game in town and not let anyone else in to compete?
29. BenCjamin (Posts: 80; Member since: 13 May 2011)
apple makes good products but sniggly is right apple wants everything to begin and end with them. They haven't even partnered with FLASH for crying out loud because it would hurt their pride. The reason practically everyone hates apple is because it's restrictiveness and exclusivity. If you have an apple iphone you have to have an apple computer, an apple ipad, ect... They make good products but it's not for everyone.
30. ivanprskalo (Posts: 119; Member since: 09 Dec 2010)
Seriously people, how no one see that Apple is trying monopolize the market.
That behavior is ugly and just mean!!
Let others live and breathe.
Not everyone wants buy super-high-extreme-expensive iStuff (which are, to be honest, built very well) but essentially, are quite like others in the market and you can do pretty much the same things with them, more or less.
So, to summarize, Apple: - high prices,
- highly restricted OS-es,
- quality of build,
- neat design to some point (but not so beautiful, to me it is ugly, but that's whole other story, I'm trying to be objective here),
- fascistic market behavior...
All in all, not enough to convince people with more than two brain cells in the head to switch to them and buy their iCrap...
Cheers people, and die Apple!