Apple’s App Store “deserves scrutiny,” according to Mark Zuckerberg. While the Facebook CEO stop shore of calling it a monopoly, he told Axios on HBO that Apple has “unilateral control of what gets on phones, in terms of apps.”
Mark Zuckerberg Says ‘Questions’ About ‘Control of the App Store’
“I think it’s probably about 50% of Americans who have smart phones, and a lot more people around the world. I think there are more than a billion Apple devices, Mr. Zuckerberg said. “I do think that there are questions that people should be looking into about that control of the App store and whether that is enabling as robust of a competitive dynamic,” he continued.
Despite that, he stopped short of calling on the government to investigate. “I think I’m not necessarily the person to answer that. … I think some of the behavior certainly raises questions. And I do think it’s something that deserves scrutiny,” he said.
This level of lack of self-awareness, or brazenness, or both is Trumpian.
Sure kid. And based upon your recent website makeover you deserve to be raked over the coals and then keel hauled in shark infested waters.
Sharks deserve better.
Charlotte:
That image fronting the video is hilarious. Nor do I think that those tears welling up in Zuckerberg’s eyes are entirely crocodilian.
The potential hit to FB’s revenue stream is substantive, if Apple seals that tap. FB undoubtedly knows what fraction of their add revenue is linked to Apple devices vs Android and whatever is left after those two, and its loss is enough to make a not quite grown man cry. (Strings)
The hypocrisy is astounding. So Zuck with a monopoly in social networking who wont allow, say twitter, to just access Facebooks ad network and use it for themselves for free… he wants apple, who has a minority share in mobile app stores, to do what he would never consider doing.
Go **** yourself zuck.
@john-kheit:
I think ‘astounding’ is an understatement. Galling begins to describe this level of naked, head-spinning hypocrisy, especially when conjoined with his conclusion, ‘I think some of the behavior certainly raises questions. And I do think it’s something that deserves scrutiny’.
I’m sorry, whose behaviour deserves scrutiny? This is akin to Hannibal Lecter suggesting we scrutinise any cookbook from Martha Stewart.