An analysis of the US DOJ's Apple case; sources say Apple plans to start rolling out its system for updating packaged iPhones' iOS to US stores in April 2024
With its lawsuit against Apple, the Justice Department focuses on outdated issues and irrelevant points, missing an opportunity to address more pressing concerns.
BloombergMark Gurman
Context & Ripple Effects
The case followed January reporting that the DOJ was preparing an antitrust challenge focused on the iPhone's position; the subsequent coverage frames the complaint as a contested account of which competitive issues deserve priority. The anticipated DOJ challenge therefore put Apple’s platform controls under a more formal spotlight.
Separately, Apple was preparing a US-store system to update software on boxed iPhones before sale. That operational change matters because it extends software deployment control into the final retail handoff, rather than leaving updates solely to buyers after activation.
First-order effects
Apple’s US retail operation can begin rolling out a process for bringing packaged iPhones’ iOS current in stores, potentially reducing the gap between a device’s factory software and its software at sale.
The DOJ case immediately requires Apple to defend its iPhone-related business practices while its arguments over the complaint’s relevance are tested through litigation rather than commentary.
Second-order effects
A pre-sale update capability could make the out-of-box experience more consistent for buyers and give Apple another controlled point in the device software lifecycle; store operations must absorb the associated process.
The lawsuit raises the cost of maintaining tightly controlled iPhone distribution and software pathways, increasing scrutiny of whether those controls serve product management, competition, or both.
Third-order effects
If retail-side software updating becomes routine, device makers may treat deployment governance as extending from factory production through retail sale, not ending when hardware leaves the factory.
The dispute is part of a longer contest over how antitrust rules assess integrated hardware, software, and distribution systems; the eventual legal resolution will determine how much of that integration faces challenge.
The trend: This is one data point in the collision between increasingly end-to-end device lifecycle control and antitrust scrutiny of the platform power that such control can reinforce.
These two sections in the DoJ's filing are fascinating. 1: There was nothing different about the Mac except the colour of the box and how cool the ads were 2: The iPhone ‘mimicked’ a PC interface. (You mean, with a start menu?)
The DOJ's suit vs. Apple touches on the social stigma of blue bubble-green bubble messaging and argues that protocols like these make experiences on rival phones worse. Legal experts say this might not be legally defensible, even if it crafts a good narrative and taps into the f…
Power On: With its lawsuit against Apple, the Justice Department focuses on outdated issues and irrelevant points, missing an opportunity to address more pressing concerns. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
- Why Apple may partner with Google, OpenAI or others for generative AI in iOS 18. - Apple prepares to roll out in-box iPhone software update feature to all US retail stores. - Sonos prepares to launch Roam 2 speaker - iOS 18 to get new Home Screen https://www.bloomberg.com/...
Gurman has long used his perch at Bloomberg to be an Apple booster, but it's wild how disingenuous his arguments are against the Apple antitrust suit. Super apps, cloud gaming, and message interoperability are absolutely not solved issues as he suggests. https://www.bloomberg.com…
Good piece. I think DoJ went after iPhone as monopoly because of the prior App Store lawsuits that didn't result in much, so it had to take a different tack. Also, after what Apple pulled with DMA and what some call suspect compliance, it was the straw that broke the camels bac…
The antitrust suit against Apple largely focuses on nonissues or problems that are already being fixed, rather than more pressing matters, @markgurman writes in this week's Power On https://www.bloomberg.com/... via @technology
A funny thing about the DOJ's case against Apple (as @markgurman notes here) is it hits hard on stuff that's a bit outdated or irrelevant and doesn't focus as much on what would seem like a major vulnerability: the App Store https://www.bloomberg.com/... [image]
You should subscribe to Mark's newsletter. He explains in a few paragraphs the issues with Lina Khan's suit better than “experts” who spend pages to try and justify antitrust for its own sake.
I'm not sure that's going to matter because it all comes down to what some judge in NJ (who probably isn't super tech savvy and might own an iPhone and uses carplay). Apple's attitude is going to matter. I recall when Judge Penfield Jackson ordered Microsoft to create a version…