Tech Talk
By

Charles Cooper /

CNET/ June 23, 2010, 8:54 PM

On Eve of iPhone 4, Apple Resentment on Display

On stage at WWDC, Steve Jobs sits down to give a demo of the new FaceTime video calling feature.

On stage at WWDC, Steve Jobs sits down to give a demo of the new FaceTime video calling feature.

/ James Martin/CNET

Former Lotus Development founder-turned-technology investor (and Internet free-speech advocate) Mitch Kapor offers the money quote for the end of an interesting New York Times piece chronicling Apple's emergence as a tech industry superpower. Or should that be increasingly-hated tech industry superpower?

"The amount of resentment is very, very large," Kapor told The Times., He added that it was "reminiscent of the kind of resentment there was toward Microsoft when it was the platform an app developer had to be on."

Reading that I had to scratch my head. I remember the "kind of resentment" other companies, large and small, once felt toward Microsoft. Back when Bill Gates lorded it over the rest of the computer industry, he really lorded it. Nowadays, Gates ione of the world's most charitable philanthropists but then, he struck contempt and fear in the hearts of rivals and partners. Contempt because he oversaw a company that raked in billions despite turning out products that were usually of middling quality. And fear because he ran a company that had no compunctions about throwing its elbows around to get its way. That hard-edged way of doing business finally became the subject of a drawn-out antitrust battle with the United States Department of Justice.

But any discussion of the unease many of Steve Jobs' contemporaries apparently feel toward Apple has to be qualified. There's an obvious difference. Microsoft's run as Numero Uno coincided with the dominance of the client-server model of computing, where the company's DOS and then Windows operating systems were must-have components. Without the OS, all you owned was an inert piece of plastic and metal. So companies paid Bill Gates his royalties and did their grumbling far away from the microphones. That king was just too powerful to annoy.

In our increasingly Internet-centric Apple doesn't command that kind of dominance - yet. The company is expanding in different directions and commands an increasingly large ecosystem of developers. Andrew Gavil, an antitrust expert and professor of law at Howard University quoted in the Times piece asks whether Apple's become so powerful in any of the markets it competes in to affect competition. Then he answers his own question in the affirmative.

That's a mouthful. No doubt Apple can act willfully. The recent controversy stemming from its decision to exclude Google and AdMob from selling ads on the iPhone 4 being a case in point. Apple has its own advertising system for mobile phones and decided to bar its rival. That's also the kind of bully-boy tactic which is pure catnip for federal regulators. (The Federal Trade Commission is already investigating Apple's decision to block certain third-party programming tools from the iPad, including Adobe's Flash.) However, this remains a world away from the forced dependence on Windows which characterized the tech business in the 1980s and 1990s.

Where will all this lead? The Times piece is just the latest reminder that Apple isn't likely to win any popularity contests with its peers. (It's another story with Apple's rabidly loyal fan base.)  Still, let's remember that boorish behavior is not against the law. And even when prosecutors think they have clinching evidence, it's still a tough sell.

I sat in Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's court house for months in the late 1990s, listening as the great David Boies skillfully made the 's case to convict Microsoft as a predatory monopolist. It was great theater but the mountains of documentation which get submitted as evidence often wind up deciding antitrust cases. And that's what happened when Microsoft reversed most of the charges against it on appeal.

On the heels of its successful iPad debut - Apple sold 3 million iPads less than three months after the device went on sale - the company is set to start selling the iPhone 4 on Thursday. Based on the overwhelming pre-orders, Apple likely has another a mega-hit on its hands. All of which is likely to further stir the envy and concerns of rivals watching this former upstart morph into the new Goliath.

© 2010 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
  • Charles Cooper On Twitter » On Google+ »

    Charles Cooper is an executive editor at CNET News. He has covered technology and business for more than 25 years, working at CBSNews.com, the Associated Press, Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. E-mail Charlie.

12 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
andacar says:
How interesting. What goes around comes around...
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
andacar says:
I guess I can't help noticing how the tech press maintains the old double standard. Microsoft was excoriated for its business practices and quality, and rightly so. But no matter what Apple does it gets at best a qualified and lukewarm dressing down, usually followed by hundreds of screaming attacks from the Apple trolls that roam the web with more tenacity a clam. Steve Jobs is now the loose cannon on the block, though he always was one really. He reminds me in some ways of Walt Disney: brilliant, innovative, fearless, single minded about what he wants, and utterly uncaring of how is temper tantrums and tart opinions effect his workers or the rest of the industry.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
caffeinepills says:
Apple is taking snobbery to new heights... Is that Steve Jobs in that famous Apple commercial from the 80's as big brother?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
thesevenveils says:
It is difficult to resent success unless the success came from depict or strong arming competition.

Still, Steve Jobs is the best barker since P.T. Barnum. "There's a sucker born every minute"
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Constable Odo says:
Apple makes a few computers and a few smartphones and doesn't command majority market share in either. That hardly qualifies Apple as an overbearing monopoly of a company. You may either buy Apple products or not. There are plenty of other companies to choose from with computers and smartphones. The FTC and DOJ won't have much of a case against Apple. I don't know what Adobe was crying about when they said Apple was making them lose money when all the rest of the mobile industry was in favor of supporting Flash.

For those that just hate Apple because they don't like how Steve Jobs wears jeans and turtleneck, it's just too damn bad.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
askagain says:
correction

When I was a kid, we had one telephone company. You had to rent the phones from the telephone company. Fees for making long distance calls were fairly high. The telephone company, as a monopoly, was like a benevolent dictator. You had one choice but the service was very good. Directory assistance was free and the operator provided an immediate credit if you dialed the wrong long distance number by mistake. If your service went out, it was fixed by the next day. Today, we have choices such as cable phones, internet phones, mobile phones, etc. However, the service is poor and it can take many days to get someone to fix problems. Appple is just one of a number of companies that offer mobile phones. They may offer great phones that are in big demand, but the consumer has many choices. Apple is not the phone company monopoly of yesteryear. I am proof as one who walks around with a Motorola. If you don't like the Apple attitude, simply buy a phone made by a different company. It is not the end of the world.
reply
Chimney_fish replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I paid $13 a month back then....I pay $90 a month now....same usage......but you are right, I have a bunch of choices now at that $90 rate...
dekeita replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
@chimney fish How far back are we talking? It'd be interesting to compare the inflation adjusted prices.

Regardless though, its not the same usage, you can use your phone anywhere, and im guessing you have the internet on it too!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
askagain says:
When I was a kid, we had one telephone company. You had to rent the phones from the yelephone company. Fees for making long distance call were fairly high. The telephone company, as a monopoly, was like a benevolent dictator. You had one choice but the service was very good. Directory assistance was free and the operator provided an immediate credit if you dialed the wrong long distance number by mistake. If your service went out, it was fixed by the next day. Today, we have choices such as cable phones, internet phones, mobile phones, etc. However, the service is poor and it can take many days to get someone to fix problems. Appple is just one of a number of companies that offer mobile phones. They may offer great phones that are in big demand, but the consumer has many choices. Apple is not the phone company monopoly of yesteryear. I am proof as one who walks around with a Motorola. If you don't like the Apple attitude, simply buy a phone made by a different company. It is not the end of the world.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
TomColt says:
The vilification would make more sense if you offered some alternatives. If the only plan is to take down a large US business, just on the principle that they are too large, then don't expect a lot of new American businesses to readily fill the void. We no longer have that depth of competitors and markets this large demand huge capital.

Any void you create will be filled by a half-dozen other countries, of which I'm sure you know the top two... The difference is that those countries have leaders who want their nations to dominate global technology and are willing to help their citizens business interests domestically and internationally.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jtf1--2008 says:
skepticalJM, power finds a vacuum. Apple was nearly gone 15 years ago. Solid leadership and an understanding of what consumers wanted put Apple where it is today. What would you propose? That once a company dominates the market so thoroughly the government takes steps to reduce its market share? That's ridiculous. It's up to some other business to come up with a new idea just as Apple did. Sorry, my freedom isn't impinged by Apple's or Microsoft's or Google's power. They don't tell me how to run my life. I can accept their products or ignore them. I think you're trying to make an issue where these isn't one.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
skepticalJM says:
Why can't people in this country understand that when a company gets too big, it has annihilated the "free" in "free market". Everywhere we look in this market economy we see a segment dominated by a giant corporation that has done exactly this same thing; what is even worse, we are seeing global multiple domination of not only one market but many. Is it no wonder that our government has also been "bought out" by these people. How can we continue to talk of freedom when we see such things; when we realize that these people have attained such greedy power?
reply
See all 12 Comments