4 ms·

Mind share and Market share are the justifications. Once you have a developer comfortable with a platform, it can be hard to impossible to get them to switch.

Mind share and Market share are the justifications. Once you have a developer comfortable with a platform, it can be hard to impossible to get them to switch. These are businesses with an interest in making money, not people with an interest in making the world a better place. I'm not saying it's right, just that it makes business sense.

shmerl 11y ago
> Mind share and Market share are the justifications. Rather herding their market share and mind share, and making it hard to go outside the herd. I.e. if you want to be cross platform - pay the tax. That's the whole purpose of their lock-in. > Once you have a developer comfortable with a platform, it can be hard to impossible to get them to switch. Yes, and it's disgusting to use development tools for lock-in. MS do it like forever.[1] > These are businesses with an interest in making money Lock-in is a crooked method of making money. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_...
- cptskippy 11y ago
  Right because that isn't the case with every other vendor or platform out there?
  - shmerl 11y ago
    It isn't. Not everyone is a jerk.
    - Delmania 11y ago
      Name one major technology company that doesn't try to lock you into their recurring subscription platforms.
      - shmerl 11y ago
        Anything that uses interoperable technology. Lock-in implies something that you can't replace for no valid reason. Standards are aimed at such interoperaibilty and luckily we have a lot of standard technologies which are interchangeable. It would have been a nightmare, if literally everything would have been locked-in MS style. I.e. imagine you bought a light bulb and can't use it because it's XYZ lightbulb that can't work with fixture ABC and requires you to rewire the whole house. What a wonderful MS style experience. Luckily it's not the case most of the time.
        Delmania 11y ago
        > Anything that uses interoperable technology Such as? Sure you can replace your iPhone with an Android device, but it's not pretty.
        shmerl 11y ago
        Better ask Apple why never could use standard chargers and USB cables ;)

shmerl 11y ago

> Mind share and Market share are the justifications. Rather herding their market share and mind share, and making it hard to go outside the herd. I.e. if you want to be cross platform - pay the tax. That's the whole purpose of their lock-in. > Once you have a developer comfortable with a platform, it can be hard to impossible to get them to switch. Yes, and it's disgusting to use development tools for lock-in. MS do it like forever.[1] > These are businesses with an interest in making money Lock-in is a crooked method of making money. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_...

cptskippy 11y ago
Right because that isn't the case with every other vendor or platform out there?
- shmerl 11y ago
  It isn't. Not everyone is a jerk.
  - Delmania 11y ago
    Name one major technology company that doesn't try to lock you into their recurring subscription platforms.
    - shmerl 11y ago
      Anything that uses interoperable technology. Lock-in implies something that you can't replace for no valid reason. Standards are aimed at such interoperaibilty and luckily we have a lot of standard technologies which are interchangeable. It would have been a nightmare, if literally everything would have been locked-in MS style. I.e. imagine you bought a light bulb and can't use it because it's XYZ lightbulb that can't work with fixture ABC and requires you to rewire the whole house. What a wonderful MS style experience. Luckily it's not the case most of the time.
      - Delmania 11y ago
        > Anything that uses interoperable technology Such as? Sure you can replace your iPhone with an Android device, but it's not pretty.
        shmerl 11y ago
        Better ask Apple why never could use standard chargers and USB cables ;)