Separate from the whole open vs. closed debate is the matter of usability and design. Simply stated, Apple products are the best at this for most products. De

Separate from the whole open vs. closed debate is the matter of usability and design. Simply stated, Apple products are the best at this for most products. Developers are driven to the quality of the environment and the subsequent quality of the products that they'll be making. I work mostly in the enterprises realm where it's easy to see that the baseline "quality" of the ecosystem (mostly Microsoft, but also other related stuff) affects the quality of the the products built around it. A quick glance at the products built around the Apple ecosystem shows a stark difference. Ever since I started bringing my Mac to work (since the switch to the Intel processor), the difference has been even more obvious to me. I think that in this instance, open vs. closed is a means to an end. If people never had any problems with how Microsoft stuff worked, then no one would have been griping about their stuff being closed. And since Apple stuff is generally pretty good, people are willing to forgo the "closed" ecosystem since they are getting what they need out of it. I also think that the closed nature of Apple's ecosystem is a little overstated. For instance: it's true that the iPhone app store has pretty draconian policies, but on the other hand, nobody has to truly go through it to get an app onto the iPhone. They could just make a web app. However, people choose to create native iPhone apps because they work better. But then again, they probably work better because Apple tends to enforce their strict policies.