3 ms·

I think an intervention would be a disaster. If Steve Jobs is right, and the progress of the platform is really slowed by cross platform toolkits, then interve

I think an intervention would be a disaster. If Steve Jobs is right, and the progress of the platform is really slowed by cross platform toolkits, then intervention would literally slow down the progress of computing, and possibly set a precedent that slows progress indefinitely. If by being right, Apple ends up in a more dominant position, that won't prevent Google and Microsoft from altering their own strategies to compete. Both of them still have massive market power they can leverage. If he's wrong, then surely he's handing a serious competitive advantage to Google, Microsoft, RIM, Nokia etc, and as all the cool apps start to appear on all of these platforms along with a plethora of interesting and cool devices, Apple will shrink back to a minority player differentiated only by style. I think it would be a terrible for both sides of this debate if the outcome is determined by judges and Apple is not allowed to take this risk.

chc 17y ago
Your comment is an example of a false dichotomy. We do not have precisely two options: A) He's right and forcing them to allow frameworks will slow computing as a whole B) He's wrong and cool apps will start to appear on all the competing platforms There's also, just as one example: C) He's wrong but large numbers of cool apps will not start to appear only on competing platforms (perhaps because the app markets on all those platforms combined are dwarfed by Apple's App Store)
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- rbarooah 17y ago
  You're right that we may not have precisely two options. However the mere possibility of the competition failing to compete for reasons that are not clearly articulated is the worst possible reason for intervention. If there are other real options that aren't just hypothetical, I would genuinely like to hear them. Both Google and Adobe seem to be saying that they are happy to compete with Apple, and that their approach is better, and there is no shortage of prognosticators who say that Apple's strategy will fail independently of intervention.

chc 17y ago

Your comment is an example of a false dichotomy. We do not have precisely two options: A) He's right and forcing them to allow frameworks will slow computing as a whole B) He's wrong and cool apps will start to appear on all the competing platforms There's also, just as one example: C) He's wrong but large numbers of cool apps will not start to appear only on competing platforms (perhaps because the app markets on all those platforms combined are dwarfed by Apple's App Store)

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
rbarooah 17y ago
You're right that we may not have precisely two options. However the mere possibility of the competition failing to compete for reasons that are not clearly articulated is the worst possible reason for intervention. If there are other real options that aren't just hypothetical, I would genuinely like to hear them. Both Google and Adobe seem to be saying that they are happy to compete with Apple, and that their approach is better, and there is no shortage of prognosticators who say that Apple's strategy will fail independently of intervention.