3 ms·

I would rephrase the argument as "Apple wants thousands of good or decent apps, but none so great so as to pull the platform into its own orbit." This rings tr

by mustpax 16y ago

I would rephrase the argument as "Apple wants thousands of good or decent apps, but none so great so as to pull the platform into its own orbit." This rings true especially in light of Jobs' statements about being able to innovate without being beholden to 3rd party vendors. As to OP's statements about not building a company on iOS apps, this is once again better stated as not building a company on a single iOS app. If you have a bunch of good apps (games or not) then this is much more sustainable, as they pose less of a "threat" to the platform.

joe_the_user 16y ago
Excellent point. You could also refined it to "Apple wants thousands of good or decent apps, but none so great so as to pull the platform into its own orbit and removing great-but-threatening apps is going to have to have priority over getting the good or decent apps"
stcredzero 16y ago
Let's examine killer apps that actually were a threat to a platform. Microsoft Office - At one time, Apple would've been very unhappy if Microsoft took this away from the Mac. MS Office is very dominant in its niche, almost a monopoly. Adobe Photoshop - Photoshop is a defacto standard. There were other image manipulation programs, but only one considered suitable for professional use. There are times when Adobe could've really hurt Apple by giving the Mac release short shrift. Metrowerks - At one point, the only way to write code for the Mac. All of Apple's recent actions are consistent with the intent to prevent another monopoly on their turf. They do not want someone else to exclusively control a killer app on their new platform, because when this happened in the past, they were at someone else's mercy.
- ams6110 16y ago
  Office on the Mac, lways (to me) felt like a kludge. It did not work like other Mac apps, it did not look like other Mac apps, and yet it did not work quite like it did on Windows either. There was Internet Explorer for the Mac also, it was even a bigger kludge than Office. I guess Apple thought they needed Office and IE at the time, but surely not because it was great software. In retrospect, I wonder if it really made any difference at all.
  - zmmz 16y ago
    I guess Apple thought they needed Office and IE at the time, but surely not because it was great software. In retrospect, I wonder if it really made any difference at all. They always have and always will need Office as long as it is the dominant tool used in professional environments. Apple does not need it to be any good, but it needs it to be there. It is one of the big separators between OSX and any other non-Windows OS, Apple needs it as on their list of offerings in order to be able to pitch itself more easily. Not everybody is savvy enough to know of possible Office alternatives (especially not the Apples "lifestyle crowd" audience), so not having the option of using Office would be very easy marketing against OSX, especially considering that their main campaign until recently has been "Get a Mac". As much as many people don't like the thought of it, Office is, and will for a very long time be, the prime application used in businesses worldwide.

by mustpax 16y ago

joe_the_user 16y ago

Excellent point. You could also refined it to "Apple wants thousands of good or decent apps, but none so great so as to pull the platform into its own orbit and removing great-but-threatening apps is going to have to have priority over getting the good or decent apps"

stcredzero 16y ago

Let's examine killer apps that actually were a threat to a platform. Microsoft Office - At one time, Apple would've been very unhappy if Microsoft took this away from the Mac. MS Office is very dominant in its niche, almost a monopoly. Adobe Photoshop - Photoshop is a defacto standard. There were other image manipulation programs, but only one considered suitable for professional use. There are times when Adobe could've really hurt Apple by giving the Mac release short shrift. Metrowerks - At one point, the only way to write code for the Mac. All of Apple's recent actions are consistent with the intent to prevent another monopoly on their turf. They do not want someone else to exclusively control a killer app on their new platform, because when this happened in the past, they were at someone else's mercy.

ams6110 16y ago
Office on the Mac, lways (to me) felt like a kludge. It did not work like other Mac apps, it did not look like other Mac apps, and yet it did not work quite like it did on Windows either. There was Internet Explorer for the Mac also, it was even a bigger kludge than Office. I guess Apple thought they needed Office and IE at the time, but surely not because it was great software. In retrospect, I wonder if it really made any difference at all.
- zmmz 16y ago
  I guess Apple thought they needed Office and IE at the time, but surely not because it was great software. In retrospect, I wonder if it really made any difference at all. They always have and always will need Office as long as it is the dominant tool used in professional environments. Apple does not need it to be any good, but it needs it to be there. It is one of the big separators between OSX and any other non-Windows OS, Apple needs it as on their list of offerings in order to be able to pitch itself more easily. Not everybody is savvy enough to know of possible Office alternatives (especially not the Apples "lifestyle crowd" audience), so not having the option of using Office would be very easy marketing against OSX, especially considering that their main campaign until recently has been "Get a Mac". As much as many people don't like the thought of it, Office is, and will for a very long time be, the prime application used in businesses worldwide.