3 ms·
Apple’s locking their customer base into their profitable products (iPhones) through services that work best on those devices. To their credit, Apple Music is a
by snazz 7y ago
Apple’s locking their customer base into their profitable products (iPhones) through services that work best on those devices. To their credit, Apple Music is available for Android, but is still much better integrated and available out of the box on iOS. By making their “house brand” products the default option, consumers buy into the ecosystem further and further and cannot exit very easily.
It’s like buying a house that can contain products from a special store that sells cheaper and better versions of name brand products that conform to your house’s design. If you move into a house built by another company, suddenly you must shop at a store where the options are more expensive and you lose access to some of the things you bought for your old house.
- pfranz 7y agoThat's a different argument and more about Apple Maps, Mail, etc being the "default app" (which is an option on macOS). That's something I'd like to have, but like I said I don't have a strong legal/moral opinion either way. They're talking about the lock-in of the App Store and competing with Apple Music. Your argument sounds more applicable to music purchases than a subscription service. Especially with a subscription, it seems more similar to the independent butcher/bread maker competing with a grocery store analogy brought up elsewhere in this thread. I'm a bit lost on the house analogy and how that applies to Spotify and Apple Music.