5 ms·

Well, Walmart is the only retailer in a Walmart store. Only Walmart is permitted to retail in a Walmart store.

mmastrac 6y ago
But Walmart isn't the only store to go to in meatspace. If you have an iOS device, you get the Walmart of apps and only the Walmart of apps. This is the problem.
- Spivak 6y ago
  But you're choosing a definition of the world that's too narrow -- "if you've already decided to go to Walmart then Walmart is the only store that can sell at Walmart." Why isn't "the world" the smartphone market where there are plenty of options?
  - untog 6y ago
    > Why isn't "the world" the smartphone market where there are plenty of options? At a certain point in debates like this everyone ends up over-examining analogies to a point where it isn't useful. To be a useful parallel you'd need a world where you can only buy two types of car and each one only lets you go to one type of shopping mall, or something like that. My point is, that isn't how either the real world works or how smartphone app stores work, so it's a debate over nothing.
  - MattRix 6y ago
    Because an iPhone is not the App Store. This seems fairly obvious? "the definition of world is too narrow" is a pretty weak argument.
    - veilrap 6y ago
      I buy an iPhone, knowing what App Store I'm getting. I don't see the issue, I chose to buy into this ecosystem.
  - mortenjorck 6y ago
    > plenty of options There are two options, and one of them is provided free of charge by the world's largest advertising company. The state of the smartphone OS market is so wildly different from the general-merchandise retail market as to render any comparisons meaningless.
    - szhu 6y ago
      Not only are there only two options, there is a high entry fee to each option, and you can only choose one at a time even if you wanted to pay this entry fee twice. What percent of consumers are willing to carry two phones in their pockets? So you can compare this to if you could only buy things at two different stores, each store has a hefty membership fee, and you were effectively locked into your decision for at least a year at a time.
  - shaftway 6y ago
    I think the underlying sentiment is that you've bought the device, so you should be able to do whatever you want with it. And there's no technical reason that your choice of device should preclude other stores. For a more meatspace example let's say you own a car with full self-driving capabilities. Now, the manufacturer of that car also runs a chain of grocery stores. It would be problematic if the car refused to drive too a different store. "If you've already to decided to buy a Walmart car then Walmart is the only store that you can go to."
    - SJetKaran 6y ago
      well put
  - thebean11 6y ago
    There are essentially two options for smartphones, for tablets it's closer to one. Remember when Microsoft got in trouble for bundling Internet Explorer in Windows? Seems quaint compared to what Apple is doing now.
- jlokier 6y ago
  It can be very difficult for someone to switch between iOS and Android. They're called ecosystems for that reason. There's the obvious problem around apps and protocols. If you've been using them for a long time, your apps, their connectivity to each other, personal data etc is likely to be locked into Apple services & devices, or Google services & devices, in a way that is difficult or even impossible to move over (I know people with data they can only access now if they buy a license to apps they can no longer run). More subtly, for example there was a recent article about how people in some places experience a social penalty if they aren't using iOS, because the difference is visible to others in terms of protocols used for instant messaging. In my view, the great difficulty of switching and the penalties of switching mean that both Apple and Android ecosystems are, more or less, separate marketplaces, and each one has a strongly dominant player that should be subject to anti-trust measures. Basically if you build a platform ecosystem, expressly design to lock-in users especially in ways that hugely affect their lives, that comes with responsibilities you don't have in a free and competitive marketplace where your users can switch with low friction.
jonny_eh 6y ago
> Walmart is the only retailer in a Walmart store It's not like people have to choose whether to exclusively shop at Walmart or Target, like they do with phones. Reasonable people don't own both an iPhone and an Android.
dentemple 6y ago
Walmart actually does allow multiple retailers in Walmart stores. Such as Coca-cola (who even has to stock their own inventory), and those shops and restaurants that are at the front of every superstore location.
mattnewton 6y ago
It is more like "Fordmart" is the only store you can go to in a Ford car, I think.

But Walmart isn't the only store to go to in meatspace. If you have an iOS device, you get the Walmart of apps and only the Walmart of apps. This is the problem.

Spivak 6y ago
But you're choosing a definition of the world that's too narrow -- "if you've already decided to go to Walmart then Walmart is the only store that can sell at Walmart." Why isn't "the world" the smartphone market where there are plenty of options?
- untog 6y ago
  > Why isn't "the world" the smartphone market where there are plenty of options? At a certain point in debates like this everyone ends up over-examining analogies to a point where it isn't useful. To be a useful parallel you'd need a world where you can only buy two types of car and each one only lets you go to one type of shopping mall, or something like that. My point is, that isn't how either the real world works or how smartphone app stores work, so it's a debate over nothing.
- MattRix 6y ago
  Because an iPhone is not the App Store. This seems fairly obvious? "the definition of world is too narrow" is a pretty weak argument.
  - veilrap 6y ago
    I buy an iPhone, knowing what App Store I'm getting. I don't see the issue, I chose to buy into this ecosystem.
- mortenjorck 6y ago
  > plenty of options There are two options, and one of them is provided free of charge by the world's largest advertising company. The state of the smartphone OS market is so wildly different from the general-merchandise retail market as to render any comparisons meaningless.
  - szhu 6y ago
    Not only are there only two options, there is a high entry fee to each option, and you can only choose one at a time even if you wanted to pay this entry fee twice. What percent of consumers are willing to carry two phones in their pockets? So you can compare this to if you could only buy things at two different stores, each store has a hefty membership fee, and you were effectively locked into your decision for at least a year at a time.
- shaftway 6y ago
  I think the underlying sentiment is that you've bought the device, so you should be able to do whatever you want with it. And there's no technical reason that your choice of device should preclude other stores. For a more meatspace example let's say you own a car with full self-driving capabilities. Now, the manufacturer of that car also runs a chain of grocery stores. It would be problematic if the car refused to drive too a different store. "If you've already to decided to buy a Walmart car then Walmart is the only store that you can go to."
  - SJetKaran 6y ago
    well put
- thebean11 6y ago
  There are essentially two options for smartphones, for tablets it's closer to one. Remember when Microsoft got in trouble for bundling Internet Explorer in Windows? Seems quaint compared to what Apple is doing now.
jlokier 6y ago
It can be very difficult for someone to switch between iOS and Android. They're called ecosystems for that reason. There's the obvious problem around apps and protocols. If you've been using them for a long time, your apps, their connectivity to each other, personal data etc is likely to be locked into Apple services & devices, or Google services & devices, in a way that is difficult or even impossible to move over (I know people with data they can only access now if they buy a license to apps they can no longer run). More subtly, for example there was a recent article about how people in some places experience a social penalty if they aren't using iOS, because the difference is visible to others in terms of protocols used for instant messaging. In my view, the great difficulty of switching and the penalties of switching mean that both Apple and Android ecosystems are, more or less, separate marketplaces, and each one has a strongly dominant player that should be subject to anti-trust measures. Basically if you build a platform ecosystem, expressly design to lock-in users especially in ways that hugely affect their lives, that comes with responsibilities you don't have in a free and competitive marketplace where your users can switch with low friction.

jonny_eh 6y ago

> Walmart is the only retailer in a Walmart store It's not like people have to choose whether to exclusively shop at Walmart or Target, like they do with phones. Reasonable people don't own both an iPhone and an Android.

dentemple 6y ago

Walmart actually does allow multiple retailers in Walmart stores. Such as Coca-cola (who even has to stock their own inventory), and those shops and restaurants that are at the front of every superstore location.

mattnewton 6y ago

It is more like "Fordmart" is the only store you can go to in a Ford car, I think.