12 ms·

I mean, couldn't we just replace Microsoft->Sony and PC->Playstation and the argument falls apart a bit? > Imagine if Sony did this on Playstation. a) prohibit

I mean, couldn't we just replace Microsoft->Sony and PC->Playstation and the argument falls apart a bit? > Imagine if Sony did this on Playstation. a) prohibiting the installation of non-PlayStation games and b) insisting that all purchases done via their store give them a 30% cut. Many platforms are like this -- and many also have the majority marketshare. Is this a call to redefine what platforms can and cannot control?

sedatk 6y ago
Arguably, Microsoft also does it on Xbox.
- qayxc 6y ago
  AFAIK in-app purchases are no problem on XBox. You can buy your Fortnite V-Bucks anywhere and can use them on XBox just fine, no?
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
There is a distinction between a general purpose computing device and a gaming console. I depend on my computer for important aspects of my life, not just entertainment. I perceive capricious behaviour like this ad a threat to my liberty and well-being.
- viro 6y ago
  "There is a distinction between a general purpose computing device and a gaming console." Whats the distinction? gaming console use x86 now. is it the keyboard support? the gpu ?
  - jchw 6y ago
    What its marketed as and who it is aimed at. Nobody ever bought a nintendo NES to use as a personal computing device, it wasn’t that they looked at the specsheet and it had a 6502. There were in fact PCs with 6502s and powerpcs as well. In any case, I still think video game consoles are stupid but they at least have some incentives to do a walled garden type thing (anti-cheat, anti-piracy) and lacking general code execution they actually stand a reasonable chance of accomplishing that (versus iOS where I am currently typing on a jailbroken device.)
    - viro 6y ago
      So the operating system?
      - jchw 6y ago
        I said >What its marketed as and who it is aimed at. I am not sure I can make my position any clearer than that. It's not an item in a spec sheet. It's what you're claiming to be selling.
      - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
        yeah, the most important piece of software on the planet.
    - m4rtink 6y ago
      You could trade stocks and bet on horses using the NES/Famicom hardware in Japan. There was a modem acessory and a cartridge with the corresponding software: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Computer_Network_System https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Computer_Network_Syst...
    - kalleboo 6y ago
      > Nobody ever bought a nintendo NES to use as a personal computing device Although interestingly, the Japanese console makers have continually tried to push the computer/development angle. When the NES was released in Japan before the US, it was branded the "Family Computer" and you could get a keyboard and a version of BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_BASIC Sony has had multiple attempts, with a consumer homebrew dev kit for the PS1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze ), and Linux for the PS2 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_for_PlayStation_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_for_PlayStation_2 ) and later PS3.
      - jchw 6y ago
        Yep, those are pretty cool and also make it more sad that video game consoles continue to go down this road of lockdown. Of course Sony also had OtherOS on PS3. It's a bit sad it ended the way that it did.
  - the_af 6y ago
    Well, you could say one definition is that a general purpose computing device is a tool that lets you run what you want in whichever way you want to install it (sort of, of course one could nitpick exceptions). An Apple laptop looks like a general purpose computing device. Do we want it not to be one, and become closer to a gaming console? I think that merely looking at the guts and seeing which processor it has is kind of a red herring.
    - hnick 6y ago
      > Well, you could say one definition is that a general purpose computing device is a tool that lets you run what you want in whichever way you want to install it (sort of, of course one could nitpick exceptions). It does seem a bit tautological. A vendor can restrict access then simply argue this is not a general purpose computing device because look, you can't run the things we don't let you run.
      - the_af 6y ago
        It seems tautological but if you think about it, it's what it actually means. A general purpose computing device is a device that can be used for any computing. If you restrict it, it ceases to be general purpose. If you turn it into a locked-up appliance, like a Playstation, it's not general-purpose anymore. General-purpose is when you can install whatever software will run in that architecture, unimpeded.
        hnick 6y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree, but does that imply that whether or not something is a general purpose computer is reliant on the current software status of the machine rather than the hardware? You can crack some smartphones or install Linux on older Playstations. Tautological was in reference to the argument about whether or not we should be able to install things if an iPhone is a general purpose device. If that status relies on what software lets us do, then the answer is always going to be no, because if they don't let us then we aren't allowed to.
  - jogu 6y ago
    I think the definition has always been a bit gray, even more so in recent years but I don't think it's about the hardware present in the device. For example, Sony made a push to classify the PS2 as a computer by providing a BASIC interpreter and later a distribution of Linux to evade some tax laws in Europe. I think if I were to answer this question now it would be based on the expectation of the end consumer to be expected to, or have the ability to program the device for general purpose tasks. Things like game consoles, phones, smart appliances, etc. all start to blur that line but I think it comes down to the consumer's expectations.
- rokobobo 6y ago
  One could argue that you bought your PC and the Windows license that comes with it because it's general purpose. And you would have paid less money if you knew it was going to lock you in. Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of "digital anti-globalism", but if this thing went to court, both sides would have their reasonable arguments. And let's hope that if there's a ruling, it rules in favor of open platforms. At the very least, I think it would be great if the courts rule that a platform that's built open and sold as open cannot be consequently closed. But I doubt that Apple will be forced to open its hardware to non-App Store programs.
  - csharptwdec19 6y ago
    > One could argue that you bought your PC and the Windows license that comes with it because it's general purpose. And you would have paid less money if you knew it was going to lock you in. And in fact Microsoft tried this (both with Windows RT and Windows 10 S) and in both cases few people bought in (or, in some cases, wound up 'confused' that other software wouldn't run, leading to the eventual sunsetting of Windows 10 S). I do think both sides have reasonable arguments, but at the same time 'computing' has become ubiquitous, and Smartphones arguably even more so. Personally, I think we are in a weird state when we consider historical context; once upon a time, remember that GM would in fact make moves to ensure they did not get too much market share. I can't remember the number but I think they didn't want to go over 59%. Of course you COULD have more market share even back then, but it also typically resulted in a lot more government oversight and willingness for the government to intervene in situations like this (thinking about Modems and Ma Bell here...) IMO Google sidesteps the problem by not having a lot of 'handset' market share. (Also, perhaps more controversial to state, but their compliance with LE/Intelligence agencies probably allows more things to be ignored.) I just don't know what to say anymore. Apple (and, dare I say, to a greater extent, Google) are doing the sorts of things that absolutely landed Microsoft in court and caused microsoft to make a number of decisions that kneecapped them in the first decade of the 2000s. It's been happening for years, and yet we are only now seeing enough people agreeing that we can talk about it without getting shouted down.
    - bnjms 6y ago
- highmastdon 6y ago
  Why would there be a difference in treatment for entertainment vs general purpose? Both are devices that I’ve bought, so I should be able to use them as I see fit.
- nappy 6y ago
  I agree with this sentiment... But I wonder if Apple considers iPhones to be general purpose computing devices, or even wants them to be. They're not marketed that way, likely most users are uninterested in using an iPhone this way. A separate concern is around anticompetitive behavior. There is no way to sideload an app, or even use a competing app store, and Apple is charging rent. This is pretty clearly anticompetitive behavior that harms consumers.
  - sjs382 6y ago
    > I agree with this sentiment... But I wonder if Apple considers iPhones to be general purpose computing devices, or even wants them to be. They're not marketed that way, likely most users are uninterested in using an iPhone this way. But iPads (though iOS was renamed/forked to iPadOS on those devices) are definitely marketed as general purpose computing devices. The headline on https://www.apple.com/ipad/ https://www.apple.com/ipad/ is "Your next computer is not a computer". iPad/iPadOS have these same restrictions as iPhone/iOS.
    - skuthus 6y ago
      Not to mention that the transition to Apple Silicon will lead to the total integration of the Mac App Store into the iOS store, so these policies are going to merge at some point and literally apply to general computers too
      - dividedbyzero 6y ago
        It's also going to require mandatory brain microchips to ensure all of the user's thoughts conform to Apple policies /s All of this is still unknown outside of Apple. What is known so far seems to me like it's pointing in the direction of a pretty open macOS and a very much locked down iOS, to satisfy different needs. We'll know more by late fall, I guess.
      - notriddle 6y ago
        I would be thrilled to learn that Apple plans to prevent anyone from running non-Apple-signed code on the Mac, because it would likely lead to better tools for writing iDevice-targetted software on non-Mac platforms (either officially supported, or jury-rigged by third parties out of necessity). As a Linux desktop user with an iPhone, this would inevitably benefit me (I don't write iPhone software right now, but if there was an iPhone compiler for Linux, I might start). Why do you think Microsoft bothered with WSL? We know that most Windows users won't do it. It was a developer-attracting move, meant to make it easier to build Windows client applications with Linux server components. Apple benefits from the same thing being offered natively. I can't see them abandoning it, even though it does create a tension between the Mac as a consumer product and the Mac as a developer's tool for iOS.
- ppseafield 6y ago
  Do the US's antitrust laws make a distinction on "only being used for entertainment"?
- vultour 6y ago
  Exactly, I depend on my computer for important aspects of my life, I don't depend on my phone for those.
  - skuthus 6y ago
    What about when your computer is on Apple Silicon, and the stores (and their policies) have been merged?
    - scarface74 6y ago
      You mean the same thing that people have been saying since 2011?
  - dividedbyzero 6y ago
    I depend on my phone for a lot more important aspects of my life than my laptop. Seems pretty obvious to me, there are apps for pretty much anything I could want to do, and I believe it's the more secure platform by far, plus I have it on me pretty much always.
  - kalleboo 6y ago
    For a huge amount of people, their phone is their only general computing device.
- mrandish 6y ago
  Like it or not, U.S. law doesn't seem to hinge on what one user personally depends on or feels is essential.
reissbaker 6y ago
FWIW, actually Sony doesn't demand a 30% cut of all revenue from any company that makes an app for their store. You can have subscriptions to non-Sony services, and Sony doesn't see a dime. Sony doesn't demand a cut of Netflix subscriptions, for example, despite having a Netflix app available for download. Similarly, it doesn't get a cut of Spotify revenue either. For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenience of integrating with their payment services, not because they'll ban you for using anything else. It's also a super different situation in general; for example, Sony actually often pays developers to develop for their store (e.g. PubFund [1]), and does free marketing campaigns for them. Console makers live and die by their access to a pipeline of new exclusive games, so they treat game developers well; Apple doesn't, so it squeezes app developers for what it can. Hence why game developers are suing Apple but not Sony. 1: https://www.giantbomb.com/pub-fund/3015-7606/ https://www.giantbomb.com/pub-fund/3015-7606/
- eggbrain 6y ago
  > You can have subscriptions to non-Sony services, and Sony doesn't see a dime Hmmm -- not to stretch the analogy too thin, but is this similar to Apple though, where they allow you to sign in to subscription services (e.g. Netflix) with your existing account to the service, but don't allow sign ups (which would trigger payment processing)? Or is payment processing baked in there as well? > For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenience of integrating with their payment services, not because they'll ban you for using anything else. To clarify, has any developer integrated external payment services within a Playstation game / app / etc? From all the games and apps I've played with, I never remember any other payment system built in other than Sony's. > It's also a super different situation in general; for example, Sony actually often pays developers to develop for their store ... Blackberry did the same thing near the end of it's life -- I was at a hackathon where they were giving away Blackberries and cash to anyone who developed a Blackberry app -- but does not giving back really reflect as monopolistic?
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    > but is this similar to Apple though, where they allow you to sign in to subscription services (e.g. Netflix) with your existing account to the service, but don't allow sign ups (which would trigger payment processing)? Or is payment processing baked in there as well? Actually, looking now, I think you're right. It looks like Spotify disabled setting up subscriptions on PS4. I guess PS4 subscriptions are a small enough chunk of revenue for Spotify it didn't really matter to them. I guess the real point is that PS4 just isn't a large enough chunk of these kinds of services' market share by revenue to matter; they don't need signups, since not many people primarily use Spotify via PlayStation.
quwert95 6y ago
Funny you mention Sony -- Linux support on the PS3 turned into a big deal. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS ) Historically, other game consoles could be used a "general purpose computing devices," such as the Sega Dreamcast with Windows CE and the Nintendo Famicom (which is short for Family Computer).
- Osiris 6y ago
  Big enough deal for them to remove it...
  - quwert95 6y ago
    And then get a drawn out lawsuit. :)
- blihp 6y ago
  Sony also 'officially' (in the sense that it was targeting hackers/developers) supported Linux on the PS2. IIRC, it was a $200 item which included a hard drive, network adapter and DVD with Linux on it.
- toast0 6y ago
  > Sega Dreamcast with Windows CE Afaik, there was never a Windows CE general purpose environment for the Dreamcast. Sega supported game developers using Sega's 100% propriatary OS or using Windows CE as embedded OS. Either way, the OS would ship on the disc, and isn't a lot more than a kernel and libraries. Of course, BSDs and Linux were ported to the Dreamcast at some point, as with anything that can boot user provided code and has enough ram. The dreamcast did have a web browser, and keyboard and mouse, but without significant local writable storage, would make a lousy general purpose computer.
tambourine_man 6y ago
We have to either acknowledge that PCs/Macs were a historical accident (a happy one, IMO), much like the open web of yore, or we have to legislate the shit out of everything that has a general purpose CPU, basically requiring every Turing machine sold to have an officially supported setting to enable running arbitrary code. It can be off by default, and probably should. But trying to hair split console from computer from cellphone makes less and less sense everyday and we all know it.
badsectoracula 6y ago
FWIW one of my biggest annoyances in gaming is how closed consoles are - i have a PS Vita, which is a great gaming handheld hardware-wise, but totally a victim to Sony's whims software-wise (they even disabled and removed all PSM games). Similar with Nintendo's Switch - Nintendo even tried to shut down a YouTuber's channel just for mentioning homebrew/jailbreaking for Switch. It is such a shame and honestly i wish these devices were as open as PCs are. That they aren't is a testament to how much they have brainwashed people to think as normal that they have no control over their own devices and what they can do with them.
Osiris 6y ago
I don't think it's a stretch to say that these platforms are being monopolistic either. Why should you not be able to write your own game and sell DVDs of it for people to play? Of course, in this case piracy would be the primary reason for the restriction, but I think it's valid to look at places where the platform is controlled by a single vendor.
Joeri 6y ago
“What about” is not a valid argument though. If what apple is doing is wrong, no amount of hypocrisy by others will make it less wrong. Anyway, I think platforms need to be regulated to be more open. We need a right to modify along with a right to repair. When I pay for a product that happens to support downloadable software, I should be free to put whatever software on it that I want. If apple allowed sideloading on iOS like they do on macOS this would not have blown up to the degree that it did.
hyperbovine 6y ago
Or how about PC with Xbox?
Townley 6y ago
The price was right on a PS VR, so I got one and thought briefly about playing around with VR using Unity. The ecosystem was so locked down (and becoming an official developer such a challenge) that I gave up and never looked back. The appeal of developing in Apple's ecosystem has always been the exposure to large audiences, the (relatively decent) tooling, and the ability to creatively actualize your ideas. That last one goes away when Apple starts looking more like Sony. I'll leave it up to lawyers to decide if this is illegal, but I know this certainly makes me less excited about developing my next iOS/OSX app

sedatk 6y ago

Arguably, Microsoft also does it on Xbox.

qayxc 6y ago
AFAIK in-app purchases are no problem on XBox. You can buy your Fortnite V-Bucks anywhere and can use them on XBox just fine, no?

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

There is a distinction between a general purpose computing device and a gaming console. I depend on my computer for important aspects of my life, not just entertainment. I perceive capricious behaviour like this ad a threat to my liberty and well-being.

viro 6y ago
"There is a distinction between a general purpose computing device and a gaming console." Whats the distinction? gaming console use x86 now. is it the keyboard support? the gpu ?
- jchw 6y ago
  What its marketed as and who it is aimed at. Nobody ever bought a nintendo NES to use as a personal computing device, it wasn’t that they looked at the specsheet and it had a 6502. There were in fact PCs with 6502s and powerpcs as well. In any case, I still think video game consoles are stupid but they at least have some incentives to do a walled garden type thing (anti-cheat, anti-piracy) and lacking general code execution they actually stand a reasonable chance of accomplishing that (versus iOS where I am currently typing on a jailbroken device.)
  - viro 6y ago
    So the operating system?
    - jchw 6y ago
      I said >What its marketed as and who it is aimed at. I am not sure I can make my position any clearer than that. It's not an item in a spec sheet. It's what you're claiming to be selling.
    - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
      yeah, the most important piece of software on the planet.
  - m4rtink 6y ago
    You could trade stocks and bet on horses using the NES/Famicom hardware in Japan. There was a modem acessory and a cartridge with the corresponding software: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Computer_Network_System https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Computer_Network_Syst...
  - kalleboo 6y ago
    > Nobody ever bought a nintendo NES to use as a personal computing device Although interestingly, the Japanese console makers have continually tried to push the computer/development angle. When the NES was released in Japan before the US, it was branded the "Family Computer" and you could get a keyboard and a version of BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_BASIC Sony has had multiple attempts, with a consumer homebrew dev kit for the PS1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze ), and Linux for the PS2 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_for_PlayStation_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_for_PlayStation_2 ) and later PS3.
    - jchw 6y ago
      Yep, those are pretty cool and also make it more sad that video game consoles continue to go down this road of lockdown. Of course Sony also had OtherOS on PS3. It's a bit sad it ended the way that it did.
- the_af 6y ago
  Well, you could say one definition is that a general purpose computing device is a tool that lets you run what you want in whichever way you want to install it (sort of, of course one could nitpick exceptions). An Apple laptop looks like a general purpose computing device. Do we want it not to be one, and become closer to a gaming console? I think that merely looking at the guts and seeing which processor it has is kind of a red herring.
  - hnick 6y ago
    > Well, you could say one definition is that a general purpose computing device is a tool that lets you run what you want in whichever way you want to install it (sort of, of course one could nitpick exceptions). It does seem a bit tautological. A vendor can restrict access then simply argue this is not a general purpose computing device because look, you can't run the things we don't let you run.
    - the_af 6y ago
      It seems tautological but if you think about it, it's what it actually means. A general purpose computing device is a device that can be used for any computing. If you restrict it, it ceases to be general purpose. If you turn it into a locked-up appliance, like a Playstation, it's not general-purpose anymore. General-purpose is when you can install whatever software will run in that architecture, unimpeded.
      - hnick 6y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree, but does that imply that whether or not something is a general purpose computer is reliant on the current software status of the machine rather than the hardware? You can crack some smartphones or install Linux on older Playstations. Tautological was in reference to the argument about whether or not we should be able to install things if an iPhone is a general purpose device. If that status relies on what software lets us do, then the answer is always going to be no, because if they don't let us then we aren't allowed to.
- jogu 6y ago
  I think the definition has always been a bit gray, even more so in recent years but I don't think it's about the hardware present in the device. For example, Sony made a push to classify the PS2 as a computer by providing a BASIC interpreter and later a distribution of Linux to evade some tax laws in Europe. I think if I were to answer this question now it would be based on the expectation of the end consumer to be expected to, or have the ability to program the device for general purpose tasks. Things like game consoles, phones, smart appliances, etc. all start to blur that line but I think it comes down to the consumer's expectations.
rokobobo 6y ago
One could argue that you bought your PC and the Windows license that comes with it because it's general purpose. And you would have paid less money if you knew it was going to lock you in. Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of "digital anti-globalism", but if this thing went to court, both sides would have their reasonable arguments. And let's hope that if there's a ruling, it rules in favor of open platforms. At the very least, I think it would be great if the courts rule that a platform that's built open and sold as open cannot be consequently closed. But I doubt that Apple will be forced to open its hardware to non-App Store programs.
- csharptwdec19 6y ago
  > One could argue that you bought your PC and the Windows license that comes with it because it's general purpose. And you would have paid less money if you knew it was going to lock you in. And in fact Microsoft tried this (both with Windows RT and Windows 10 S) and in both cases few people bought in (or, in some cases, wound up 'confused' that other software wouldn't run, leading to the eventual sunsetting of Windows 10 S). I do think both sides have reasonable arguments, but at the same time 'computing' has become ubiquitous, and Smartphones arguably even more so. Personally, I think we are in a weird state when we consider historical context; once upon a time, remember that GM would in fact make moves to ensure they did not get too much market share. I can't remember the number but I think they didn't want to go over 59%. Of course you COULD have more market share even back then, but it also typically resulted in a lot more government oversight and willingness for the government to intervene in situations like this (thinking about Modems and Ma Bell here...) IMO Google sidesteps the problem by not having a lot of 'handset' market share. (Also, perhaps more controversial to state, but their compliance with LE/Intelligence agencies probably allows more things to be ignored.) I just don't know what to say anymore. Apple (and, dare I say, to a greater extent, Google) are doing the sorts of things that absolutely landed Microsoft in court and caused microsoft to make a number of decisions that kneecapped them in the first decade of the 2000s. It's been happening for years, and yet we are only now seeing enough people agreeing that we can talk about it without getting shouted down.
  - bnjms 6y ago
highmastdon 6y ago
Why would there be a difference in treatment for entertainment vs general purpose? Both are devices that I’ve bought, so I should be able to use them as I see fit.
nappy 6y ago
I agree with this sentiment... But I wonder if Apple considers iPhones to be general purpose computing devices, or even wants them to be. They're not marketed that way, likely most users are uninterested in using an iPhone this way. A separate concern is around anticompetitive behavior. There is no way to sideload an app, or even use a competing app store, and Apple is charging rent. This is pretty clearly anticompetitive behavior that harms consumers.
- sjs382 6y ago
  > I agree with this sentiment... But I wonder if Apple considers iPhones to be general purpose computing devices, or even wants them to be. They're not marketed that way, likely most users are uninterested in using an iPhone this way. But iPads (though iOS was renamed/forked to iPadOS on those devices) are definitely marketed as general purpose computing devices. The headline on https://www.apple.com/ipad/ https://www.apple.com/ipad/ is "Your next computer is not a computer". iPad/iPadOS have these same restrictions as iPhone/iOS.
  - skuthus 6y ago
    Not to mention that the transition to Apple Silicon will lead to the total integration of the Mac App Store into the iOS store, so these policies are going to merge at some point and literally apply to general computers too
    - dividedbyzero 6y ago
      It's also going to require mandatory brain microchips to ensure all of the user's thoughts conform to Apple policies /s All of this is still unknown outside of Apple. What is known so far seems to me like it's pointing in the direction of a pretty open macOS and a very much locked down iOS, to satisfy different needs. We'll know more by late fall, I guess.
    - notriddle 6y ago
      I would be thrilled to learn that Apple plans to prevent anyone from running non-Apple-signed code on the Mac, because it would likely lead to better tools for writing iDevice-targetted software on non-Mac platforms (either officially supported, or jury-rigged by third parties out of necessity). As a Linux desktop user with an iPhone, this would inevitably benefit me (I don't write iPhone software right now, but if there was an iPhone compiler for Linux, I might start). Why do you think Microsoft bothered with WSL? We know that most Windows users won't do it. It was a developer-attracting move, meant to make it easier to build Windows client applications with Linux server components. Apple benefits from the same thing being offered natively. I can't see them abandoning it, even though it does create a tension between the Mac as a consumer product and the Mac as a developer's tool for iOS.
ppseafield 6y ago
Do the US's antitrust laws make a distinction on "only being used for entertainment"?
vultour 6y ago
Exactly, I depend on my computer for important aspects of my life, I don't depend on my phone for those.
- skuthus 6y ago
  What about when your computer is on Apple Silicon, and the stores (and their policies) have been merged?
  - scarface74 6y ago
    You mean the same thing that people have been saying since 2011?
- dividedbyzero 6y ago
  I depend on my phone for a lot more important aspects of my life than my laptop. Seems pretty obvious to me, there are apps for pretty much anything I could want to do, and I believe it's the more secure platform by far, plus I have it on me pretty much always.
- kalleboo 6y ago
  For a huge amount of people, their phone is their only general computing device.
mrandish 6y ago
Like it or not, U.S. law doesn't seem to hinge on what one user personally depends on or feels is essential.

reissbaker 6y ago

FWIW, actually Sony doesn't demand a 30% cut of all revenue from any company that makes an app for their store. You can have subscriptions to non-Sony services, and Sony doesn't see a dime. Sony doesn't demand a cut of Netflix subscriptions, for example, despite having a Netflix app available for download. Similarly, it doesn't get a cut of Spotify revenue either. For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenience of integrating with their payment services, not because they'll ban you for using anything else. It's also a super different situation in general; for example, Sony actually often pays developers to develop for their store (e.g. PubFund [1]), and does free marketing campaigns for them. Console makers live and die by their access to a pipeline of new exclusive games, so they treat game developers well; Apple doesn't, so it squeezes app developers for what it can. Hence why game developers are suing Apple but not Sony. 1: https://www.giantbomb.com/pub-fund/3015-7606/ https://www.giantbomb.com/pub-fund/3015-7606/

eggbrain 6y ago
> You can have subscriptions to non-Sony services, and Sony doesn't see a dime Hmmm -- not to stretch the analogy too thin, but is this similar to Apple though, where they allow you to sign in to subscription services (e.g. Netflix) with your existing account to the service, but don't allow sign ups (which would trigger payment processing)? Or is payment processing baked in there as well? > For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenience of integrating with their payment services, not because they'll ban you for using anything else. To clarify, has any developer integrated external payment services within a Playstation game / app / etc? From all the games and apps I've played with, I never remember any other payment system built in other than Sony's. > It's also a super different situation in general; for example, Sony actually often pays developers to develop for their store ... Blackberry did the same thing near the end of it's life -- I was at a hackathon where they were giving away Blackberries and cash to anyone who developed a Blackberry app -- but does not giving back really reflect as monopolistic?
- reissbaker 6y ago
  > but is this similar to Apple though, where they allow you to sign in to subscription services (e.g. Netflix) with your existing account to the service, but don't allow sign ups (which would trigger payment processing)? Or is payment processing baked in there as well? Actually, looking now, I think you're right. It looks like Spotify disabled setting up subscriptions on PS4. I guess PS4 subscriptions are a small enough chunk of revenue for Spotify it didn't really matter to them. I guess the real point is that PS4 just isn't a large enough chunk of these kinds of services' market share by revenue to matter; they don't need signups, since not many people primarily use Spotify via PlayStation.

quwert95 6y ago

Funny you mention Sony -- Linux support on the PS3 turned into a big deal. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS ) Historically, other game consoles could be used a "general purpose computing devices," such as the Sega Dreamcast with Windows CE and the Nintendo Famicom (which is short for Family Computer).

Osiris 6y ago
Big enough deal for them to remove it...
- quwert95 6y ago
  And then get a drawn out lawsuit. :)
blihp 6y ago
Sony also 'officially' (in the sense that it was targeting hackers/developers) supported Linux on the PS2. IIRC, it was a $200 item which included a hard drive, network adapter and DVD with Linux on it.
toast0 6y ago
> Sega Dreamcast with Windows CE Afaik, there was never a Windows CE general purpose environment for the Dreamcast. Sega supported game developers using Sega's 100% propriatary OS or using Windows CE as embedded OS. Either way, the OS would ship on the disc, and isn't a lot more than a kernel and libraries. Of course, BSDs and Linux were ported to the Dreamcast at some point, as with anything that can boot user provided code and has enough ram. The dreamcast did have a web browser, and keyboard and mouse, but without significant local writable storage, would make a lousy general purpose computer.

tambourine_man 6y ago

We have to either acknowledge that PCs/Macs were a historical accident (a happy one, IMO), much like the open web of yore, or we have to legislate the shit out of everything that has a general purpose CPU, basically requiring every Turing machine sold to have an officially supported setting to enable running arbitrary code. It can be off by default, and probably should. But trying to hair split console from computer from cellphone makes less and less sense everyday and we all know it.

badsectoracula 6y ago

FWIW one of my biggest annoyances in gaming is how closed consoles are - i have a PS Vita, which is a great gaming handheld hardware-wise, but totally a victim to Sony's whims software-wise (they even disabled and removed all PSM games). Similar with Nintendo's Switch - Nintendo even tried to shut down a YouTuber's channel just for mentioning homebrew/jailbreaking for Switch. It is such a shame and honestly i wish these devices were as open as PCs are. That they aren't is a testament to how much they have brainwashed people to think as normal that they have no control over their own devices and what they can do with them.

Osiris 6y ago

I don't think it's a stretch to say that these platforms are being monopolistic either. Why should you not be able to write your own game and sell DVDs of it for people to play? Of course, in this case piracy would be the primary reason for the restriction, but I think it's valid to look at places where the platform is controlled by a single vendor.

Joeri 6y ago

“What about” is not a valid argument though. If what apple is doing is wrong, no amount of hypocrisy by others will make it less wrong. Anyway, I think platforms need to be regulated to be more open. We need a right to modify along with a right to repair. When I pay for a product that happens to support downloadable software, I should be free to put whatever software on it that I want. If apple allowed sideloading on iOS like they do on macOS this would not have blown up to the degree that it did.

hyperbovine 6y ago

Or how about PC with Xbox?

Townley 6y ago

The price was right on a PS VR, so I got one and thought briefly about playing around with VR using Unity. The ecosystem was so locked down (and becoming an official developer such a challenge) that I gave up and never looked back. The appeal of developing in Apple's ecosystem has always been the exposure to large audiences, the (relatively decent) tooling, and the ability to creatively actualize your ideas. That last one goes away when Apple starts looking more like Sony. I'll leave it up to lawyers to decide if this is illegal, but I know this certainly makes me less excited about developing my next iOS/OSX app