6 ms·

Well of course you're going to prefer an anti-competitive approach if you view competition as burdensome. This has analogies in many industries. You should div

Well of course you're going to prefer an anti-competitive approach if you view competition as burdensome. This has analogies in many industries. You should divorce your personal anti-competition desires from the non-personal discussion. Encouraging choice is often a better way to give more people what they want.

ericmay 6y ago
The competition is in the marketplace. I'm not sure what value there is in having an Epic store, an Apple store, a Google store, a Netflix store, a Microsoft Store... Having choice isn't always better. I think the Apple iOS store is a very clear example where choice leads to negative experience for users. As I've mentioned before, Apple collectively bargains on behalf of users against developers. They enforce (albeit imperfectly) certain standards and force nefarious developers to implement things like sign in with Apple. They only, and I mean only, affect of releasing developers from the App Store is that they'll sign on with some 3rd party store, and if you want to use Spotify, or Netflix, or Facebook you'll get it from a 3rd party store where they charge the exact same prices but then infest the applications with hostile anti-patterns, tracking, etc. That's it. When you advocate for "choice" here, you're simply advocating for the choice for users to pay the same prices they've been paying except also being exposed to anti-patterns that Apple is working to prevent. Choice in this case, is clearly bad. I'll also add, I have yet to hear a peep from Epic w.r.t having to go through Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo for releasing Fortnite via their locked-in app stores. The iPhone is no more or less a computing device than those are.
- horsawlarway 6y ago
  This is the same kind of response that used to be used when Google was discussed. "Google is clearly making the right choice for me. Their motto is literally 'don't be evil'". And in some respects it's true - A benevolent dictatorship is undeniably a great form of governance. The problem (and this is a problem) is that benevolent dictatorships never, Never, NEVER stay benevolent. At some point the guiding principles will change, or you will change, and you'll find yourself outside of the bubble you were so comfortable to live in. Some of us are already outside of that bubble. I don't like not being able to run software of my choice on a device I (in theory only, in Apple's case) own. Basically - I find this argument extremely short-sighted. It's trading any sense of long term thinking for the immediate convenience of letting someone else do the work for you in the short term. I have very, very little respect for this argument.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    > I don't like not being able to run software of my choice on a device I (in theory only, in Apple's case) own. I just don't find this compelling and don't really care about it. There are lots of products to choose from, you can build your own stuff, buy a generic phone and load whatever you want on it, etc. > The problem (and this is a problem) is that benevolent dictatorships never, Never, NEVER stay benevolent. Then new products will arise when this happens. > Basically - I find this argument extremely short-sighted. It's trading any sense of long term thinking for the immediate convenience of letting someone else do the work for you in the short term. I have very, very little respect for this argument. We routinely delegate trust in society to experts and other accountable entities. It's like saying we shouldn't have an FDA and everybody should just make sure they aren't ingesting something that will kill them. Also, can you clearly articulate what exactly I'm losing here with a single App Store? So far I just see more cons than pros.
    - horsawlarway 6y ago
      > Also, can you clearly articulate what exactly I'm losing here with a single App Store? So far I just see more cons than pros. No. My whole point is that you're clearly happy in your benevolent dictatorship. But it really doesn't suite me. I just told you the reason I'm not happy, and you handily dismissed it as "not compelling". Which is fine. For you it probably isn't. For me, not having root on a device I own intended for general purpose computing is literally a no-go on every front. It's not just insulting, it's a literal threat to my source of income. I find it just as crazy as if Volvo told me I could only drive on Volvo certified roads. They may be great roads (the best roads, which will never damage the car, guaranteed!) but I don't give a shit. I bought the car to drive where I want to drive. I buy a computing device to run the software I want to run. So that said, my real problem here is that both major mobile operating systems currently operate under this model. Google is marginally better (by the barest of margins). So you claim that a new product will arise when Apple decides that you don't fit in their dictatorship, but watching what's happening with Google and search right now... Well, I'll quote you - "I just don't find this compelling" Google is still the only player in search. Youtube is still the only player in video. New products are at best fringe products that don't gain traction, because there's a clear monopoly effect in play here.
- jasonlotito 6y ago
  > I'll also add, I have yet to hear a peep from Epic w.r.t having to go through Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo for releasing Fortnite Don't fight five enemies when defeating one will defeat all five.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Which would make a little bit more sense if they weren't also suing Google at the same time, but I guess at least they're going after mobile altogether at the same time. It'll be interesting to see what happens. If they win this case (unlikely) it will cause a lot of changes. It really is an interesting case though. I see applications across multiple industries and services (Amazon, Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc.) as well as Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and others. If you can bypass the Apple App Store, I'm not finding a compelling reason that you can't bypass ANY App Store or similar product. If Nintendo sells a new console, they'll have to let you install any app store. Hell, why can't I create my own app store and publish it? Why only Epic?
- tutino 6y ago
  Sacrificing freedom & rights for user experience and comfort, that's how we get dictatorships. Apple takes total control but we shouldn't worry because they are "the good guys" acting "on user behalf" ? We have to distinguish User Experience (short term comfort) from User Respect/Freedom/Rights. Choice is bad for UX, but it is good for avoiding abuses. If you download FB, Instagram, TikTok, etc. on the app store those are malwares that collect all your data and Apple is doing absolutely nothing about it. ICloud is not even end-to-end encrypted. Let's stop this myth that Apple provides actual privacy. Apple doesn't care about you, they care about power. If they need to put "Privacy" in their ads for you to buy it, they'll do it. If they need to keep malwares on the app store to generate revenues, they'll do it (but they'll make sure you believe you are safe thx to their fake privacy propaganda). It's true other game platforms are closed but first we have more choice : Mobile gaming = Google or Apple Home gaming = Nintendo, Xbox, PlayStation, Linux/Windows/Mac, Steam, Itch.io, GameJolt, Windows store, Epic game store, Origin/Ubisoft/Blizzard, etc. Second : it's not about gaming only, it's about the right of people to control the device they bought. Iphone & Google have a far bigger monopoly and control on our life than an Xbox sitting in our living room, so it makes sense to worry about Apple and Google first.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    > Second : it's not about gaming only, it's about the right of people to control the device they bought. I think most people don't really want that right. Myself included. I like the iPhone as it is and don't see any advantages to changing the operating model. Maybe if you're a developer you don't like it, so in that case I just say too bad and just don't develop for the iPhone if it isn't profitable for you. All this talk about "freedom" and "rights" is quite a bit of misguided grandstanding if you ask me. "I bought an Xbox, where are my rights as a general computing device!11!" Give me a break. If you want all this stuff to "change' then go ahead and start with making Blizzard allow me to publish my independent games on their App Store with no review process and no revenue cut. Make Microsoft let me play Nintendo Switch games on my Xbox. Make game developers make all of their games cross-platform, no more Windows-exclusive games.
- belltaco 6y ago
  >The iPhone is no more or less a computing device than those are The iPad Pro, the iPad and iPhone is are not general computing devices, but more like gaming consoles? Wow. Apart from that, gaming consoles subsidize or barely eke out a profit for their hardware, whereas Apple charges buyers a huge margin on the phones. I'll agree to the forced 30% cut if Apple cuts their phone prices by 50%.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Just sounds to me like Apple has the better business model.

ericmay 6y ago

The competition is in the marketplace. I'm not sure what value there is in having an Epic store, an Apple store, a Google store, a Netflix store, a Microsoft Store... Having choice isn't always better. I think the Apple iOS store is a very clear example where choice leads to negative experience for users. As I've mentioned before, Apple collectively bargains on behalf of users against developers. They enforce (albeit imperfectly) certain standards and force nefarious developers to implement things like sign in with Apple. They only, and I mean only, affect of releasing developers from the App Store is that they'll sign on with some 3rd party store, and if you want to use Spotify, or Netflix, or Facebook you'll get it from a 3rd party store where they charge the exact same prices but then infest the applications with hostile anti-patterns, tracking, etc. That's it. When you advocate for "choice" here, you're simply advocating for the choice for users to pay the same prices they've been paying except also being exposed to anti-patterns that Apple is working to prevent. Choice in this case, is clearly bad. I'll also add, I have yet to hear a peep from Epic w.r.t having to go through Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo for releasing Fortnite via their locked-in app stores. The iPhone is no more or less a computing device than those are.

horsawlarway 6y ago
This is the same kind of response that used to be used when Google was discussed. "Google is clearly making the right choice for me. Their motto is literally 'don't be evil'". And in some respects it's true - A benevolent dictatorship is undeniably a great form of governance. The problem (and this is a problem) is that benevolent dictatorships never, Never, NEVER stay benevolent. At some point the guiding principles will change, or you will change, and you'll find yourself outside of the bubble you were so comfortable to live in. Some of us are already outside of that bubble. I don't like not being able to run software of my choice on a device I (in theory only, in Apple's case) own. Basically - I find this argument extremely short-sighted. It's trading any sense of long term thinking for the immediate convenience of letting someone else do the work for you in the short term. I have very, very little respect for this argument.
- ericmay 6y ago
  > I don't like not being able to run software of my choice on a device I (in theory only, in Apple's case) own. I just don't find this compelling and don't really care about it. There are lots of products to choose from, you can build your own stuff, buy a generic phone and load whatever you want on it, etc. > The problem (and this is a problem) is that benevolent dictatorships never, Never, NEVER stay benevolent. Then new products will arise when this happens. > Basically - I find this argument extremely short-sighted. It's trading any sense of long term thinking for the immediate convenience of letting someone else do the work for you in the short term. I have very, very little respect for this argument. We routinely delegate trust in society to experts and other accountable entities. It's like saying we shouldn't have an FDA and everybody should just make sure they aren't ingesting something that will kill them. Also, can you clearly articulate what exactly I'm losing here with a single App Store? So far I just see more cons than pros.
  - horsawlarway 6y ago
    > Also, can you clearly articulate what exactly I'm losing here with a single App Store? So far I just see more cons than pros. No. My whole point is that you're clearly happy in your benevolent dictatorship. But it really doesn't suite me. I just told you the reason I'm not happy, and you handily dismissed it as "not compelling". Which is fine. For you it probably isn't. For me, not having root on a device I own intended for general purpose computing is literally a no-go on every front. It's not just insulting, it's a literal threat to my source of income. I find it just as crazy as if Volvo told me I could only drive on Volvo certified roads. They may be great roads (the best roads, which will never damage the car, guaranteed!) but I don't give a shit. I bought the car to drive where I want to drive. I buy a computing device to run the software I want to run. So that said, my real problem here is that both major mobile operating systems currently operate under this model. Google is marginally better (by the barest of margins). So you claim that a new product will arise when Apple decides that you don't fit in their dictatorship, but watching what's happening with Google and search right now... Well, I'll quote you - "I just don't find this compelling" Google is still the only player in search. Youtube is still the only player in video. New products are at best fringe products that don't gain traction, because there's a clear monopoly effect in play here.
jasonlotito 6y ago
> I'll also add, I have yet to hear a peep from Epic w.r.t having to go through Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo for releasing Fortnite Don't fight five enemies when defeating one will defeat all five.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Which would make a little bit more sense if they weren't also suing Google at the same time, but I guess at least they're going after mobile altogether at the same time. It'll be interesting to see what happens. If they win this case (unlikely) it will cause a lot of changes. It really is an interesting case though. I see applications across multiple industries and services (Amazon, Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc.) as well as Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and others. If you can bypass the Apple App Store, I'm not finding a compelling reason that you can't bypass ANY App Store or similar product. If Nintendo sells a new console, they'll have to let you install any app store. Hell, why can't I create my own app store and publish it? Why only Epic?
tutino 6y ago
Sacrificing freedom & rights for user experience and comfort, that's how we get dictatorships. Apple takes total control but we shouldn't worry because they are "the good guys" acting "on user behalf" ? We have to distinguish User Experience (short term comfort) from User Respect/Freedom/Rights. Choice is bad for UX, but it is good for avoiding abuses. If you download FB, Instagram, TikTok, etc. on the app store those are malwares that collect all your data and Apple is doing absolutely nothing about it. ICloud is not even end-to-end encrypted. Let's stop this myth that Apple provides actual privacy. Apple doesn't care about you, they care about power. If they need to put "Privacy" in their ads for you to buy it, they'll do it. If they need to keep malwares on the app store to generate revenues, they'll do it (but they'll make sure you believe you are safe thx to their fake privacy propaganda). It's true other game platforms are closed but first we have more choice : Mobile gaming = Google or Apple Home gaming = Nintendo, Xbox, PlayStation, Linux/Windows/Mac, Steam, Itch.io, GameJolt, Windows store, Epic game store, Origin/Ubisoft/Blizzard, etc. Second : it's not about gaming only, it's about the right of people to control the device they bought. Iphone & Google have a far bigger monopoly and control on our life than an Xbox sitting in our living room, so it makes sense to worry about Apple and Google first.
- ericmay 6y ago
  > Second : it's not about gaming only, it's about the right of people to control the device they bought. I think most people don't really want that right. Myself included. I like the iPhone as it is and don't see any advantages to changing the operating model. Maybe if you're a developer you don't like it, so in that case I just say too bad and just don't develop for the iPhone if it isn't profitable for you. All this talk about "freedom" and "rights" is quite a bit of misguided grandstanding if you ask me. "I bought an Xbox, where are my rights as a general computing device!11!" Give me a break. If you want all this stuff to "change' then go ahead and start with making Blizzard allow me to publish my independent games on their App Store with no review process and no revenue cut. Make Microsoft let me play Nintendo Switch games on my Xbox. Make game developers make all of their games cross-platform, no more Windows-exclusive games.
belltaco 6y ago
>The iPhone is no more or less a computing device than those are The iPad Pro, the iPad and iPhone is are not general computing devices, but more like gaming consoles? Wow. Apart from that, gaming consoles subsidize or barely eke out a profit for their hardware, whereas Apple charges buyers a huge margin on the phones. I'll agree to the forced 30% cut if Apple cuts their phone prices by 50%.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Just sounds to me like Apple has the better business model.