3 ms·

The places where people want Apple broken up are generally places where we all know it will make the result "worse" but will enable interoperability and competi

by saurik 6y ago

The places where people want Apple broken up are generally places where we all know it will make the result "worse" but will enable interoperability and competition and break down lock-in and empower users and lead to more repairable and less wasteful devices and (and and)... the idea is that what is best for an entire market isn't merely "the fastest thinnest devices with the longest battery life and the most integrated stacks" if that implies buying into one of a handful of locked down systems, but instead that we should actively enforce an optimization that is harmful for all of those companies and potentially their products but which causes an ecosystem of interoperable components where users have commensurate power to make demands back on platforms. It is the very true fact that economies of scale and efficiencies of vertical integration exist that make regulation and anti-trust law so critically important to prevent the world from being made up of an oligopoly of maybe three giant companies that each make one of everything you might ever own, all beautifully integrated with their own products while being almost entirely incompatible with the products made by the other two, with cross promotions from tying and forced purchases from bundling all making it difficult-to-impossible for a new company to independently introduce anything new without replicating the entire vertical stack of an incumbent.

zepto 6y ago
With all due respect, I don’t see any logic explaining how an ecosystem of interoperable products where users have commensurafe power to make demands back on platforms would be a consequence of breaking up Apple. I do think it’s a positive situation to wish, but the idea that it would arise simply as a result of breaking up Apple needs some serious explanation. Repairability leading to less waste is also a seems like an unlikely consequence of making devices less integrated. Apple’s device lifetimes are much greater than any of their competitors. I personally strongly value software freedom, and do not think we can afford to let the current situation persist for all time, but it pains me to see things like right to repair be tied in with the problems of the software ecology. One seems like Luddism, and the other seems like a bedrock of a sane digital future, two things that don’t mix well. One step which would seem to serve both of these goals, would be to require all devices that fit some general category of ‘general purpose computer’ to permit alternative operating systems to be installed. But that has absolutely zero to do with breaking up Apple. If we need rights, let’s actually say what they are. Breaking companies up doesn’t create rights. The null hypothesis for what would happen if you break up Apple is that Android would simply dominate, with no improvements over its current locked down state, which is admittedly slightly more free than Apple, but in no way resembles the utopia you describe. We’d probably get Facebook and Amazon forks of Android gaining more traction this time around, but offering none of what you and I want in terms of freedom.

by saurik 6y ago

zepto 6y ago

With all due respect, I don’t see any logic explaining how an ecosystem of interoperable products where users have commensurafe power to make demands back on platforms would be a consequence of breaking up Apple. I do think it’s a positive situation to wish, but the idea that it would arise simply as a result of breaking up Apple needs some serious explanation. Repairability leading to less waste is also a seems like an unlikely consequence of making devices less integrated. Apple’s device lifetimes are much greater than any of their competitors. I personally strongly value software freedom, and do not think we can afford to let the current situation persist for all time, but it pains me to see things like right to repair be tied in with the problems of the software ecology. One seems like Luddism, and the other seems like a bedrock of a sane digital future, two things that don’t mix well. One step which would seem to serve both of these goals, would be to require all devices that fit some general category of ‘general purpose computer’ to permit alternative operating systems to be installed. But that has absolutely zero to do with breaking up Apple. If we need rights, let’s actually say what they are. Breaking companies up doesn’t create rights. The null hypothesis for what would happen if you break up Apple is that Android would simply dominate, with no improvements over its current locked down state, which is admittedly slightly more free than Apple, but in no way resembles the utopia you describe. We’d probably get Facebook and Amazon forks of Android gaining more traction this time around, but offering none of what you and I want in terms of freedom.