4 ms·
I agree that if the “active participant” model somehow became a better fit for most people than the Apple/Google model, it seems like disruption would be possib
by aroman 6y ago
I agree that if the “active participant” model somehow became a better fit for most people than the Apple/Google model, it seems like disruption would be possible.
That’s a big “if” though. Curious if you think there are larger trends that would suggest that the current standard of the “walled garden”/closed software model will become less effective than the “active participant” model in meeting the computing needs of everyday people.
- zepto 6y agoYes, it’s a big if, however the number of people who can code and the general sophistication level of even amateur programmers is rising over time. Actual computer literacy in the sense of being about to both read and write programs is only going to increase over time. My sense is that Apple is underserving the needs of software creators in general, by shoehorning everything into Apps. They could respond to this, and I have been expecting them to for years. My sense now is that they may be too are too blinded by the store model to realize what is happening. This is one of the trends that I think Jobs would have understood, but that a post Jobs Apple may miss. Another trend is the rise of crypto. I am not a Bitcoin bull or anything like that, but now that there is so much creativity in the crypto space, I think it’s entirely feasible that we could solve the problem of distributing trust, so that we can provide something for end users with the safety of the App Store but without the central gatekeeper. This is not even close to being a solved problem yet, which is why I oppose the breakup of app stores. However the basic tools seem to exist for us to solve it, as does the pressure.