4 ms·

>society might be better off if someone takes the initiative to meet this demand rather than force a company to roll out the red carpet for it's competition. W

>society might be better off if someone takes the initiative to meet this demand rather than force a company to roll out the red carpet for it's competition. Would you say the same if the car market suddenly coalesced into a duopoly and the car companies become very restrictive? Would you defend only them being allowed to do basic repairs in the interest of safety? One going as far as saying you need to buy their tires or tires from companies that pay them tribute or the car won't start, their seat covers unless you manage disable some weird detection, etc The other allowing such stuff just making it a pain. Would you then say a company just needs to pop up and meet this demand? Despite all the stuff involved and the size of cars would be a lot lot easier. Because at least cars don't necessarily need an ecosystem, userbase and developer community outside of the company to get of the ground and get sales. As soon as you apply these things the other industries they start sounding ridiculous and hilariously anticompetitive but with phones people for some reason have come to accept it.

fossuser 6y ago
I don’t totally agree with your analogy framing. My take: Car company requires third party manufacturers to adhere to its quality standards and pass review before being installed. The car company installs all of the third party parts for you and distributes them globally, handling payment, they charge 30% (or 15%) to the third party for this. If you refuse to adhere to their quality standards they refuse to install your third party accessory. Drivers can only get approved service from the car company. Seems fine? Probably an exclusive benefit for owners of that car. I could see people choosing that car because of this.
- echelon 6y ago
  That is not right at all! The world should not work like that. Your car, your choice. You want to install an aftermarket supercharger and fish fins? Your prerogative. Toyota and Apple have no right to tell you what to do.
  - fossuser 6y ago
    Then you can buy a different car from the other company that doesn't have this policy. You can even still hack the fins on your car despite the policy, but it might be difficult to do yourself and it'll void your warranty.
    - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
      Firstly, thats not how warranty work - if I add fins to my car that does not give you the right to void wrranty on the engine. Secondly I vote to get laws passed that they make sure they can shove this policy. I've had enough of this corporate lawmaking and stockholm syndrome victims covering for them
    - modo_mario 6y ago
      >Then you can buy a different car from the other company that doesn't have this policy. Which now also charges more fucking over consumers because they can and limits more in their favour because ...hey it's a duopoly. There's no pressure to make it a monopoly. Also as someone else noted apples own actions show that this isn't how they do business given the opportunity.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Except in the real world Apple purposefully prevents you from getting your hands on replacement parts, they sue anyone distributing scematics, refuse to repair equipment that's 4 years old and repairable and refuse to do data recovery. So no, there is no part of that thats fine. When laws around cars were put together people actually cared about their liberty, and I have the right to open car repair tomorrow and BMW and Toyotas of the world wont interfere. And unlike iPhones,cars actually are dangerous.

fossuser 6y ago

I don’t totally agree with your analogy framing. My take: Car company requires third party manufacturers to adhere to its quality standards and pass review before being installed. The car company installs all of the third party parts for you and distributes them globally, handling payment, they charge 30% (or 15%) to the third party for this. If you refuse to adhere to their quality standards they refuse to install your third party accessory. Drivers can only get approved service from the car company. Seems fine? Probably an exclusive benefit for owners of that car. I could see people choosing that car because of this.

echelon 6y ago
That is not right at all! The world should not work like that. Your car, your choice. You want to install an aftermarket supercharger and fish fins? Your prerogative. Toyota and Apple have no right to tell you what to do.
- fossuser 6y ago
  Then you can buy a different car from the other company that doesn't have this policy. You can even still hack the fins on your car despite the policy, but it might be difficult to do yourself and it'll void your warranty.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Firstly, thats not how warranty work - if I add fins to my car that does not give you the right to void wrranty on the engine. Secondly I vote to get laws passed that they make sure they can shove this policy. I've had enough of this corporate lawmaking and stockholm syndrome victims covering for them
  - modo_mario 6y ago
    >Then you can buy a different car from the other company that doesn't have this policy. Which now also charges more fucking over consumers because they can and limits more in their favour because ...hey it's a duopoly. There's no pressure to make it a monopoly. Also as someone else noted apples own actions show that this isn't how they do business given the opportunity.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
Except in the real world Apple purposefully prevents you from getting your hands on replacement parts, they sue anyone distributing scematics, refuse to repair equipment that's 4 years old and repairable and refuse to do data recovery. So no, there is no part of that thats fine. When laws around cars were put together people actually cared about their liberty, and I have the right to open car repair tomorrow and BMW and Toyotas of the world wont interfere. And unlike iPhones,cars actually are dangerous.