4 ms·

In your example, you forget that there is a competing private road just next to it. And competitors aren’t arguing about not being able to put new competing roa

In your example, you forget that there is a competing private road just next to it. And competitors aren’t arguing about not being able to put new competing roads, they are arguing that they should be able to put tollboths on Apples road, because even though Apple don’t have a monopoly and don’t even have the most used road, it is still a very profitable road for Apple.

emsy 5y ago
No, those two roads connect two mostly distinct group of people, since most people use either an Apple or a Google smartphone, not both, so I still think it’s a fitting analogy. And what is being argued for depends on who you ask. Some are fine with smaller fees, others don’t like the fact that Apple can control who and what is allowed to use the road, which is immense power for a road that connects millions of people.
- threatofrain 5y ago
  But how does this metaphor work because Apple and Google customers largely have the same experiences; if anything the Apple ecosystem often has a teensy bit more than Google. Also, are single ecosystem households more common than multi ecosystem ones? Is that obvious?
  - emsy 5y ago
    I stated that the same applies to Google and other companies. These networks hold immense power over our lives and for some reason we grant it to them unquestioned because "well they built it". Also, I wasn't talking about households but individuals. Most individuals only use one main OS as a daily driver and the lock-in is a real and important factor that contributes to competitors not simply being able to "build their own". This argument doesn't make sense if you think about it. ISPs build their own infrastructure but depending on where you live they still have to comply to regulations. As smartphones are an ever increasing component of our lives (contact tracing, payment, tickets, access to hardware and services) it seems odd that we somehow exempt them from any regulations whatsoever.

emsy 5y ago

No, those two roads connect two mostly distinct group of people, since most people use either an Apple or a Google smartphone, not both, so I still think it’s a fitting analogy. And what is being argued for depends on who you ask. Some are fine with smaller fees, others don’t like the fact that Apple can control who and what is allowed to use the road, which is immense power for a road that connects millions of people.

threatofrain 5y ago
But how does this metaphor work because Apple and Google customers largely have the same experiences; if anything the Apple ecosystem often has a teensy bit more than Google. Also, are single ecosystem households more common than multi ecosystem ones? Is that obvious?
- emsy 5y ago
  I stated that the same applies to Google and other companies. These networks hold immense power over our lives and for some reason we grant it to them unquestioned because "well they built it". Also, I wasn't talking about households but individuals. Most individuals only use one main OS as a daily driver and the lock-in is a real and important factor that contributes to competitors not simply being able to "build their own". This argument doesn't make sense if you think about it. ISPs build their own infrastructure but depending on where you live they still have to comply to regulations. As smartphones are an ever increasing component of our lives (contact tracing, payment, tickets, access to hardware and services) it seems odd that we somehow exempt them from any regulations whatsoever.