4 ms·

One holds your saved games. The other connects you to local emergency services, the global economy, your financial assets, your government, your family, your ed

by mthoms 5y ago

One holds your saved games. The other connects you to local emergency services, the global economy, your financial assets, your government, your family, your education, and increasingly - your health care provider. To suggest they should be treated the same is downright laughable. Yes, the underlying technology is similar, but their importance and impact on society is orders of magnitude different.

gjsman-1000 5y ago
From a legal perspective though, where this matters most, the law makes zero distinction between single purpose and general purpose computing devices whatsoever. Furthermore, they are all computers capable of running code from anywhere and the law views them as such. The distinction you are drawing that consoles are "specific" and iPhones are "general purpose" has no bearing in the law, nor in my opinion should it. From the law's perspective, the iPhone is on the same legal grounds as a PlayStation or Nintendo Switch. Frankly, I don't think the law should try to separate devices. Either this lock-in is legally permitted, for any manufacturer, or it's not permitted and all manufacturers must be open.
- mthoms 5y ago
  Strong disagree. We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. Consider that different classes of vehicles are regulated differently, even though they all rely on the same underlying technology. The law should serve the people, not some rigid doctrine.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    > We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. I agree completely, which is why hopefully Apple prevails. Their ecosystem is the best for Apple customers and the free market.
    - mthoms 5y ago
      That's a perfectly valid argument IMHO. The argument equating smart phones with consoles however, is downright silly. Can I ask, how does letting me have the option of occasionally purchasing songs, books, movies and character skins direct from vendors hurt your ability to enjoy the benefits of purchasing everything direct from Apple? I just don't understand how that would ruin the system for you. If anything, wouldn't it force Apple to improve their store in order to be more competitive? Would that not be a benefit to you?
      - ericmay 5y ago
        > The argument equating smart phones with consoles however, is downright silly. Yea I’m kind of the opposite. I don’t really see the difference. An Xbox has many of the same apps, a web browser, etc. > I just don't understand how that would ruin the system for you. If anything, wouldn't it force Apple to improve their store in order to be more competitive? Would that not be a benefit to you? The App Store on iOS and how Apple manages it is effectively a collective bargaining agreement that individual users wouldn’t be all that effective in enforcing. Items like mandating what’s being tracked and how, allowing for anonymous sign-ins, and others are possible because Apple can bargain for users via their control of the App Store. If you take away the App Store, it’s possible (idk how likely or not though I view it as extremely likely) that Apple I as the user lose that ability to collectively bargain. Companies like Facebook will migrate their apps to third party App Stores where Apple’s beneficial (in my view) rules and terms won’t be enforced. The network effect of apps moving to third party app stores will overwhelm the iOS App Store, and the benefits I enjoy will be largely unenforceable. There won’t be anybody who is even somewhat on my side. There won’t be some sort of competition between a privacy-first Facebook and data harvesting one. So we can’t really tell what users prefer. Apple also creates a great user experience. One way to pay, a single App Store where everything is, and via their collective bargaining position I can mostly trust that they are trying to enforce rules around privacy, not let junk or scam apps in, etc. I know these rules are not always properly enforced, but they’re there. So I view third-party app stores as not only not beneficial but hostile to the user experience I enjoy with the iPhone. I’m vehemently against those changes. I’d rather the App Store lose support from major Apps than Apple change how they’re doing things. And this is kind of how things work on all platforms, stores, etc. There are more strong and loose rules, but I can’t just sell skins on the Epic game store for Fortnite, they don’t allow third-party integrations. I can’t sell apples I grow in my backyard at Wal-Mart either - they have a problem with that. For some reason since Apple makes the best phone and makes the most money people think they should be treated differently, and I don’t. If users really value these things they’ll buy Android phones or jailbreak iPhones or demand Apple open up things. So far they aren’t. It’s a vocal minority - an absolutely tiny one, and the market seems to pretty clearly say that they prefer things how they are by buying iPhone.

by mthoms 5y ago

gjsman-1000 5y ago

From a legal perspective though, where this matters most, the law makes zero distinction between single purpose and general purpose computing devices whatsoever. Furthermore, they are all computers capable of running code from anywhere and the law views them as such. The distinction you are drawing that consoles are "specific" and iPhones are "general purpose" has no bearing in the law, nor in my opinion should it. From the law's perspective, the iPhone is on the same legal grounds as a PlayStation or Nintendo Switch. Frankly, I don't think the law should try to separate devices. Either this lock-in is legally permitted, for any manufacturer, or it's not permitted and all manufacturers must be open.

mthoms 5y ago
Strong disagree. We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. Consider that different classes of vehicles are regulated differently, even though they all rely on the same underlying technology. The law should serve the people, not some rigid doctrine.
- ericmay 5y ago
  > We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. I agree completely, which is why hopefully Apple prevails. Their ecosystem is the best for Apple customers and the free market.
  - mthoms 5y ago
    That's a perfectly valid argument IMHO. The argument equating smart phones with consoles however, is downright silly. Can I ask, how does letting me have the option of occasionally purchasing songs, books, movies and character skins direct from vendors hurt your ability to enjoy the benefits of purchasing everything direct from Apple? I just don't understand how that would ruin the system for you. If anything, wouldn't it force Apple to improve their store in order to be more competitive? Would that not be a benefit to you?
    - ericmay 5y ago
      > The argument equating smart phones with consoles however, is downright silly. Yea I’m kind of the opposite. I don’t really see the difference. An Xbox has many of the same apps, a web browser, etc. > I just don't understand how that would ruin the system for you. If anything, wouldn't it force Apple to improve their store in order to be more competitive? Would that not be a benefit to you? The App Store on iOS and how Apple manages it is effectively a collective bargaining agreement that individual users wouldn’t be all that effective in enforcing. Items like mandating what’s being tracked and how, allowing for anonymous sign-ins, and others are possible because Apple can bargain for users via their control of the App Store. If you take away the App Store, it’s possible (idk how likely or not though I view it as extremely likely) that Apple I as the user lose that ability to collectively bargain. Companies like Facebook will migrate their apps to third party App Stores where Apple’s beneficial (in my view) rules and terms won’t be enforced. The network effect of apps moving to third party app stores will overwhelm the iOS App Store, and the benefits I enjoy will be largely unenforceable. There won’t be anybody who is even somewhat on my side. There won’t be some sort of competition between a privacy-first Facebook and data harvesting one. So we can’t really tell what users prefer. Apple also creates a great user experience. One way to pay, a single App Store where everything is, and via their collective bargaining position I can mostly trust that they are trying to enforce rules around privacy, not let junk or scam apps in, etc. I know these rules are not always properly enforced, but they’re there. So I view third-party app stores as not only not beneficial but hostile to the user experience I enjoy with the iPhone. I’m vehemently against those changes. I’d rather the App Store lose support from major Apps than Apple change how they’re doing things. And this is kind of how things work on all platforms, stores, etc. There are more strong and loose rules, but I can’t just sell skins on the Epic game store for Fortnite, they don’t allow third-party integrations. I can’t sell apples I grow in my backyard at Wal-Mart either - they have a problem with that. For some reason since Apple makes the best phone and makes the most money people think they should be treated differently, and I don’t. If users really value these things they’ll buy Android phones or jailbreak iPhones or demand Apple open up things. So far they aren’t. It’s a vocal minority - an absolutely tiny one, and the market seems to pretty clearly say that they prefer things how they are by buying iPhone.