4 ms·

If they want? I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform.

• josephcsible 5y ago
  If you buy a Camry and then become an Uber driver, should you have to give Toyota a cut of your earnings?
  • tmp231 5y ago
    If they tell you going then won’t buy that Camry. Get a Honda.
    • josephcsible 5y ago
      I don't quite understand your first sentence, but by your second one it sounds like your answer is basically "yes". That seems like a rather extreme position to take. Are you also opposed to the First Sale Doctrine?
      • tmp231 5y ago
        I’m saying if someone tells you that the software sold with his device is locked to to only work with company X, then you are free to buy it or not. You should also be free to put other software on it yourself, like a new OS. You should not take the extreme position of leveraging law to force the seller to write his software the way you like.
        • stale2002 5y ago
          So then you do not support the first sale doctrine? If someone buys something, even like a physical good, you do not believe that the person who bought it, actually owns its, and the seller can put whatever restrictions that they want on the thing that was purchased? For example, if someone sells a book, you think it would be OK for the book writer to prevent someone from reselling it, or reading the book in a way that the writer does not like. And even more so, it seems like you do not believe in any form of anti trust laws at all. And you think that all anti trust laws are just illegitimate? This is an odd position to take, because most people support the first sale doctrine, and also support some form of anti-trust law.
          • tmp231 5y ago
            Of course you own it and should be able to put whatever OS you want on it. But you are confusing that with forcing apple to write their software in a way that suits you. Antitrust laws _can_ be good, but like I said elsewhere, we are a country swimming neck deep in regulation and seem to like our particular hammer. It has a cooling effect on innovation, and China in some ways has a freer economy than we do. I think it odd that many people rush to strongarm companies through law when there is a perfectly good alternative in Android. Even Microsoft and Amazon have been in the phone business and could get back in, offering you a phone with multiple app stores. Epic could even do it. There doesn’t seem to be enough people who care. You apparently do, and actually I agree with you that Apple should allow alternative app stores. But voluntarily because the people demand it or are leaving for Android, not because the hammer came down on them.
            • stale2002 5y ago
              > when there is a perfectly good alternative There is very little cost in simply preventing Apple from taking so many intentionally anti-competitive actions. It is not about forcing Apple to write software. Instead it is about preventing them from spending so much effort and trying to remove other people's ability to install other app stores. Allowing other app stores, really would not be a huge burden on Apple, and it would give people a lot of choice. > should be able to put whatever OS you want on it That is not really very possible when Apple spends so much effort engaging in illegal anti-competitive practices, to prevent other app stores from being installed. Finally, even if it were possible/easy to provide jailbreaking software, I think that Apple would almost certainly make serious efforts to prevent people from doing that. But sure, I agree that game companies, and major tech companies should absolutely take action to provide people with very easy ways of jailbreaking people's phone. Perhaps if Fortnite was available through Epic provided jailbreaking software, then that would be enough to kickstart things, and cause a bunch of other companies to move off of Apple's app store, and move to the jailbreak only version. EX: imagine if fortnite provide incentives, like "free vbucks" to a large number of people, in order to get a large amount of people to jailbreak their phone, and then imagine if other companies, like Facebook, worked together on that, until almost everyone had a jailbroken phone. That could certainly work. But I doubt Apple would just let that happen.
  • matz1 5y ago
    Depends, If I'm the buyer I don't want it but if I'm Toyota and if I can get a way with it while making more money then its no brainer.
    • josephcsible 5y ago
      I think you misunderstood my question. I'm asking whether you think the law should let Toyota get away with it.
      • tmp231 5y ago
        I’m also saying that our culture absolute swims in regulation and we as fish just get used to it and are quick to reach for it as a hammer, seeing everything as nails. We are so steeped in it, that in many ways _China_ has a freer economy than the US does. I’d urge much caution here.
      • matz1 5y ago
        Whatever the law I would like to be would depends on whether I'm Toyota or I'm the customer.
        • josephcsible 5y ago
          Which do you think is more fair and better for society as a whole?
          • matz1 5y ago
            as a whole ? I believe there can't be such thing. Fair for one may not be fair for other. 'Better' for one may not be better for other.
            • tmp231 5y ago
              It would be better for both to enforce contract law all around. Don’t let either lie or steal and you’ll have a better outcome for all.
• stale2002 5y ago
  > I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform. Well, because it is illegally anti-competitive, and the courts already ruled against microsoft, regarding web browsers. So thats why. It is because of anti-trust law.
  • tmp231 5y ago
    And the Microsoft ruling was a ridiculous one.