3 ms·

They should be allowed to develop anything they want. What they shouldn’t be allowed to do is to abuse their control of the platforms they own, to give them unf

They should be allowed to develop anything they want. What they shouldn’t be allowed to do is to abuse their control of the platforms they own, to give them unfair advantage over competition.

svachalek 5y ago
The definition of "abuse" is slippery and companies can stay far ahead of the judges. The classic solution for this is to separate the incentives, let different companies compete for users rather than having a single company leverage its strength from product to product to product. Then users can decide what is "abuse" for themselves.
- justapassenger 5y ago
  Everything in the law is slippery. Law isn’t built to be interpreted by simple if-else statements, but by humans, with taking lots of nuance, context and intention into the account. Also - there’s a tons of ways you can abuse position when you own the platforms. It could be by pushing your products, by giving specific partners preferential access, unequal enforcement of rules, discriminatory rules, etc, etc. That’s why broad terms like abuse exist in the context of the law, so you don’t have to list every single possible bad behavior and let judges decide. Is that perfect? No. But I’d argue it’s better than your proposal.
freediver 5y ago
This. I consider pretty much everything Apple does a fair game except for one thing - access to private APIs for their own products, same products that then compete on the market with the products from developers invited with the expectation to build on the same platform. This single-handly invalidates the entire WWDC effort. If you want to make sure you have best products then do it through superior product, design and engineering craftsmanship. Don't 'cheat'! It just does not feel right and it is mind-boggling why is this the case. One thing is to have a say on what the app store fee is and 30% is fine, this is your cost of distribution that you accept. But the existence of private APIs means that whatever you do on their platform comes with a risk of them building a better, more-integrated product simply because they have access to platform features you don't. This is an incredibly bad position to be in as a developer on Apple platform developing any kind of serious product, let alone a competitor for existing Apple products (like we are doing, crazy enough to be building a Safari alternative). Apple, open same APIs your consumer apps have and make it a fair game. This will spark innovation, creativity and different ways of doing same things. It is exactly what you should be thriving for as a leader in the industry.

They should be allowed to develop anything they want. What they shouldn’t be allowed to do is to abuse their control of the platforms they own, to give them unfair advantage over competition.

svachalek 5y ago

The definition of "abuse" is slippery and companies can stay far ahead of the judges. The classic solution for this is to separate the incentives, let different companies compete for users rather than having a single company leverage its strength from product to product to product. Then users can decide what is "abuse" for themselves.

justapassenger 5y ago
Everything in the law is slippery. Law isn’t built to be interpreted by simple if-else statements, but by humans, with taking lots of nuance, context and intention into the account. Also - there’s a tons of ways you can abuse position when you own the platforms. It could be by pushing your products, by giving specific partners preferential access, unequal enforcement of rules, discriminatory rules, etc, etc. That’s why broad terms like abuse exist in the context of the law, so you don’t have to list every single possible bad behavior and let judges decide. Is that perfect? No. But I’d argue it’s better than your proposal.

freediver 5y ago

This. I consider pretty much everything Apple does a fair game except for one thing - access to private APIs for their own products, same products that then compete on the market with the products from developers invited with the expectation to build on the same platform. This single-handly invalidates the entire WWDC effort. If you want to make sure you have best products then do it through superior product, design and engineering craftsmanship. Don't 'cheat'! It just does not feel right and it is mind-boggling why is this the case. One thing is to have a say on what the app store fee is and 30% is fine, this is your cost of distribution that you accept. But the existence of private APIs means that whatever you do on their platform comes with a risk of them building a better, more-integrated product simply because they have access to platform features you don't. This is an incredibly bad position to be in as a developer on Apple platform developing any kind of serious product, let alone a competitor for existing Apple products (like we are doing, crazy enough to be building a Safari alternative). Apple, open same APIs your consumer apps have and make it a fair game. This will spark innovation, creativity and different ways of doing same things. It is exactly what you should be thriving for as a leader in the industry.