3 ms·

>That is an option for Netflix. If they made their own platform they could offer a more competitive price. It may be an option for Netflix. It may be an option

>That is an option for Netflix. If they made their own platform they could offer a more competitive price. It may be an option for Netflix. It may be an option for Facebook. But it's not an option for 99.999% of app makers and it would be bad for consumers. Very bad. Imagine you had to buy one device per service you're using. I don't want to buy a Netflix device to watch Netflix movies. This is just bonkers. >It seems useful to me. It's the basis of what makes this game interesting. No. It's more than just useless. It is a great demonstration of how every ideology becomes insanity if you take it to its extremes.

charcircuit 5y ago
>But it's not an option for 99.999% of app makers and it would be bad for consumers. Then you will just have to live with being disadvantaged to a platform's creator when competing on their platform. They have the home field advantage. >No. It's more than just useless. It is a great demonstration of how every ideology becomes insanity if you take it to its extremes. You are the one making it extreme. If you think the strategic decision of developing your own mobile ecosystem is silly then there is always the option to not do it. There is no rule in this game that it has to be profitable to release stuff on the app store. Apple could just decide one day that third party apps are a security and privacy problem and then remove them all leaving only Apple apps.
- fauigerzigerk 5y ago
  Ah so now you have changed your position from "it's competitive" to "it's not competitive but it doesn't matter". But you're wrong about me just having to live with being disadvantaged. Apple is built on top of a platform as well. It's called society. And society makes some rules that govern what advantages platform operators like Apple can enjoy as a benefit of having created a successful platform and what advantages are unfair and/or damaging for consumers. So we'll see about who has to live with what.
  - charcircuit 5y ago
    >Ah so now you have changed your position from "it's competitive" to "it's not competitive but it doesn't matter". I never did that. Take for example the capture the flag game made. Some parts of maps are stronger for one team than the other. That doesn't mean the game is not competitive it just means that it is something you need to take in mind. What I described is a spot on the map where Apple has an advantage. >But you're wrong about me just having to live with being disadvantaged. Apple is built on top of a platform as well. It's called society. Sure, but it's with existing base ideas like freedom of association Apple can just not work with Netflix at all.

charcircuit 5y ago

>But it's not an option for 99.999% of app makers and it would be bad for consumers. Then you will just have to live with being disadvantaged to a platform's creator when competing on their platform. They have the home field advantage. >No. It's more than just useless. It is a great demonstration of how every ideology becomes insanity if you take it to its extremes. You are the one making it extreme. If you think the strategic decision of developing your own mobile ecosystem is silly then there is always the option to not do it. There is no rule in this game that it has to be profitable to release stuff on the app store. Apple could just decide one day that third party apps are a security and privacy problem and then remove them all leaving only Apple apps.

fauigerzigerk 5y ago
Ah so now you have changed your position from "it's competitive" to "it's not competitive but it doesn't matter". But you're wrong about me just having to live with being disadvantaged. Apple is built on top of a platform as well. It's called society. And society makes some rules that govern what advantages platform operators like Apple can enjoy as a benefit of having created a successful platform and what advantages are unfair and/or damaging for consumers. So we'll see about who has to live with what.
- charcircuit 5y ago
  >Ah so now you have changed your position from "it's competitive" to "it's not competitive but it doesn't matter". I never did that. Take for example the capture the flag game made. Some parts of maps are stronger for one team than the other. That doesn't mean the game is not competitive it just means that it is something you need to take in mind. What I described is a spot on the map where Apple has an advantage. >But you're wrong about me just having to live with being disadvantaged. Apple is built on top of a platform as well. It's called society. Sure, but it's with existing base ideas like freedom of association Apple can just not work with Netflix at all.