5 ms·
On the other hand, since there are presumably more Apple Weather users than Dark Sky users, by moving the functionality of Dark Sky into the Apple Weather app,
by freetime2 4y ago
On the other hand, since there are presumably more Apple Weather users than Dark Sky users, by moving the functionality of Dark Sky into the Apple Weather app, more people will benefit from the features than when Dark Sky was independent.
- Tao3300 4y agoRight. Just like how we all benefitted when they bought Lala :(
- freetime2 4y ago> By purchasing Lala, Apple acquired technology that would enable it to bounce everyone's iTunes libraries to online servers, so iTunes users would be able to access their collections from a variety of Apple's devices: laptops, desktops, Apple TV set-top boxes, iPads, iPhones and iPod Touches. [1] I never used Lala, but I have used the iTunes "Sync Library" feature. So, in my case, yes I suppose I benefited from that acquisition. Not claiming that "we all" benefited. But this seems to be another case where Apple bought some company for its technology, folded it into its own service and made it available to a much wider audience, and then killed off the original service. If you were a happy Lala user, then I think your disatisfaction is justified, and you certainly have my sympathy. But also need to recognize that Apple was able to reach a far wider audience with that technology than Lala did. [1] https://www.wired.com/2010/04/apple-kills-lala-music-service/ https://www.wired.com/2010/04/apple-kills-lala-music-service...
- zapzupnz 4y agoDefinitely. I've used iTunes Sync Library and iTunes Match since the day they were released by Apple. Never heard of Lala until today.
- vict00ms 4y agoLala was great, you could upload your own MP3s and stream them or you could purchase them directly (for download or streaming as a "web song"). If you were a registered member, you could listen to any album/song once at no cost (not just on their platform, embedded in web sites too).
- Tao3300 4y agoThe streaming purchases were the killer feature to me. It was the a la carte alternative to the subscription models that wound up winning.
- atchoo 4y agoIt was available on IOS. Why would non-users on IOS be an argument for the power of capital to diminish other platforms?
- freetime2 4y agoBecause even though it might dimish the experience for a relatively small number of Dark Sky users on other platforms, the move can still be a net gain for consumers as a whole due to the large number of iOS users who can now benefit from improvements to the default weather app. Dark Sky wasn't even available to purchase in my country previously. But now, thanks to this investment by Apple, I get access to a bunch of great new features in the Weather app via a free software update. Calling this "anti-consumer" and declaring that it should be illegal is, in my opinion, an over simplification.
- atchoo 4y agoSo you are saying that folding in a cross platform company into the platform is a platform advantage... but not a concentration of market power? Apple changed the price of Dark Sky on other platforms to infinity but on it's platform to zero.
- freetime2 4y agoI agree that it's a concentration of market power. I disagree that government intervention is necessary or beneficial here.
- atchoo 4y agoOne example should be enough to see a problem. Do you not see a problem of Apple denuding other platforms all independent applications? They've taken what... Siri, Shazam, NextVR, Dark Skies off other platforms. How would you quantify your limit if not one? They block Firefox/Opera in preference to their own, they impose undue costs on Spotify etc. I see a need for separation of pipes and content. Break up the apple App business and it's platform otherwise the market abuse will continue.