3 ms·
You said it wasn't easy to buy an alternative, and you used switching away from Windows during Microsoft's dominance as your example. It was true that moving t
by rbarooah 15y ago
You said it wasn't easy to buy an alternative, and you used switching away from Windows during Microsoft's dominance as your example.
It was true that moving to the competition was hard during the Windows era because there weren't good alternatives. That's a strawman because there actually are good alternatives now, and your comments indicate that you know this.
Oversight exists to prevent abuse of monopolies, not to regulate companies just because they are successful.
- huggyface 15y agoYou said it wasn't easy to buy an alternative I actually said "but that is seldom as simple as it at first blush may seem". Have a bunch of apps and iBooks? Ready to completely abandon them? Accustomed to any of the countless apps and services that only exist on the iPad? Ready to do without them? Apple's actions are acts of bravado, and they only come from a position of strength. They earned that position of strength, but you can't simply say "Oh don't like it -- this policy and tax that most buyers don't even know about -- then don't buy it". It is hardly so simple.
- rbarooah 15y agoAccustomed to any of the countless apps and services that only exist on the iPad? Ready to do without them? Severing business or consumer relationships with anyone but a totally incompetent supplier or commodity service involves a trade-off. Some benefits you are accustomed to may not be present, but others which are more desirable presumably exist. Understanding this is part of being responsible for how you spend your money and it applies universally. Are you arguing that consumers should be protected from having to understand and exercise this responsibility by the government?