3 ms·

They did address it by explaining why it's not only not worse, but different. Microsoft to OEMs: you can only put our OS on the devices you sell if you make IE

They did address it by explaining why it's not only not worse, but different. Microsoft to OEMs: you can only put our OS on the devices you sell if you make IE the default. Without Windows, PC makers knew they had no market to sell to because there was no viable alternative OS being demanded by consumers (hence the asserted monopoly position of Microsoft). They were restraining other business from engaging alternatives from competing browser makers. Apple: we build our messaging product, in our OS, on our devices There are no other businesses involved between Apple and end users, who can use competing device makers, OS makers and contrary to what you stated, messaging services like Telegram, Signal, Matrix etc etc.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> There are no other businesses involved between Apple and end users, who can use competing device makers, OS makers How do you install Android or some other OS competitor on an iPhone, or install iOS on a Samsung or Google device? > and contrary to what you stated, messaging services like Telegram, Signal, Matrix etc etc. Only with Apple's blessing, which they then deny for competing payment systems, browser engines, app stores etc. And iMessage is still the default.
- mckn1ght 3y ago
  > How do you install Android or some other OS competitor on an iPhone, or install iOS on a Samsung or Google device? You don’t, you either choose to buy an Android or an iPhone. This is like asking why I can’t go to Princeton but have my favorite Stanford professor come teach my class, or why I can’t play CS:GO inside Mario Party. Life is full of tradeoffs. You can’t have your cake and eat it too all the time.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > This is like asking why I can’t go to Princeton but have my favorite Stanford professor come teach my class You can do that. You just convince them to teach the class at Princeton. Professors move from one school to another all the time. You can also go take a class at one school while attending another if you want to do that, and the other school will not only not stand in your way, you'll generally get transfer credit. > or why I can’t play CS:GO inside Mario Party. These are two different games. The example you're looking for is that you can't play Mario Party on a PlayStation. But that's barely even an analogy, it's just the same situation -- why shouldn't you be able to play Mario Party on a PlayStation except for nefarious anticompetitive BS? This is distinct from technical capability. If you can't play Mario Party on a Sega Genesis because it only has 64KB of RAM, too bad. But if you can't play it on <whatever device> even though you paid for it solely because of some anti-competitive lock-in even if the hardware is capable and you're willing to e.g. create a compatibility layer, that's something else.
    - pests 3y ago
      Apple owns what they create. Why do you feel entitled to demand things from them?
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        They sold what they created to someone else. Now the someone else owns it, but Apple still wants to control it. You either get the money or you keep the stuff. You don't get to take the money and retain ownership control of the stuff.
        pests 3y ago
        You didn't buy a full license to their software. You bought a phone that is a complete package. What entitles you to try to install their software on stuff they don't want it on or didn't build it to supprt? Do you want them to spend money developing iOS for other devices, just so you can take that for free and install it on an Android? You knew the rules before you pulled out your wallet. For iMessage - they run a service that costs money. Why should they just give it out for free? Sure, they give it to their customers for free, but why does that mean you get it too? It would be like sneaking into a complimentary hotel breakfast. Sure, you managed to grab someone's keycard - you technically can get past the restrictions. Still eating food someone else paid for. Just because you have friends eating already and you want to join them doesn't make it right.
        AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        > You didn't buy a full license to their software. You bought a copy of their software. Now that copy is yours and not theirs. Why shouldn't you be able to transfer your copy of it to whatever you want or use it however you want? You paid for it. Licensing is for granting additional rights you don't otherwise get with a copy, e.g. a volume license allows you to reproduce additional copies for multiple devices at once, or the GPL allows you to reproduce and distribute copies to other people under certain terms. Taking away rights via license is inconsistent with the first sale doctrine. > Do you want them to spend money developing iOS for other devices, just so you can take that for free and install it on an Android? Why would it have to be free? You don't get Windows for free. But you can install it on a Dell in addition to a Surface, and so can Dell. > You knew the rules before you pulled out your wallet. Saying "you knew the rules" is not how you establish someone's authority to create rules. > For iMessage - they run a service that costs money. This is a fig leaf. Messaging services cost a negligible amount of money to operate and if anybody actually cared about this, no one is demanding for them to operate it themselves anyway rather than using or creating a protocol that supports federation. Notice that substantially all of the other popular messaging services are just as free to everyone, including the ones not limited to any particular platform.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> There are no other businesses involved between Apple and end users, who can use competing device makers, OS makers How do you install Android or some other OS competitor on an iPhone, or install iOS on a Samsung or Google device? > and contrary to what you stated, messaging services like Telegram, Signal, Matrix etc etc. Only with Apple's blessing, which they then deny for competing payment systems, browser engines, app stores etc. And iMessage is still the default.

mckn1ght 3y ago
> How do you install Android or some other OS competitor on an iPhone, or install iOS on a Samsung or Google device? You don’t, you either choose to buy an Android or an iPhone. This is like asking why I can’t go to Princeton but have my favorite Stanford professor come teach my class, or why I can’t play CS:GO inside Mario Party. Life is full of tradeoffs. You can’t have your cake and eat it too all the time.
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > This is like asking why I can’t go to Princeton but have my favorite Stanford professor come teach my class You can do that. You just convince them to teach the class at Princeton. Professors move from one school to another all the time. You can also go take a class at one school while attending another if you want to do that, and the other school will not only not stand in your way, you'll generally get transfer credit. > or why I can’t play CS:GO inside Mario Party. These are two different games. The example you're looking for is that you can't play Mario Party on a PlayStation. But that's barely even an analogy, it's just the same situation -- why shouldn't you be able to play Mario Party on a PlayStation except for nefarious anticompetitive BS? This is distinct from technical capability. If you can't play Mario Party on a Sega Genesis because it only has 64KB of RAM, too bad. But if you can't play it on <whatever device> even though you paid for it solely because of some anti-competitive lock-in even if the hardware is capable and you're willing to e.g. create a compatibility layer, that's something else.
  - pests 3y ago
    Apple owns what they create. Why do you feel entitled to demand things from them?
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      They sold what they created to someone else. Now the someone else owns it, but Apple still wants to control it. You either get the money or you keep the stuff. You don't get to take the money and retain ownership control of the stuff.
      - pests 3y ago
        You didn't buy a full license to their software. You bought a phone that is a complete package. What entitles you to try to install their software on stuff they don't want it on or didn't build it to supprt? Do you want them to spend money developing iOS for other devices, just so you can take that for free and install it on an Android? You knew the rules before you pulled out your wallet. For iMessage - they run a service that costs money. Why should they just give it out for free? Sure, they give it to their customers for free, but why does that mean you get it too? It would be like sneaking into a complimentary hotel breakfast. Sure, you managed to grab someone's keycard - you technically can get past the restrictions. Still eating food someone else paid for. Just because you have friends eating already and you want to join them doesn't make it right.
        AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        > You didn't buy a full license to their software. You bought a copy of their software. Now that copy is yours and not theirs. Why shouldn't you be able to transfer your copy of it to whatever you want or use it however you want? You paid for it. Licensing is for granting additional rights you don't otherwise get with a copy, e.g. a volume license allows you to reproduce additional copies for multiple devices at once, or the GPL allows you to reproduce and distribute copies to other people under certain terms. Taking away rights via license is inconsistent with the first sale doctrine. > Do you want them to spend money developing iOS for other devices, just so you can take that for free and install it on an Android? Why would it have to be free? You don't get Windows for free. But you can install it on a Dell in addition to a Surface, and so can Dell. > You knew the rules before you pulled out your wallet. Saying "you knew the rules" is not how you establish someone's authority to create rules. > For iMessage - they run a service that costs money. This is a fig leaf. Messaging services cost a negligible amount of money to operate and if anybody actually cared about this, no one is demanding for them to operate it themselves anyway rather than using or creating a protocol that supports federation. Notice that substantially all of the other popular messaging services are just as free to everyone, including the ones not limited to any particular platform.