4 ms·

All I can think of is where we'd be as a species now, at least technologically, If Microsoft, Apple, IBM or even Commodore and Atari had similar abilities since

All I can think of is where we'd be as a species now, at least technologically, If Microsoft, Apple, IBM or even Commodore and Atari had similar abilities since the 70s to restrict what kind of software developers can make and publish for their platforms...

pavlov 3y ago
There have always been walled garden software platforms. Nintendo is a very successful example from the Commodore/Atari era.
- malermeister 3y ago
  Nintendos are specifically gaming devices, though. Smartphones are general purpose computing platforms.
  - paulmd 3y ago
    This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into. And insofar as any particular apps exist or don’t on switch, it’s purely a result of gatekeeper decisions on the part of Nintendo - Nintendo keeps there from being an email client or an office suite and that’s the reason you perceive it as “just a gaming device”. They’ve gatekept successfully. This is the problem, there really isn’t a coherent threshold between switch and iPhone or a reason console vendors shouldn’t be equally considered general purpose devices other than marketing. You could plug in some usb peripherals and run office suites on a PlayStation just fine.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      > This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into No, nobody buys a nintendo to do banking on them. I bought a phone since I needed it to do banking. This is a real difference, not just a marketing distinction. > it’s purely a result of gatekeeper decisions on the part of Nintendo Yes, and that gatekeeper power ensures Nintendo isn't a general purpose device. If they allowed it to be a general purpose device like Apple did with phones then things would be different. Controlling such a major share of general purpose devices like Apple does is a serious issue. Controlling a share of gaming computing like Nintendo doesn't matter nearly as much, so therefore lawmakers aren't going after them to the same degree. It doesn't matter if technically they are the same, in practice one doesn't cause issues for society while the other one does.
Aurornis 3y ago
But the most powerful general purpose computers we have are all wide open for development. A lot of us here write software on our laptops and desktops all day and can download and install whatever we want.
- dylan604 3y ago
  I too think it is funny that there is so much attention paid to a mobile device, but then am forced to remember for so so many of today's youngest "users" that mobile device is their only compute device. While you and I might look at the mobile device as just an additional thing that only gets used when away from keyboards, more and more people don't even have a keyboard to be away from. I'm also much more sane about how retail works, and realize that MSRP vs retail pricing is how the world works. Expecting to earn full retail pricing while selling your wares through someone else's store is just farcical. Developing a product that can only work on someone else's product and then complains about the rules of that other product's maker puts in place is also just hubris.

pavlov 3y ago

There have always been walled garden software platforms. Nintendo is a very successful example from the Commodore/Atari era.

malermeister 3y ago
Nintendos are specifically gaming devices, though. Smartphones are general purpose computing platforms.
- paulmd 3y ago
  This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into. And insofar as any particular apps exist or don’t on switch, it’s purely a result of gatekeeper decisions on the part of Nintendo - Nintendo keeps there from being an email client or an office suite and that’s the reason you perceive it as “just a gaming device”. They’ve gatekept successfully. This is the problem, there really isn’t a coherent threshold between switch and iPhone or a reason console vendors shouldn’t be equally considered general purpose devices other than marketing. You could plug in some usb peripherals and run office suites on a PlayStation just fine.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > This is an artificial marketing distinction that you’ve bought into No, nobody buys a nintendo to do banking on them. I bought a phone since I needed it to do banking. This is a real difference, not just a marketing distinction. > it’s purely a result of gatekeeper decisions on the part of Nintendo Yes, and that gatekeeper power ensures Nintendo isn't a general purpose device. If they allowed it to be a general purpose device like Apple did with phones then things would be different. Controlling such a major share of general purpose devices like Apple does is a serious issue. Controlling a share of gaming computing like Nintendo doesn't matter nearly as much, so therefore lawmakers aren't going after them to the same degree. It doesn't matter if technically they are the same, in practice one doesn't cause issues for society while the other one does.

Aurornis 3y ago

But the most powerful general purpose computers we have are all wide open for development. A lot of us here write software on our laptops and desktops all day and can download and install whatever we want.

dylan604 3y ago
I too think it is funny that there is so much attention paid to a mobile device, but then am forced to remember for so so many of today's youngest "users" that mobile device is their only compute device. While you and I might look at the mobile device as just an additional thing that only gets used when away from keyboards, more and more people don't even have a keyboard to be away from. I'm also much more sane about how retail works, and realize that MSRP vs retail pricing is how the world works. Expecting to earn full retail pricing while selling your wares through someone else's store is just farcical. Developing a product that can only work on someone else's product and then complains about the rules of that other product's maker puts in place is also just hubris.