2 ms·

> Consumers deserve to be able to choose tight integration over interop. I want to be able to agree with you on this, but the reality of vendor-lock in means t

> Consumers deserve to be able to choose tight integration over interop. I want to be able to agree with you on this, but the reality of vendor-lock in means that it's a slippery slope towards having no choice. This is proved time and time again: it's just more convenient for service providers (banks, shops, transport companies etc.) to support only the Apple platform. The EU's DMA doesn't address this aspect of interoperability; it doesn't say that shopkeepers or bus operators have to accept other payment methods, for instance. Is it Apple's fault that their constrained but well-curated platform causes other people to neglect interoperability? Maybe not directly - but they have a massive financial incentive not to help fix the situation!

lolinder 3y ago
> This is proved time and time again: it's just more convenient for service providers (banks, shops, transport companies etc.) to support only the Apple platform. Is this really true, though? I'm in the US, where Apple is strongest, and I have never seen a payment terminal that accepted Apple Pay and didn't accept alternative NFC-based payment methods like Google Wallet. On the face of it I'd be shocked if any substantial number of payment terminal manufacturers decided that it was worth it to add the hardware to do NFC payments but not the software required to reach the ~40% of the USA that uses Android phones. Nor have I ever seen a service that I was locked out of because they only provided an iOS app (no Android or web app).