4 ms·

> 3. Messaging interoperability > 4. Smartwatches [interoperability] Where do you draw the line on forcing interoperability? This is kind of like (in-person)

> 3. Messaging interoperability > 4. Smartwatches [interoperability] Where do you draw the line on forcing interoperability? This is kind of like (in-person) movie theaters. Movie theaters don't allow you to bring your own food, you have to buy their food/drink. Why should a movie theater be forced to allow patrons bring their own food? Why should Apple be forced to allow it's patrons to brining competitive things to their business? Note: I ask these questions out of genuine curiosity. Not to troll/stir-the-pot.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jiggawatts 3y ago
Even better analogies: - Should the government force marketplaces to allow competing marketplaces to set up shop within their area, collect fees, but not pay any fees to the larger market? - Should the government make laws to require restaurants to allow competing chefs to bring a hot plate and start cooking food at the tables and serve them to their customers? - Should Google be forced by the government to include support for formats in Android that are used by Apple such a HEIF and HEIC? What about Microsoft and Linux? These rules are not about individual choice or freedom. This is about giant corporations using the government to give them a way into the walled garden built by a competing mega corporation. This is completely self-serving and in no shape, way, or form serves the common good. As an iPhone user I do not want government interference in a market place that has been kept mostly free of malware precisely because it keeps out the riff-raff. I want the hucksters and the scammers blocked. I really don't care if they scream "unfair!" at the top of their lungs from outside of the fence. Similarly, general SMS messaging is a cesspit of unceasing spam precisely because it is so interoperable. Because Apple keeps out garbage devices with zero security, I've seen precisely zero iMessage spam in the last decade. I got a spam SMS in the last hour. I'll get several more today.
- bezier-curve 3y ago
  > I do not want government interference in a market place This is just not the world we live in. The Play store is also malware-free, and yet you can sideload apps on Android phones.
  - robotshmobot 3y ago
    The Play Store is absolutely not malware free unless you don’t consider apps that take over your launcher and Lock Screen, serve you ads, and links to their own apps malware. Had to remove this garbage from my grandmother’s Pixel
- wiseowise 3y ago
  Even better: no stupid analogies and just talk about topic at hand. > Should Google be forced by the government to include support for formats in Android that are used by Apple such a HEIF and HEIC? What about Microsoft and Linux? Yes, please. > As an iPhone user I do not want government interference in a market place that has been kept mostly free of malware precisely because it keeps out the riff-raff. Citation needed.
  - jiggawatts 3y ago
    > Yes, please. Those are patented formats. This would make Android no longer open source in the truly free software sense. Are you sure you want this kind of precedent on the books?
    - wiseowise 3y ago
      Whatever runs on Pixel is not AOSP anyway.
3D30497420 3y ago
I presume the question is about impact: At Apple's scale, restricting competition has a very broad impact on the economy. In contrast, a movie theater not allowing outside food is probably not reducing all that much food-related competition in aggregate. I don't think there's a good real-world "venue/food" analogy. However, hypothetically: Imagine if half of all homes/apartments were controlled by the same company and they also happened to be the largest food producer. They then decided to limit what food could be brought into your home, saying "We have the safest food, so you can only buy our food." Now, they might even be right that their food is the safest, but the market impact would be significant enough to warrant anti-trust action.
- jiggawatts 3y ago
  Let's say that a movie theatre chain becomes very successful by selling high-quality food instead of stale popcorn laden with artificial butter flavoring. They also curate movies and refuse to screen low-brow garbage pushed out by the studios. The customers love the good movies and good food, so this chain slowly takes over the market, nearly, but not quite, to a level of monopoly. You can still go to competing theatres, but the seats will be sticky, the food will clog your arteries, and you won't enjoy the movie. So you're saying in this situation the government should step in and force the successful chain with standards to allow competing movie theatres, junk food sellers, and low-budget movie producers to sell their wares in their theatres? That's literally what's happening with these moves against Apple. The peddlers of crap are upset that they're locked out of a well-managed market frequented by discerning customers. That's it.
  - allturtles 3y ago
    No, that's a totally different analogy. The point is the impact of their market power other people who want to sell food, not other people who want to sell movies. Apple controls a very large share of the app market; no movie theater, however successful, controls a significant part of the food market.
    - jiggawatts 3y ago
thlamz 3y ago
In some countries with strong consumer laws, movie theaters are not legally allowed to forbid customers from bringing their own food and drinks.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jiggawatts 3y ago

Even better analogies: - Should the government force marketplaces to allow competing marketplaces to set up shop within their area, collect fees, but not pay any fees to the larger market? - Should the government make laws to require restaurants to allow competing chefs to bring a hot plate and start cooking food at the tables and serve them to their customers? - Should Google be forced by the government to include support for formats in Android that are used by Apple such a HEIF and HEIC? What about Microsoft and Linux? These rules are not about individual choice or freedom. This is about giant corporations using the government to give them a way into the walled garden built by a competing mega corporation. This is completely self-serving and in no shape, way, or form serves the common good. As an iPhone user I do not want government interference in a market place that has been kept mostly free of malware precisely because it keeps out the riff-raff. I want the hucksters and the scammers blocked. I really don't care if they scream "unfair!" at the top of their lungs from outside of the fence. Similarly, general SMS messaging is a cesspit of unceasing spam precisely because it is so interoperable. Because Apple keeps out garbage devices with zero security, I've seen precisely zero iMessage spam in the last decade. I got a spam SMS in the last hour. I'll get several more today.

bezier-curve 3y ago
> I do not want government interference in a market place This is just not the world we live in. The Play store is also malware-free, and yet you can sideload apps on Android phones.
- robotshmobot 3y ago
  The Play Store is absolutely not malware free unless you don’t consider apps that take over your launcher and Lock Screen, serve you ads, and links to their own apps malware. Had to remove this garbage from my grandmother’s Pixel
wiseowise 3y ago
Even better: no stupid analogies and just talk about topic at hand. > Should Google be forced by the government to include support for formats in Android that are used by Apple such a HEIF and HEIC? What about Microsoft and Linux? Yes, please. > As an iPhone user I do not want government interference in a market place that has been kept mostly free of malware precisely because it keeps out the riff-raff. Citation needed.
- jiggawatts 3y ago
  > Yes, please. Those are patented formats. This would make Android no longer open source in the truly free software sense. Are you sure you want this kind of precedent on the books?
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    Whatever runs on Pixel is not AOSP anyway.

3D30497420 3y ago

I presume the question is about impact: At Apple's scale, restricting competition has a very broad impact on the economy. In contrast, a movie theater not allowing outside food is probably not reducing all that much food-related competition in aggregate. I don't think there's a good real-world "venue/food" analogy. However, hypothetically: Imagine if half of all homes/apartments were controlled by the same company and they also happened to be the largest food producer. They then decided to limit what food could be brought into your home, saying "We have the safest food, so you can only buy our food." Now, they might even be right that their food is the safest, but the market impact would be significant enough to warrant anti-trust action.

jiggawatts 3y ago
Let's say that a movie theatre chain becomes very successful by selling high-quality food instead of stale popcorn laden with artificial butter flavoring. They also curate movies and refuse to screen low-brow garbage pushed out by the studios. The customers love the good movies and good food, so this chain slowly takes over the market, nearly, but not quite, to a level of monopoly. You can still go to competing theatres, but the seats will be sticky, the food will clog your arteries, and you won't enjoy the movie. So you're saying in this situation the government should step in and force the successful chain with standards to allow competing movie theatres, junk food sellers, and low-budget movie producers to sell their wares in their theatres? That's literally what's happening with these moves against Apple. The peddlers of crap are upset that they're locked out of a well-managed market frequented by discerning customers. That's it.
- allturtles 3y ago
  No, that's a totally different analogy. The point is the impact of their market power other people who want to sell food, not other people who want to sell movies. Apple controls a very large share of the app market; no movie theater, however successful, controls a significant part of the food market.
  - jiggawatts 3y ago

thlamz 3y ago

In some countries with strong consumer laws, movie theaters are not legally allowed to forbid customers from bringing their own food and drinks.