24 ms·

> I think of Apple kind of like Nintendo, but for computers. Then hopefully you understand why people get more upset over Apple's arbitrary "ecosystem" decisio

> I think of Apple kind of like Nintendo, but for computers. Then hopefully you understand why people get more upset over Apple's arbitrary "ecosystem" decisions than they are with Nintendo. I love Nintendo, even for all the mistakes they make. But they sell a toy; a games console that is strictly used for entertainment with no auxiliary purpose. Nobody is suing Nintendo because their PDF won't open on their Switch; Nintendo just doesn't offer that functionality, from anyone. There is no unfair market segmentation because Nintendo doesn't segregate functionality by-developer. > What market is Apple dominating? Have you not been following the DMA? It's software; they refuse to offer any form of competitive software distribution. Because of Apple's first-party advantage, they can explicitly block competitors from ever shipping a viable business, and until recently they even blatantly forbid the distribution of GPL-licensed apps. If Apple wants to play the Nintendo defense, then they can get both barrels that Microsoft dodged. I really have no patience for grown-up developers that want to rely on the benefit of the doubt we give a toy company.

xtiansimon 2y ago
> “Because of Apple's first-party advantage, they can explicitly block competitors from ever shipping a viable business…” What does that mean ‘shipping a viable business’?
- talldayo 2y ago
  Depends on the business. Let's say you're Dropbox, or a similar third-party subscription backup service. You want to offer a competing service to iCloud for iPhone users, but there are a few hitches in the way: 1) Apple doesn't give you the same APIs they use to integrate iCloud. Your service literally cannot compete with their service on a functional basis. 2) You cannot out-price Apple without a sweetheart deal from Apple themselves. This creates a situation where Apple's consent is required to offer pricing that would be disruptive to any of their services. 3) The de-facto integration, promotion and nagging that iCloud enjoys constitutes product bundling. As we know from their deal with Google, Apple prices their defaults at a ludicrous amount, in order to create a disproportionate first-party advantage relative to competitors. User control is put up for auction under the guise of security and simplicity, when it's really being divided among sinister benefactors. With these combined, it is effectively impossible to present a competitive first-party software experience on Apple platforms. It wouldn't matter if your service was genuinely superior to Apple's offerings because, much like Microsoft, Apple enjoys a privileged position where they can block competitors from their internal market if they pose a legitimate threat.
  - xtiansimon 2y ago
    Then you envision Apple opening both hardware and software platform for full business competition with itself. Similar to installing whatever Linux distro you want on an Intel box? It's not like this is the early days of iPhone--the solution waiting for a problem. You needed competent developers to make quality products to engage and retain users. You offered lucrative deals as compensation. You envision total disruption?
    - talldayo 2y ago
      > You envision total disruption? I forsee it. Microsoft took three steps down that same path and was lucky to walk away in one piece. If Apple drills-down on this point then they will be destroyed municipally without a second thought. The only country sitting on their hands and refusing to fix things is the United States, Apple's designated tax-collector.

xtiansimon 2y ago

> “Because of Apple's first-party advantage, they can explicitly block competitors from ever shipping a viable business…” What does that mean ‘shipping a viable business’?

talldayo 2y ago
Depends on the business. Let's say you're Dropbox, or a similar third-party subscription backup service. You want to offer a competing service to iCloud for iPhone users, but there are a few hitches in the way: 1) Apple doesn't give you the same APIs they use to integrate iCloud. Your service literally cannot compete with their service on a functional basis. 2) You cannot out-price Apple without a sweetheart deal from Apple themselves. This creates a situation where Apple's consent is required to offer pricing that would be disruptive to any of their services. 3) The de-facto integration, promotion and nagging that iCloud enjoys constitutes product bundling. As we know from their deal with Google, Apple prices their defaults at a ludicrous amount, in order to create a disproportionate first-party advantage relative to competitors. User control is put up for auction under the guise of security and simplicity, when it's really being divided among sinister benefactors. With these combined, it is effectively impossible to present a competitive first-party software experience on Apple platforms. It wouldn't matter if your service was genuinely superior to Apple's offerings because, much like Microsoft, Apple enjoys a privileged position where they can block competitors from their internal market if they pose a legitimate threat.
- xtiansimon 2y ago
  Then you envision Apple opening both hardware and software platform for full business competition with itself. Similar to installing whatever Linux distro you want on an Intel box? It's not like this is the early days of iPhone--the solution waiting for a problem. You needed competent developers to make quality products to engage and retain users. You offered lucrative deals as compensation. You envision total disruption?
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > You envision total disruption? I forsee it. Microsoft took three steps down that same path and was lucky to walk away in one piece. If Apple drills-down on this point then they will be destroyed municipally without a second thought. The only country sitting on their hands and refusing to fix things is the United States, Apple's designated tax-collector.