5 ms·

You have no experience dealing with a 3rd party that controls the marketplace. Apple's behavior is not exceptional. It's how every monopolist behaves when they

by maratd 14y ago

You have no experience dealing with a 3rd party that controls the marketplace. Apple's behavior is not exceptional. It's how every monopolist behaves when they own the market. I dealt with the very same issues when I had my own business selling on eBay. At the end of the day, when you have to move your product through someone's market, it's not your product, it's not your business, and those aren't your customers. It's all theirs. Because if you do something they don't like, they will just turn you off ... or worse, they'll call you and tell you to change it. > There doesn't seem to be anything that openness would have provided him. It would have provided him the freedom of developing the product he wants, without compromise. It would have allowed him to take his vision directly to his customers. And nobody would be able to get in his way. > With that said Win8 has a complete desktop mode fully available for tinkering. Have you tried installing unsigned software on Windows 8? You get a huge window pretty much saying NO. Only after clicking on more info, do you get an option to override. I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9?

Mythbusters 14y ago
Signing the software is still different than getting it approved by Microsoft. I am guessing it's done by third party certificates? I still don't understand what the concern is? The model you described is the app store model and though I partially agree with you the heavy handed behavior is only possible when you have a monopoly. I don't think Microsoft can afford that at this point.
- maratd 14y ago
  > I still don't understand what the concern is? Where do you buy your groceries? Do you go to a guy who sells tomatoes and then drive to the other side of town to get apples from a different guy? Most of us just go to a market and buy all our groceries there. Now tell me, Mr. Customer, what is the name of the guy who grows your tomatoes? What is the name of the farm? Do you consider yourself his customer or the customer of the market? If the tomatoes taste bad, who will you complain to? Who are you loyal to? If the market starts buying tomatoes from a different guy ... will you shrug your shoulders and buy the new tomatoes ... or will you drive across town to get the original tomatoes? I'm sure you see my point. The very same thing is happening to the software market. Yes, we will make more money. But there is more to life than money! We will no longer have any customers. We will become employees of Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. Mind you, not employees with benefits, no. Independent contractors who are "hired" and "fired" at whim. Again, yes, we can all make more money. But if money is all we wanted, we would have chosen to work for the big boys to begin with! This movement toward centralized markets is the fundamental reason I chose to go into web development and avoided app development like the plague. Each part of my stack is easily replaceable and my customers are my customers. I don't care if I make less money. I have the freedom to see my vision come to life and to see it being put to work by people I know and who know me. Funny enough, the same push-back is happening in the food biz. The entire local food movement is based on a fairly similar desire.
  - xtracto 14y ago
    >Funny enough, the same push-back is happening in the food biz. The entire local food movement is based on a fairly similar desire. You do not have to go that far in your analogy. The music business is a great example of how more and more musicians are inclined to be "independent" of their monopolistic overlords.
kenjackson 14y ago
At the end of the day, when you have to move your product through someone's market, it's not your product, it's not your business, and those aren't your customers. It's all theirs. Because if you do something they don't like, they will just turn you off ... or worse, they'll call you and tell you to change it. That can just as easily apply to the platform it was built on. Windows, OS X, or Android, can do this today if they were so inclined (well maybe not Windows due to anti-trust concerns -- but that has to do with market dominance, not openness). What you're saying is that you must run on a full stack you completely build, from the foundary, CPU, on up (because Intel could break all Windows computers with firmware update if they were so inclined). We've all built on something, giving away some degree of responsibility and ownership. Now maybe Notch's point is that this is where he draws the line. It seems like an odd place to draw it IMO, especially given how fast the game market tends to move (when was the last time someone asked you to play Words with Friends?). But like I said before, more power to Notch wherever he goes. I'll miss not playing Minecraft as I move all my machines to Win8 (admittedly not much of a gamer though), but not for too long I'm sure. Have you tried installing unsigned software on Windows 8? You get a huge window pretty much saying NO. Only after clicking on more info, do you get an option to override. I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9? Really, that's a complaint of yours? I actually which there was a setting to not let these install at all.
- bad_user 14y ago
  Android allows for third-party sources when installing software. There are developers out there that distribute their software through other channels than Google Play. E.g. one of the Humble Indie Bundle that I bought had 4 Android games in it and distribution was through download links sent by email. And when publishing on Google Play, at least for now, there is no approval process. And no, Windows and OS X cannot do this today, as long as installation of software from third-parties is still possible and your OS is not remotely controlled by them. Microsoft can't do anything today to ban an app on Windows. But it's increasingly clear that they want this capability. For those of us familiar with the gaming industry since the nineties, we've experienced this same fight between PCs and gaming consoles and even though the PC wasn't a common household appliance until the mid nineties at least and even though the likes of Sega, Nintendo and later Sony looked poised to take over the world, most games were built for PCs first, because that's were the innovation was and because nobody could pull the rug from under your feet. Even the arguments were exactly the same as today - for consumers it was ease of use, no viruses/mallware and a better return on investment, while for developers it was the lack of piracy, promotion and a piece of a large pie where the competition was controlled. And it's a pretty sad fact that this is precisely what Apple and now Microsoft are trying - the consolification of the PC. Well I for one do not think that consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me and Windows Vista before it.
rimantas 14y ago
> Apple's behavior is not exceptional. It's how every > monopolist behaves when they own the market. What is has to do with monopoly? Apple behaved the same way since the very beginning, I'd say it is even more relaxed now compared to few years ago.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > What is has to do with monopoly? Apple behaved the same way since the very beginning ... Not true. How do I know? I was there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Lutus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Lutus This is not to excuse what Apple has become, not by any means. But Apple wasn't always a cyber-octopus. I remember the idealism of a startup that briefly had a vast marketplace to itself.
  - rimantas 14y ago
    Good for you. This still does not answer how Apple is a monopoly (which it is not), neither it makes fact that software for iOS was available only from AppStore since day one less a fact.
    - officemonkey 14y ago
      Maratd did not say Apple was a monopoly, he said Apple was a monopolist. Having the behavior of a thing and being the thing are two different things. Technically, Apple is a Monopsony, in that they control the app store market. If you want to sell your app, you go through Apple, and they in turn sell it to their users. The move by all the major vendors to control the market is great for the company (who wouldn't love to take 30% of every sale simply for being the middleman,) but it flies in the face of a free market economy, stifles innovation, creates barriers to entry, and encourages scammy behavior (I am rich app, "freemium" apps, paying for reviews, etc.)
nhangen 14y ago
Microsoft has no obligation to make their platform open, and as a business owner, I can't fault them for trying to leverage their platform to make money. In this case, Microsoft came to Notch, so it's not like he set out to start a flame war, but I can't empathize with people who complain about operating systems being closed. The honest truth is that if you don't like it, and it's that important to you, then consider creating your own. Of course I'm aware that this is not easy.
- saalweachter 14y ago
  Wasn't there this big giant thing in the 90's where we decided that Microsoft did have to let other people develop for their OS?
- baby 14y ago
  > The honest truth is that if you don't like it, and it's that important to you, then consider creating your own. That's a pretty good come back that you have here.
mistercow 14y ago
> I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9? Don't major versions of Windows follow the same pattern as Star Trek movies? According to history, Windows 9 will be an acceptable release, and then Windows 10 will be ridiculous nonsense again.
- calinet6 14y ago
  Except they will do another marketing shift and it will surely be called something like "Windows Z" by then.

by maratd 14y ago

Mythbusters 14y ago

Signing the software is still different than getting it approved by Microsoft. I am guessing it's done by third party certificates? I still don't understand what the concern is? The model you described is the app store model and though I partially agree with you the heavy handed behavior is only possible when you have a monopoly. I don't think Microsoft can afford that at this point.

maratd 14y ago
> I still don't understand what the concern is? Where do you buy your groceries? Do you go to a guy who sells tomatoes and then drive to the other side of town to get apples from a different guy? Most of us just go to a market and buy all our groceries there. Now tell me, Mr. Customer, what is the name of the guy who grows your tomatoes? What is the name of the farm? Do you consider yourself his customer or the customer of the market? If the tomatoes taste bad, who will you complain to? Who are you loyal to? If the market starts buying tomatoes from a different guy ... will you shrug your shoulders and buy the new tomatoes ... or will you drive across town to get the original tomatoes? I'm sure you see my point. The very same thing is happening to the software market. Yes, we will make more money. But there is more to life than money! We will no longer have any customers. We will become employees of Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. Mind you, not employees with benefits, no. Independent contractors who are "hired" and "fired" at whim. Again, yes, we can all make more money. But if money is all we wanted, we would have chosen to work for the big boys to begin with! This movement toward centralized markets is the fundamental reason I chose to go into web development and avoided app development like the plague. Each part of my stack is easily replaceable and my customers are my customers. I don't care if I make less money. I have the freedom to see my vision come to life and to see it being put to work by people I know and who know me. Funny enough, the same push-back is happening in the food biz. The entire local food movement is based on a fairly similar desire.
- xtracto 14y ago
  >Funny enough, the same push-back is happening in the food biz. The entire local food movement is based on a fairly similar desire. You do not have to go that far in your analogy. The music business is a great example of how more and more musicians are inclined to be "independent" of their monopolistic overlords.

kenjackson 14y ago

At the end of the day, when you have to move your product through someone's market, it's not your product, it's not your business, and those aren't your customers. It's all theirs. Because if you do something they don't like, they will just turn you off ... or worse, they'll call you and tell you to change it. That can just as easily apply to the platform it was built on. Windows, OS X, or Android, can do this today if they were so inclined (well maybe not Windows due to anti-trust concerns -- but that has to do with market dominance, not openness). What you're saying is that you must run on a full stack you completely build, from the foundary, CPU, on up (because Intel could break all Windows computers with firmware update if they were so inclined). We've all built on something, giving away some degree of responsibility and ownership. Now maybe Notch's point is that this is where he draws the line. It seems like an odd place to draw it IMO, especially given how fast the game market tends to move (when was the last time someone asked you to play Words with Friends?). But like I said before, more power to Notch wherever he goes. I'll miss not playing Minecraft as I move all my machines to Win8 (admittedly not much of a gamer though), but not for too long I'm sure. Have you tried installing unsigned software on Windows 8? You get a huge window pretty much saying NO. Only after clicking on more info, do you get an option to override. I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9? Really, that's a complaint of yours? I actually which there was a setting to not let these install at all.

bad_user 14y ago
Android allows for third-party sources when installing software. There are developers out there that distribute their software through other channels than Google Play. E.g. one of the Humble Indie Bundle that I bought had 4 Android games in it and distribution was through download links sent by email. And when publishing on Google Play, at least for now, there is no approval process. And no, Windows and OS X cannot do this today, as long as installation of software from third-parties is still possible and your OS is not remotely controlled by them. Microsoft can't do anything today to ban an app on Windows. But it's increasingly clear that they want this capability. For those of us familiar with the gaming industry since the nineties, we've experienced this same fight between PCs and gaming consoles and even though the PC wasn't a common household appliance until the mid nineties at least and even though the likes of Sega, Nintendo and later Sony looked poised to take over the world, most games were built for PCs first, because that's were the innovation was and because nobody could pull the rug from under your feet. Even the arguments were exactly the same as today - for consumers it was ease of use, no viruses/mallware and a better return on investment, while for developers it was the lack of piracy, promotion and a piece of a large pie where the competition was controlled. And it's a pretty sad fact that this is precisely what Apple and now Microsoft are trying - the consolification of the PC. Well I for one do not think that consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me and Windows Vista before it.

rimantas 14y ago

> Apple's behavior is not exceptional. It's how every > monopolist behaves when they own the market. What is has to do with monopoly? Apple behaved the same way since the very beginning, I'd say it is even more relaxed now compared to few years ago.

lutusp 14y ago
> What is has to do with monopoly? Apple behaved the same way since the very beginning ... Not true. How do I know? I was there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Lutus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Lutus This is not to excuse what Apple has become, not by any means. But Apple wasn't always a cyber-octopus. I remember the idealism of a startup that briefly had a vast marketplace to itself.
- rimantas 14y ago
  Good for you. This still does not answer how Apple is a monopoly (which it is not), neither it makes fact that software for iOS was available only from AppStore since day one less a fact.
  - officemonkey 14y ago
    Maratd did not say Apple was a monopoly, he said Apple was a monopolist. Having the behavior of a thing and being the thing are two different things. Technically, Apple is a Monopsony, in that they control the app store market. If you want to sell your app, you go through Apple, and they in turn sell it to their users. The move by all the major vendors to control the market is great for the company (who wouldn't love to take 30% of every sale simply for being the middleman,) but it flies in the face of a free market economy, stifles innovation, creates barriers to entry, and encourages scammy behavior (I am rich app, "freemium" apps, paying for reviews, etc.)

nhangen 14y ago

Microsoft has no obligation to make their platform open, and as a business owner, I can't fault them for trying to leverage their platform to make money. In this case, Microsoft came to Notch, so it's not like he set out to start a flame war, but I can't empathize with people who complain about operating systems being closed. The honest truth is that if you don't like it, and it's that important to you, then consider creating your own. Of course I'm aware that this is not easy.

saalweachter 14y ago
Wasn't there this big giant thing in the 90's where we decided that Microsoft did have to let other people develop for their OS?
baby 14y ago
> The honest truth is that if you don't like it, and it's that important to you, then consider creating your own. That's a pretty good come back that you have here.

mistercow 14y ago

> I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9? Don't major versions of Windows follow the same pattern as Star Trek movies? According to history, Windows 9 will be an acceptable release, and then Windows 10 will be ridiculous nonsense again.

calinet6 14y ago
Except they will do another marketing shift and it will surely be called something like "Windows Z" by then.