4 ms·

Mark Zuckerberg explicitly called out the airpod pairing being closed as unfair in a semi recent interview, maybe he can throw some dollars that way and get it

• stavros 11mo ago
  It's not up to a third party to invest into opening up Apple's purposely locked-down ecosystem.
  • mft_ 11mo ago
    …unless someone has sufficient time and/or money to spend on it, and wants to do so as a point of principle. If I had large amounts of spare money, I’d love to seed small endeavours that (according to my personal world view) made the world incrementally better. As has been noted before, what’s the point of having ‘FU money’ if you don’t use it to say ‘FU’ now and again?
    • stavros 11mo ago
      Yeah, but saying "maybe super rich people will do random illogical things" isn't really a great argument. For all we know, Mark Zuckerberg wants to spend his "fuck you" money locking the ecosystem down even more, as a "fuck you" to consumers.
• thewebguyd 11mo ago
  That's backwards. It's not AirPods being closed that's unfair. Apple should be able to sell first party tech that only works with their own products. What's unfair is Apple locking everyone else out. Not allowing or documenting for third parties to use the same APIs to enable something like automatic device switching in third party bluetooth headphones is the unfair part. Same goes for the watch. That the Apple Watch only works with iPhone isn't the problem. The problem is no other third party is able to make a smartwatch that competes on an level playing field with the Apple Watch on Apple Devices, because Apple locks them out. lock-out is the unfair problem.
  • intrasight 11mo ago
    "only works with their own products" == "lock-out" Or am I missing something that distinguishes between these two in your view?
    • thewebguyd 11mo ago
      Only works with their own products is lock-in. Lock-out is Apple preventing third parties from making accessories that can match the first party ones in feature parity and seamlessness. Apple Watch only working with iPhones=lock-in No third party watch being allowed to use the same APIs the Apple Watch does or not being allowed to access iMessage, Apple Pay, etc = lock-out.
      • 4dm1r4lg3n3r4l 11mo ago
        By locking their products "in", they're also locking third parties "out". How on earth would they be able to "lock-in" the Apple Watch to the iPhone while at the same time NOT "locking-out" third parties? It's the same thing.
        • BrawnyBadger53 11mo ago
          I think they're suggesting that lock in implies apple didn't write the code to help support 3rd parties. Lock out implies they actively wrote code to prevent 3rd parties.
          • intrasight 11mo ago
            With other companies there may be a difference. But with Apple, for all intents and purposes, it's the same thing. Because they are hostile to third-party integration using undocumented API's or interfaces.
        • _fuchs 11mo ago
          I have a apartement i rent out for vacation If i offer to bring you fresh breakfast in the morning but not offer the service to other apartments down the street -> „lock in“ If i do not allow you to get your breakfast (of equal quality)elsewhere -> „lock out“