3 ms·

Yes, but that was exactly my point. Video game consoles have been around for ages, are closed ecosystems, and no one minds. The App Store decides to do this for

Yes, but that was exactly my point. Video game consoles have been around for ages, are closed ecosystems, and no one minds. The App Store decides to do this for phones (which were at the time, pretty closed ecosystems anyway) and everyone gets upset. What is the difference?

girvo 13y ago
Windows Mobile, Palm OS, hell even later versions of Blackberry. None of these were closed in terms of app installation. Smartphones were not closed ecosystems, in fact, the point of them was to be open in this way.
- interpol_p 13y ago
  I guess I was thinking more of non-smart mobile phones, since that was what most people used before the iPhone. But even so, it doesn't explain why other closed devices have been, and remain closed with no complaints. Why do we not express the same discontent over a PS3? Or any other closed environment? I don't think it's because smartphones were "open" before the iPhone.
  - tl 13y ago
    > Why do we not express the same discontent over a PS3? Or any other closed environment? I don't think it's because smartphones were "open" before the iPhone. Two reasons: 1. The device that plays games is a lot less important than the ubiquitous pocket computer (and for some only general purpose computer). 2. Games, more-so than other software, benefit from the walled garden / curated approach. Nintendo more or less proved this out decades ago when they entered the console market.
    - interpol_p 13y ago
      1. But to game developers it is their most important device. I am a developer who would love to be able to test and publish my games on those platforms — but I don't mind that they keep the platform closed, because I feel it adds value to the games currently on there. (Developers are the main group concerned with the issue of open vs. closed.) 2. I would argue that your point also applies to the best apps on the App Store. The super-polished, simple and focused experiences that people love. They are hardly complex software, they are just well-thought-out design wise. By taking a curated approach you prevent the crud from building up. I see it as similar to a fashionable clothing store — they buy all their clothes for cheap just like everyone else. The value they offer is in their curation and taste. (In my mind Apple is not strict enough with their curation, which dilutes the value of their store. But I realise I am in the minority with this opinion.)

girvo 13y ago

Windows Mobile, Palm OS, hell even later versions of Blackberry. None of these were closed in terms of app installation. Smartphones were not closed ecosystems, in fact, the point of them was to be open in this way.

interpol_p 13y ago
I guess I was thinking more of non-smart mobile phones, since that was what most people used before the iPhone. But even so, it doesn't explain why other closed devices have been, and remain closed with no complaints. Why do we not express the same discontent over a PS3? Or any other closed environment? I don't think it's because smartphones were "open" before the iPhone.
- tl 13y ago
  > Why do we not express the same discontent over a PS3? Or any other closed environment? I don't think it's because smartphones were "open" before the iPhone. Two reasons: 1. The device that plays games is a lot less important than the ubiquitous pocket computer (and for some only general purpose computer). 2. Games, more-so than other software, benefit from the walled garden / curated approach. Nintendo more or less proved this out decades ago when they entered the console market.
  - interpol_p 13y ago
    1. But to game developers it is their most important device. I am a developer who would love to be able to test and publish my games on those platforms — but I don't mind that they keep the platform closed, because I feel it adds value to the games currently on there. (Developers are the main group concerned with the issue of open vs. closed.) 2. I would argue that your point also applies to the best apps on the App Store. The super-polished, simple and focused experiences that people love. They are hardly complex software, they are just well-thought-out design wise. By taking a curated approach you prevent the crud from building up. I see it as similar to a fashionable clothing store — they buy all their clothes for cheap just like everyone else. The value they offer is in their curation and taste. (In my mind Apple is not strict enough with their curation, which dilutes the value of their store. But I realise I am in the minority with this opinion.)