3 ms·

No company is 'nice' or 'friendly'. They are always in it for themselves. Their best interests are not the same as their consumers or developers. People need

by roc 17y ago

No company is 'nice' or 'friendly'. They are always in it for themselves. Their best interests are not the same as their consumers or developers. People need to stop anthropomorphizing these entities into friends and enemies.

InclinedPlane 17y ago
Sure, all companies are ultimately in it for the profit. But some companies treat their customers well, and they make a profit by making products their customers enjoy. In a real sense their best interests are closely aligned to their customers' best interests (building better products). But some companies try their damnedest to abuse and rip off their customers. Apple's history lies just shy of abuse. They revel in proprietary systems, are very anti-competitive, and they demand outrageous profit margins. If Microsoft behaved the same way they would have been destroyed or broken up by government regulation long ago. Yet because Apple is able to design and execute much better than the industry average many people give them a pass on all of these things. But they shouldn't. Apple's anti-competitive and anti-consumer behavior is cute when viewed in the context of, say, their tiny share of the PC market. But there may come a day when Apple dominates a market (it's certainly looking that way for smartphones) and when that day comes people will almost certainly regret not having payed more attention to Apple's dark side.
- roc 17y ago
  I disagree. Any alignment in interests is temporary at best. Inasfar as the alignment exists and results in a good product, people should stick to that alone: "this is a good product". It's a mistake to generalize or extend that sentiment to "therefore the company is a good company". Given the opportunity Microsoft would absolutely erect a walled garden ecosystem of DRM'd media and 'blessed' hardware. Hell, they tried. Several times (with varying levels of success). Even in the midst of their anti-trust problems. And given the opportunity, Apple absolutely would lean on its partners and conspire against standards the way Microsoft has in the past. They also have tried (with varying levels of success). Several times. The only difference between Apple and Microsoft is that they can only afford to put their interests ahead of their customers in the fields they dominate, which, by definition, are different fields.

by roc 17y ago

InclinedPlane 17y ago

Sure, all companies are ultimately in it for the profit. But some companies treat their customers well, and they make a profit by making products their customers enjoy. In a real sense their best interests are closely aligned to their customers' best interests (building better products). But some companies try their damnedest to abuse and rip off their customers. Apple's history lies just shy of abuse. They revel in proprietary systems, are very anti-competitive, and they demand outrageous profit margins. If Microsoft behaved the same way they would have been destroyed or broken up by government regulation long ago. Yet because Apple is able to design and execute much better than the industry average many people give them a pass on all of these things. But they shouldn't. Apple's anti-competitive and anti-consumer behavior is cute when viewed in the context of, say, their tiny share of the PC market. But there may come a day when Apple dominates a market (it's certainly looking that way for smartphones) and when that day comes people will almost certainly regret not having payed more attention to Apple's dark side.

roc 17y ago
I disagree. Any alignment in interests is temporary at best. Inasfar as the alignment exists and results in a good product, people should stick to that alone: "this is a good product". It's a mistake to generalize or extend that sentiment to "therefore the company is a good company". Given the opportunity Microsoft would absolutely erect a walled garden ecosystem of DRM'd media and 'blessed' hardware. Hell, they tried. Several times (with varying levels of success). Even in the midst of their anti-trust problems. And given the opportunity, Apple absolutely would lean on its partners and conspire against standards the way Microsoft has in the past. They also have tried (with varying levels of success). Several times. The only difference between Apple and Microsoft is that they can only afford to put their interests ahead of their customers in the fields they dominate, which, by definition, are different fields.