4 ms·

Someone just needs to make a better computer that people can switch to from Apple. No need to bring violence into the equation. We know the formula now, which

Someone just needs to make a better computer that people can switch to from Apple. No need to bring violence into the equation. We know the formula now, which Microsoft ignores since their market is companies. The formula for selling computers to people seems to be "be in control of both hardware and software to provide the best native experience". It's not a secret, anyone that wants to can start a company and compete with Apple. All regulators can do is make Apple's job harder for themselves which will result in bad products and cost taxpayers money, a lose-lose situation.

walterbell 11y ago
The formula also includes factory financing which slows competitor access to manufacturing capacity. Some products benefit from network effects (manufacturing, developer adoption) and become difficult to displace by any competitor, however well funded. Careful intervention can help to restore balance. Unlike the oil companies of yesteryear, or even a browser that is supposedly "baked into" an operating system, the remedy here is not logistically complex: the backdoor is already known to exist -- it can be extended to some competitive products.
- innguest 11y ago
  > The formula also includes factory financing which slows competitor access to manufacturing capacity. I'm talking about the formula that seduced the customer. "Factory financing" did not seduce the customer - one company in charge of the whole computer (as opposed to one company making the hardware and another making the software) is what seduced the consumer. The fact that company makes computers for end users, not company employees, is what seduced the consumer. > Careful intervention can help to restore balance. Like non-violent spanking, careful intervention is an oxymoron. Unless you can show an example where no one was harmed by government anti-trust laws being applied.

walterbell 11y ago

The formula also includes factory financing which slows competitor access to manufacturing capacity. Some products benefit from network effects (manufacturing, developer adoption) and become difficult to displace by any competitor, however well funded. Careful intervention can help to restore balance. Unlike the oil companies of yesteryear, or even a browser that is supposedly "baked into" an operating system, the remedy here is not logistically complex: the backdoor is already known to exist -- it can be extended to some competitive products.

innguest 11y ago
> The formula also includes factory financing which slows competitor access to manufacturing capacity. I'm talking about the formula that seduced the customer. "Factory financing" did not seduce the customer - one company in charge of the whole computer (as opposed to one company making the hardware and another making the software) is what seduced the consumer. The fact that company makes computers for end users, not company employees, is what seduced the consumer. > Careful intervention can help to restore balance. Like non-violent spanking, careful intervention is an oxymoron. Unless you can show an example where no one was harmed by government anti-trust laws being applied.