Walls of Apple's Garden Tumbling Down?

Not sure this is the best place for this post, but here it is…

The walls of Apple’s garden are tumbling down - The Verge

1 Like

Interesting take, but I think the author is way over his skis except for the fact that Apple, like any other manufacturer who has so much relying on one revenue source, is in a tough spot as phones more and more become a commodity. What I don’t get is the Warren/Sanders mentality that everything has to be “fair” in the sense that we get to play with your services as we want to - does that mean every successful restaurant chain must share their “secret sauce” with everyone to be “fair.”

One place I do have a problem is the iMessage blue vs green bubbles. Especially for children. It is NOT a means of warning of security of the messaging, it is clearly a logo, like Ralph Lauren, Polo, Nike, that shows everyone Mine is superior (blue bubble) and YOU have the inferior (green bubble) device. There is no reason to color code the phones the messages are coming from.

3 Likes

I think that access is the issue that’s being played upon. With the percentage of market share that Apple still claims, they are vulnerable to criticisms that they deny access…

1 Like

Not sure I buy that. Apple has its highest percentage of use in the United States and it’s only half. Android has the other half in the US and something like 70% in the world.

Also, as someone who just switched from iPhone to Android (again!), there was no difficulty at all having access to friends and family with iMessage and me no longer having it. None. Sure, I couldn’t do the confetti congratulations animation for my sister but is that really a big deal that we have to have lawsuits about? Seriously?!

Tempest in a teapot.

2 Likes

You misunderstand. I’m talking about access in the context of how the on-phone apps work and what they present. And 50% market share and ~20% of world-wide market share is certainly significant enough to invite criticism or perhaps I should say scrutiny (warranted or not)…

1 Like

I don’t think messaging is a problem for most anyone except for silly teenagers who look at it as a status symbol. Instead, I think the article’s poor writing that dawdles on iMessage is causing the big picture discussion of the walled garden in general to be missed. The take-home message is the ability to change to other default apps or services in the operating system to whatever other ones that the user prefers is missing. Microsoft made the same mistake decades earlier, and Apple is repeating that mistake when they could have prepared and adjusted far in advance. Instead, they have now gotten caught in a reactionary mode where their innovation is getting gummed up by litigation and regulation. We already have seen pent-up interest moving us in this direction with years of a constant game of cat-and-mouse of jailbreaking and more recently hacks like SideStore that remove sideloading restrictions. It is clear just because this article exists that the public mind in general is more aware and desirous for openness in the platform even if most users themselves won’t avail it personally.

Will the consoles be opened up next? They’re way more walled off than anything else. :roll_eyes:

Sorry, I don’t buy it. I just see a lot of competing companies seeing a chance to take Apple down a notch and make more money.

This is what bothers me about the whole discussion - why does the user have a court ordered right to change how a manufacturer designs and presents its product. Your “right” as a consumer is to vote with your wallet. What if I LOVE the Toyota RAV4, but HATE the drive shift knob - do I have the right to sue to make them use a push button selector?

2 Likes

Yeah if you take the “pro” argument to it’s logical end, Apple would be forced to offer IOS to other phone vendors.

This is classic government overreach which only benefits the politician as in “look at me standing up to/sticking it to bad ol’ company xxx …”

And no company would have any real incentive to innovate

3 Likes

And speaking of going too far…
iPads join iPhones in requirement to follow strict EU rules - The Verge

3 Likes

I can’t help thinking that a big part of this sudden push for opening up Apple is because they’re sitting on all that juicy user data that their current policies prevent apps from collecting.

2 Likes

exactly, there is always an agenda behind this, and it’s rarely the publicly stated one.

1 Like

These efforts remind me of one of my all time favorite writers, kurt Vonnegut, and one of his best stories/satires about making everything equal for everyone.

Though I also perhaps am showing my age as well :slight_smile:
A Critical Analysis of Harrison Bergeron Free Essay Example (studymoose.com)

PS: regardless of your views, it is also very funny … “KLANG”…

1 Like

Disclaimer I have not RTFA

You have the right as a consumer to buy a new drive shift knob and install it because it’s attached via an industry standard screw. Additionally, even if it was a proprietary drive shift knob and you really hated it, there are plenty of other SUVs on the market to choose from.

The default app fight goes back to microsoft’s bundling of internet explorer pushing out netscape.

This also gets into things like the right to repair laws after John Deere tried to lock down their tractors so you’d have to hire a licensed repair person to fix stupid stuff. Farmers didn’t take kindly to having to pay absurd license fees to fix things they owned outright.

Ownership of something like a cellphone or computer is more complicated than just the idea that the physical thing is mine. The physical thing is a paperweight without software, ie: windows phones rotting in my dead tech drawer. And do you own the software? Nope. You own a license to use the software. So, does the company have a right to tell you what you can run their software on? Yes, that’s what the license agreement is. But that ELA didn’t really stop the hackintosh movement from shoehorning OSX onto all those atom netbooks. However, it absolutely would have stopped a hardware company from trying to sell netbooks with OSX preinstalled.

Does the company that sold you the hardware have the right to tell you what you can run on it? Nope, but good luck getting an iPhone to run anything else. Has anyone installed linux on one of those yet? Does it run slackware?

But okay, now I’m intrigued by the idea of trying to install other OSes on my fold. Windows on the Duo is an interesting gimmick, but what would iPhoneOS look like on a fold? Or iPad OS? Should that be as easy to do as swapping out the shift knob on a RAV 4?

1 Like

So there’s the rub. when/where do you cross the line between competitive advantage and predatorily exclusionary?

In the realm of cell phones, and hewing to your example, Apple has already met that bar by operating on the same 5g and 4g bands, and texts, at least minimally are cross platform.

The other problem I have is that regardless of good original intent, government is INCREDIBLY INEPT at actually doing it properly, not to mention the aforementioned other agendas almost always involved.

PS: as a side note. I see a similar battle on the horizon if the new Snapdragon Pro/WOA combo takes off. What if a vendor wants to use Exynos chips?

3 Likes

I think this is the hidden REAL motivation here. Yes, Apple blocks developers from collecting the data - they are Apple customers not yours - which sounds awful. However, I really want Apple to curate, not the others.

2 Likes

I defy ANYONE to watch ANY Congressional hearing and not be stunned at the DUMB questions and POSITION STATEMENTS by legislators to witnesses.

1 Like

When I was young and naive I used to think that maybe they were pretending to be dumb in order to lead the the person testifying down a line of questioning that would entrap them or something. But no, I eventually woke up and realized that they’re just dumb, by and large.

1 Like

In all fairness, while there seems to be a low IQ for legislators, sometimes it is just the simple fact they don’t know how little they know about a subject and yet feel compelled to expound on that subject.

2 Likes

Because, if for not any other reason, that was the precedent was established and punishments were applied to Microsoft for the very same reasons. If the regulators equivocate, then that invalidates all of the rulings and makes them subject to rebuttal and reversal. Microsoft would then be well within their rights to challenge the regulators for not equally and fairly applying the same rules to their competitor. But if you agree that this should not happen, then let Microsoft do the same thing as Apple is with iOS and iPadOS because they will if the regulators are not holding their feet to the fire.