Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 20:59 UTC
Apple Now that Apple has unveiled the iPad, people are wondering what the future holds for the iPhone OS platform and the concepts behind it. The iPad comes scarily close to being an actual computer in the more classical sense of the word, and a recent Apple job posting seems to indicated the Cupertino giant is interested in further moving the iPhone OS up the ladder. We ask you: would you be put off or excited about the iPhone OS' restrictive model moving up the stack?
Thread beginning with comment 410586
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Imagine a world ...
by JoeBuck on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 21:09 UTC
JoeBuck
Member since:
2006-01-11

... in which every program you run on your laptop has to be purchased via a Microsoft web site. Microsoft would approve each application, and would take a share of each sale. Apps that interfered with Microsoft's business model would not be approved, and there would be no recourse. It would not be possible to write your own program for your computer. Would you choose this world? Then why would you choose it if the monopolist is Apple instead of Microsoft?

Reply Score: 34

RE: Imagine a world ...
by mtzmtulivu on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 21:50 in reply to "Imagine a world ..."
mtzmtulivu Member since:
2006-11-14

... in which every program you run on your laptop has to be purchased via a Microsoft web site. Microsoft would approve each application, and would take a share of each sale. Apps that interfered with Microsoft's business model would not be approved, and there would be no recourse. It would not be possible to write your own program for your computer. Would you choose this world? Then why would you choose it if the monopolist is Apple instead of Microsoft?


voices generated by apple talk in the media make it seem as it apple has a vast market share that is big enough to attract government scrutiny. It is not and this is where your microsoft/apple comparison falls short.microsoft is a convicted monopoly, apple isnt and your comparison also fails in this regard too. when does microsoft convicted legal status end?

A lot of people are putting up with app store, why wouldnt the same people put up with the same store and its policies with another device from apple? apple doesnt aim to be number in market share in any market and they have a loyal following that will buy anything apple and that is why they can afford to do stuff like their app store and their policies.

this article is nothing more than an attempt at inflating apple noise on the internet to get more clicks???

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Imagine a world ...
by deathshadow on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 22:48 in reply to "RE: Imagine a world ..."
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Sleazeball vendor lock-in is sleazeball vendor lock-in, regardless of who practices it or how big they are. That's like saying we shouldn't go after mass murderers becuase they are only a fraction of the population - or we shouldn't go after inside-traders on wall street because they are only a small proportion of the people doing business there.

All this monopoly bullshit most people knee-jerk into as a 'defense' of sleazy practices, or as 'offense' against the 'great satan' forgets one of the base precepts of Law and human rights: "For a law to be fair, it must treat all parties equally." Justice needs to be blind, so that undue favoritism and unjust persecution is not executed.

Penalizing any individual or group of individuals for things practiced by all simply because they are more successful isn't just unjust; It should be considered criminal. If they are performing something that is unfair to it's competitors, then it's competitors should NOT be allowed to do the EXACT SAME THING. If they break the law - then fine, slap them down for it... - But I swear it's almost like some people want to make being successful illegal... Being more succesful than their competitors does NOT justify slapping them down for LEGAL actions that EVERYONE ELSE IN THE INDUSTRY IS DOING TOO!!! It shouldn't matter if you are black, white, male, female, successful or dirt poor - While certainly monopolies can be guilty of abuse, there's a difference between going after them for illegal/amoral activities, and just penalizing them for daring to be successful.

Which is why if MS is going to get slapped down for IE and Media player, Apple shouldn't be allowed to bundle iTunes or Safari, *nix distros should not be allowed to bundle FF and players like Totem or VLC, etc, etc... But no, they cannot compete on their own merits so they have to resort to litigation - Which IMHO is the EXACT SAME BULL as SCO's 'business model'.

But then, lots of unjust practices are propagated by the word of law and the ignorance of the sheep who kowtow to media hype and the words of their 'leaders' who are more interested in filling their government's coffers than they are the rights of the people or the fairness of their laws, made worse when fines can be handed out by rubber-stamp judges in places like the EU....

Though much of it is just the irrational hatred of anyone who happens to be more successful than your favorite pet project. Rah, rah, fight the power, down with the man... One step removed from the tinfoil hat brigade.

Edited 2010-02-23 22:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

v RE: good products...
by sergio on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 22:24 in reply to "Imagine a world ..."
RE[2]: good products...
by ebasconp on Tue 23rd Feb 2010 22:58 in reply to "RE: good products..."
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Maybe because Apple do good products and Microsoft don't.



That's troll man.

Apple does not have anything compared in size, features, performance, etc. to Microsoft Office, Exchange, Active Directory, NTFS or Visual Studio; Apple does not have a huge set of frameworks or APIs similar to Win32 API, DirectX, .NET Framework and so on.

Apple applications are nice, easy to use, intuitive, etc... but "nice" does not always means "good".

Reply Parent Score: 5