[realusername]

But non-developers have no idea about that, let's be honest. Just open-up a mainstream Youtube video about the latest iphone and check whenever they talk about the app review process (hint: never).

> Also, I get the sense that people are trying to impose OSS-isms on Apple when they both have no power to and also Apple has no reason to abide.

That's why we need anti-trust investigations to both Google and Apple, having a good chunk of the modern economy relying on just two companies which don't even appear to have any competition pressure is just unacceptable.

[gigatexal]

Sounds like tyranny to me. All of this imposition to force the market leaders to change instead of championing other champions. Nobody was giving mind to Apple when Rim and Nokia and Sony were the big players. Apple just made a better device that the market liked more. There will be a new better thing to come along it just needs to be invented.

[throwaway34241]

There are network effects with software platforms that give the established players an advantage. Modern smartphones are more like PCs than feature phones where people generally don't care much about the third party software ecosystem.

If Microsoft had as much power over software distribution in the nineties as Apple does now, they would probably have (smartly for them) severely limited or eliminated web browsers, and forced developers to write their internet applications as Microsoft-specific native software instead (or some other proprietary technology). We take the cross-platform internet for granted now but earlier it was not a sure thing.

If many of (what are now) web services only worked on the Microsoft ecosystem, this would have not only deeply entrenched their position in the PC market but also given them a huge advantage in mobile (if Apple even survived long enough to compete there). One of the early iPhone's biggest strengths was having a full web browser (especially since there was no app store initially). If the real draw was MicrosoftNetwork and not the open web, this wouldn't have been a big selling point for the iPhone and it would have been much harder for them to get the ball rolling. Microsoft would have had an enormous amount of time to come out with a phone that can access the MicrosoftNetwork that everyone wants.

And this is all assuming that anti-trust is still enforced enough that Microsoft can't just demand exclusivity from everyone else, or that companies aren't afraid to associate with competitors since they live or die by subjective Microsoft processes.

[gigatexal]

Throwaway account ... hmm. Is that you Tim Sweeney? ;)

[throwaway34241]

It's not really a throwaway, I've been using the account for a while and commenting semi-regularly. I've periodically wondered if I should email the moderators to try to change it to something less misleading...

Despite not being Tim Sweeney I think as a developer and a consumer I would prefer having the option to install alternative app stores. I'd like to be able to buy apps in a way that lets me install them across platforms, and don't like solely depending on Apple for curation when they ban apps like streaming / emulators etc that don't seem to be a real security concern.

I don't care about mobile as much as laptops and future platforms like VR/AR, but it seems like the trend in general is for things to be more locked down with a few companies acting as gatekeepers. Strong sandboxing with permissions seems great but I don't see why that has to be coupled with everything needing to go through one company for approval.