[theplumber]

Long story short: the next big thing is milking/squeezing the existing customers through services. I guess the next next big thing would be charging customers for existing/free features(i.e pay more for privacy, no more on-device storage etc)

[sem000]

Gotta love HN... always acting like Apple is holding a gun to consumers heads.

[belval]

Realistically (and I am not singling out Apple here), we are more and more captive of an ecosystem. My Android phone is needed to login to most online service through 2FA, I can pay with it, have my calendar and emails on it.

Losing my phone at this point is worse than losing my wallet and Apple is pushing for even tighter integrations with their customer's life which will ultimately centralize all that information.

[whatarethembits]

If I lost my iPhone (and the FindMy network wasn’t able to locate it), the watch can get me by just fine as if nothing even happened. Oh and this was all setup in a couple of minutes when first buying the watch, so unlikely to be in a situation where the watch can’t adequately take over phone duties because I didn’t dedicate a semester to set everything up and keep it in sync on a regular basis. It’s all automatic. Integrated devices > non-integrated devices all day long. Back to the lost phone; I would then walk into an Apple store when time permits, and get or buy a replacement (depending on Apple care coverage status) phone, enter my Apple ID on the new phone and voila its in the exact state as the old one before leaving the store. End of saga, I go meetup with mates as planned in the evening.

Try to do the same with non-Apple ecosystem or with physical cards and keys. I wish there were (dependable) options, but other large organisations have proven to be utterly incompetent in this area. They have no vision and/or ability to pull off something like this. Or their own actions have made their reputation unpalatable even if they somehow offered it in the future.

Also I hate having to remember to carry five different things every time I leave the house, and feel the sensation of those bulky items moving around in my pocket while walking (Europe, we walk a lot) or running. And I hate having to be limited to trousers/joggers/shorts that have deep enough pockets to fit all those items in, and them falling out while out for a run etc etc etc.

[sem000]

>Realistically (and I am not singling out Apple here), we are more and more captive of an ecosystem.

Yes, we definitely are. But I am not so sure that is a bad thing? And it's nothing new... how many businesses had their entire operations tied to Blackberry, Microsoft, Lotus, etc. for so long? The market might be a little slow, but it's not stupid.

I personally like Apple products and services. I like the integration. I like that I don't have to go out and find third party apps for certain things and hope for the best.

> Losing my phone at this point is worse than losing my wallet and Apple is pushing for even tighter integrations with their customer's life which will ultimately centralize all that information.

The great thing about this is a replacement phone can be loaded almost instantaneously with all your info again. How long would it take to have every credit card company and the DMV send you replacements?

[stale2002]

> Yes, we definitely are. But I am not so sure that is a bad thing?

Well, it is the basis of anti-trust law and pro-competition law, that the legal system supports competition and opposes anti-competitive effects.

[nottorp]

> Gotta love HN... always acting like Apple is holding a gun to consumers heads.

Well they are. Because the only alternative is Android. We're into a duopoly situation on mobile and it's almost as bad as a proper monopoly.

[janef0421]

Apple devices have strong, intentional vendor lock-in, which is coercive.

[2Gkashmiri]

>the next big thing is milking/squeezing the existing customers through services

i am NOT a subscriber to netflix et al. never have been and actively avoid signing up to "trial services" because it could potentially hook me up good.

maybe these people are gullible enough to be convinced enough to be parted with their money, that's fine.

you see, there is "EVIDENCE" in support of cigarettes causing cancer but instead of banning the sales, governments milk it for taxes, the companies say "if someone is willing to pay, why not us" and the blame is on the user.....

the same thing with alcohol and weed and stuff like that. Most of the world has grown around alcohol and even when EVERYONE knows its not healthy for the body, people still consume it, "its traditional".

if people want to not own stuff, want netflix style monthly payments to have their whole life managed by apple, good for these people because then they dont have to pay individually for a bank, for a cable tv, for a cell phone company, for internet, for transport, for education, for security, for netflix, disney, hbo, prime and all that.

[theplumber]

Big companies can excert influence and change behaviours. Consider this as a drug dealer who gives you a free trial.

[2Gkashmiri]

yes, that is what i am saying. there are people who avoid smoking cigarettes or take alcohol for all their lives even in the face of freebies. they aren't swayed by them but then there are people who are swayed.

if cigarette makers and breweries can continue and expand their business, so can apple and it would be just the same thing imo

[skc]

Is it still milking if customers are paying willingly?

[sgmoore]

Yes. I guess you have never been near a dairy farm at milking time and seen the cows queue up, or hear the noise they make if they are not milked.

[theplumber]

Thank you! You've just made my day!

[theplumber]

Yea, just like Intel has been milking existing customers. For monopolistic companies milking is their main business.

[ibn_khaldun]

That depends on what you consider “willingly” to mean in this matter.

[mynameisvlad]

Is Apple holding a gun to every person’s head saying “pay for Apple One or else”?

[stale2002]

What they are doing is using anti-competitive practices, that go against the purpose of anti-trust laws and pro-competition laws.

[mynameisvlad]

How, exactly? Apple One is a subscription like any other. People can choose to get it or not.

[stale2002]

Through the process of using dominant market power, to anti-competitively harm competitors in various industries.

The most common one, that is in the news, is the App Store situation, where literal laws are being passed to ban Apple's behavior.

But it also applies to other parts of their business, such as ads. There could be a push to pass laws to make Apple's behavior illegal in those spaces as well.