[ryandrake]

Whenever someone brings up this nebulous "General Purpose Computer" concept, I challenge them to articulate what makes a phone a general purpose computer, but not a game console. So far I haven't heard a convincing answer. They both have CPUs and typical computer architectures, and can run a wide variety of software. Surely the intention of both smartphone makers and game console makers is that their devices are not made for a "general" purpose, and that (so far) has allowed them to justify locking them down.

"Are they essential for day to day life" is a new one. I'm not sure that makes sense either, but I'll give you points for originality! It's also debatable whether phones are essential for day to day life, but we can leave that in another thread.

[Beldin]

While i won't aim to provide a full and perfect definition: a phone is a computing device with a generic interface and the goal of being a platform for a wide variety of software aimed at many different goals: 1-on-1 communication (calling), messaging, social networks, document exchange, note taking, web browsing, photography & photo editing, video & video editing, inventory, physical access control, ... Consoles have a game-targeted interface and a singular focus on games.

I don't know if everything that has been labeled a console matches this description. Some "consoles" have indeed been stretching any meaningful distinction to or even past the breaking point.

But I will unashamedly go "no true Scotsman" on those: If a machine has a secondary (tertiary, quadrutionary, ...) specific focus with dedicated interface, it might still be a console. Illustration: a console that also can play dvd's ia a dedicated dvd interface. However, if the interface is generic and just waiting for the right app, not so much.

The point is not "can it do general-purpose computing" - a lot of devices can be made to run some linux. The pertinent question: is it made to support general-purpose computing out of the box? Things that I would call game consoles aren't - they're platforms for gaming.

[ffsm8]

The issue with apples walled garden is entirely based around how widespread their use is.

Literally from the first time people argued about this, that was at the core of the issue.

Nobody cares if you're creating a hardware device that can only run your OS and Apps if its not in widespread use. The issue occurs only once they're entrenched and can use their market position as an unfair advantage, which apple unashamedly does.

(And so does Nintendo and Sony with their gaming system, yes. The reason why almost nobody cares is because they're not in widespread use. And if they abuse their market position they also get a lot of flak. A lot more then apple ever gets, that's for sure. Just look at the helldivers 2 debacle last week, Nintendo banning people that mod their games in single player etc.)