[gjsman-1000]

I find it interesting that all the way back in 1985, in Atari vs NES, we had proof that consumers preferred walled gardens. The walled garden exploded from a completely dead market, while the already-existing open system killed itself. Apple proceeded to make a killing of their own on this reality, Microsoft invented a pseudo-walled garden that has become a technical dead end, while FOSS communities are still in denial about how things shouldn't be that way rather than accepting reality and inventing their own curated experience with enforced rules.

[garciansmith]

I disagree, it wasn't about consumers, but rather other businesses. The walled garden approach Nintendo took in America was needed to convince retailers to stock video games on store shelves again. And of course the Famicom didn't have that same approach, and while Nintendo hated the fact third parties could easily make Famicom carts, the open nature of the system certainly didn't hurt it in Japan.

[gosub100]

I think consumers chose quality and convenience. It just so happens that the walled garden is the easiest way to accomplish this. Electronics, especially computers, were extremely expensive back then. I can't blame people for buying a console that just works. Compatibility was an issue well into the late 90s because so many people didn't know how computers worked.

[RajT88]

> Microsoft invented a pseudo-walled garden that has become a technical dead end

If you're referring to Windows, this is not very walled at all. You barely need a computer to write and release windows apps, let alone money.

Office, perhaps? Or a variety of other products.

[gjsman-1000]

Windows is an open platform for developers... if you ignore all of the security checks and Windows Defender and the stagnant platform which is about 2 decades behind everyone else, across the board, in terms of native tooling (e.g. which UI framework should I use and is it good?).

However, Windows also has many, many, walled garden things bolted onto it. You aren't distributing your own drivers without Microsoft's approval. You aren't running Microsoft Office on Wine. You aren't connecting to Active Directory without Microsoft's blessing. You aren't making group policies that work on Linux for MDM. You aren't manufacturing Windows devices, at all, unless they meet Microsoft's system requirements and mandates (e.g. a Windows icon on the keyboard). Your BIOS must follow strict rules about where the activation key is fused. Etc.

In that respect, Windows is only open from an end user perspective. In all other respects, it is closed, and it is closed tightly.

[RajT88]

> You aren't distributing your own drivers without Microsoft's approval.

Only kernel drivers.

> You aren't connecting to Active Directory without Microsoft's blessing.

I think you're talking about EntraID. That is true enough. You can just spin up Windows Server and create a domain controller, no problem. You don't need Microsoft for domain services, though - you can use other domain controller types. (You don't get GPO and other things - that's not a 'walled garden' thing, that's a feature set which other systems don't have)

> In that respect, Windows is only open from an end user perspective. In all other respects, it is closed, and it is closed tightly.

Not so tight as you seem to think. And anyways, I was specifically referring to building windows apps - which you did not disagree with. You absolutely can pull down various free tools, build an app, package it up as a .zip or .msi and distribute it from a variety of places. The Windows app store is a walled garden, but you don't have to use it.

[mywittyname]

I think the takeaway is consumers want to trust the products they are buying are as advertised.