> but is it really likely this damages Apple in the long run?
Of course it does. People like myself see the overreach Apple has taken with their platforms and hardware, and as a result, I'm not going to rest the viability of my business on Apple's whims.
> they plan to make most of their money back from sales of games and services(ala Apple)
I thought Apple seems to do the opposite: they constantly raise iPhone prices while cutting features that increase manufacturing cost (eg. replacing the headphone jack with an empty hole large enough to fit a lightning?3.5mm dongle), and I’ve heard Apple fans argue here, I think more than once, that Apple is able to offer less profiteering (more privacy friendly) software because they make so much on hardware.
The hardware scene is, in practice, quite monopolistic. This is especially true nowadays that Apple’s chips are vastly outcompeting others. I don’t know if this is because of some nefarious schemes or not, but even if it is a natural monopoly, it’s still a monopoly that might take years to be undone.
There is no reason to extend this hardware monopoly to software as well though. Apple can enjoy their great margin on their hardware, without also controlling everyone’s most intimate devices.
> you’re free to take away Apple’s decision making power you grant them by simply not buying an iphone.
That's a very common argument
But it doesn't get any less stupid with time.
I never owned an iPhone.
Because I am an adult homo sapiens that can take decisions for himself.
But you should know that if a standard exists, and the standard has been approved by a consortium, a consortium where Apple is a very important member, they should at least support what they signed for, instead of forcing developers to go through hoops just to support their platform.
When Elon Musk make Teslas he has to put airbags in them, stop lights, front lights, safety belts, they must pass crash tests, because that's the standard, otherwise he couldn't sell them as cars.
So if Apple believe that the standard that they approved is too dangerous, they can make their OS more secure, instead of putting the blame on developers.
> Why can I make money doing so? Because Apple built trust with the users, and because they developed the tools and technologies that made their OS worth paying significantly more for similar tech specs.
Nah. It's because developers put a lot of effort in making Apple's platform great for many users.
Please, go do it. You'll be very rich very quick and I'll eagerly buy your products once you succeed.
Unfortunately you'll find out it's not actually easy at all when you realize that consumers care about weight, size, temperature and battery life which are all things apple excels at. Their hardware is really quite good, unfortunately the software is horribly crippled.
> It’s kinda weird how Apple doesn’t realize this and continues to build for that world.
If you’re a hardware manufacturer, I don’t think building for the common denominator of the web browser is a viable strategy. Looking at various of their competitors, it certainly brings in less money.
How many people would buy an iPhone that’s basically a “browser device” if, for 50% of its price, they could get something that’s 80% as good (percentages for illustration purposes)?
> I find this notion that companies should do what we want ridiculous.
The thing is, we actually have a vote in this by buying or not buying their products. So apparently, too many people are content enough with what Apple (for example) is doing.
> Their only purpose is to encourage customers to buy from these companies.
No, you are assuming too much. People who do this are typically not interested in boosting Apple's sales at all. They merely want to make a good use of a good hardware.
In general, the ignorance or inability to understand why something is being done does not imply that it in fact is pointless.
For instance, I do not fully see well into the physics of the general relativity. But that does not entitle me to imply that the people who dedicate their lives to exploring this field are wasting their time.
> And my laptop is a lot more expensive than my phone.
It's not for many people. An iPhone X starts at $1,000.
> The feature / price point combination of those phones are in part a result of the App Store policies. Changing that cut will change the feature / price point: they'd have to charge more, or give you less, or find alternate sources of revenue (i.e., start spying on you).
Apple is a ridiculously profitable company. They quite literally have more money than they know what to do with, as evidenced by their enormous bank account.
I'm happy Apple has been so successful, but I also think a portion of their inordinate profitability has come from anticompetitive practices, namely how locked down the app store is. They don't have a right to that particular revenue stream.
It isn't about the devices. It is about ecosystems. Choosing a different device is about choosing a different ecosystem. Be it a phone, a laptop or a desktop computer.
We can pretend that it is just a matter of choosing a different vendor. But that would not usefully describe reality.
And Apple knows this, which is why they feel emboldened to milk their customers.
Because most of them don't really care until it directly impacts them, and because Apple spends a huge amount of money on their marketing.
reply