The Pro's and Con's of a Closed System
Monday, May 17, 2010 at 7:12AM So, reading all the hype over the iPhone and iPad, I decided to get myself in hot water and post some thoughts on the subject… It's long... sorry, I don't do it often. I will admit, I'm pretty boring... I drive a CRV (when I drive... which isn't often), I live in bucolic Petaluma, CA... And over the years, my near mohawk has been wittled and evened out to just a short hair cut. I've got kids... cool kids (13, 15, 2, and almost)... but I don't claim to represent the "cool" kids anymore. I'm probably a little more middle America these days. Of course, as I point out below... that may be the point.
Here it goes...
Apple and Antitrust
I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV - but I don't think Apple really has to worry about antitrust, and if they do, I think there's something wrong with the system. Here's why…
Apple's Share of the PC Market - 7.4% (IDC)
Apple's Share of the Smartphone Market - 16.1% (IDC)
Apple's Share of the Music Market - 25% (NPD)
It would be very hard to make a case that Apple has a monopoly over the market…any market. Sure, everyone is talking about them... but the market is very new and Apple doesn't have anything close to a majority. 60,000 Android phones are being sold … a day. You have to prove not just that Apple's actions are detrimental to the market or consumers - but that they have a monopoly in the market that they are damaging AND that they are using that monopoly as leverage. (Microsoft got into trouble here when they forced manufacturers to buy only their product or none at all… While commanding 85-90% of the market).
We can talk about what's fair and what's right… but you need to fulfill the basic requirements of antitrust and I don't think it's there. Importantly, this is precisely why Apple needs to make the moves that it's making now and not later. With 15% of the smartphone market, Apple can pretty much do as it pleases (legally). With 80% of the smart phone market, it's antitrust. If Apple is going to lay down the law, it has to fight these fights early on when it is, theoretically, vulnerable to market changes.
And vulnerable is correct… Apple does not own this market… they are a minority player in very, very large market. If they are truly incorrect in their thinking, they will lose market share and probably shift directions. They've been mistaken before… that's how they ended up with 10% of the PC market (though I think much of this had to do with the absence of S Jobs and the presence of mere business managers who were… idiots).
I get that the Justice Department needs to humor companies complaining about this stuff but we should be very very frightened of a federal government dictating what companies with minority shares in the market are allowed to do... there is no limit to government intervention at that point.
Rights Lost in a "Closed System"…
The iPhone environment is closed… and, it's true, our rights are being trampled on, like…
1) The Right to Porn - Apple is taking our Porn away… no Apps for you! The air of censorship is heavy. Ok, let's get a grip. First, porn is widely available on the Web… on the iPhone or iPad. If you want some portable love, Apple's not blocking it. Apple is blocking the apps. Censorship… a dirty word here in America… is something the government can't do (we have an amendment about that, I think)… but companies are free to make business decisions that they feel are good for their position in the market. Apple is clearly education and family oriented. It makes a lot of sense for them to keep it clean.
(As an aside, I really stopped going to YouTube regularly when the front page became inundated with stupid, sexually-heavy content. The Signal to Noise Ratio wasn't worth it. I started feeling the same way about iTunes until Apple cleaned house.)
2) The Right to Write Crappy Apps - So, Apple has begun to cull apps according to content and quality. It looks like we'll have 150,000 instead of 160,000 apps to choose from. I get the concern… and Apple has some history of capriciously choosing winners and losers related to their technology. But I will say, generally, a mild-mannered developer has very little to worry about. 99% of the things that would be successful aren't a problem… and it seems like 99% of the apps submitted are being approved currently… It's a big field, you don't need to play along the boundary. I think this is why, in the midst of all the "uproar" about App Censorship… WWDC sold out in 8 days with only a little over a month of warning. Most developers get this isn't about them or their designs… it's a very small, very vocal minority. Saying that this move is going to kill iPhone app interest is like saying "No one goes to that restaurant any more because you always have to wait for a table."
(I do have to say that I'm truly frustrated about not having Google Voice. I think it's a great app that should be on the iPhone (if Skype is) and I think it's a bad and wrong decision… but I also think it's Apple's right to make that decision. If they make enough decisions like that, I might choose another phone… but not yet. Forcing companies to do what we think they should is censorship too.)
3) The Right to Choose My Provider - I actually wish I had that right. I hate AT&T. But I'm not 100% sure I would like anyone better. I hate Verizon (but love my MiFi), I hated Sprint and I have yet to hate T-Mobile (but probably only because I haven't used them yet). I think the phone companies exemplify what we are worried will happen with Apple… not enough competition leading a really bad experience. The reality is, I think the only thing that makes any of them tolerable is that I don't use my iPhone as a phone very often and Apple keeps AT&T in check. However, I don't know if anyone would be any better given the way we use our iPhones… I think we would pound anyone's network into the ground.
Rights Gained in a "Closed System"
1) The Right to an Easy Install - I thought long serial numbers were bad in the 90's but now there's activation, and double activation and sometimes a background check. Why do we get this? Because of Piracy… Piracy is much easier in a world where everyone is accountable for their own security (just like it's much harder to guard your house in the wilderness than if it is in a walled town). With a more managed environment, the software developer doesn't need to worry about it which means I don't need to worry about. Which leads us to…
2) The Right to Cheap Applications - On my mac, I consider $50 a cheap app… on my iPad, I have to really think about anything over $10. Why is that? Few reasons…
- Not much Piracy - Sorry to bring that up again… but, unfortunately, the honest pay for the dishonest through higher prices. Software companies aren't really "losing" billions in lost sales… they're charging you for it.
- Ease of Sale - As we reduce the friction of purchase, we can charge less because more people will do it. There is no place easier to buy content and software than iTunes. If Apple sold TVs and Groceries on iTunes, I'd probably stop using Amazon.
- Apple is making money on HARDWARE - Sure Apple makes some money on the apps but they are really tracking the hardware sales. This gives them an incentive to keep app prices, and media prices low…
3) The Right to Have My Device Actually Work - On my laptop, I have some tolerance for crashing (I beta test a lot of software)… but on my iPad and iPhone… I don't care about control… I just want it to work when I pick it up. Whether it provides developers every option, I'm afraid, is not really my concern. I am certain that code written in Xcode will have a better chance of A) being more stable and B) Playing better with the system and other applications. I think anyone arguing otherwise is really not being rational.
In the end, Apple is the only company, in my opinion, with an absolute focus on the User experience. Microsoft focuses on Administrators, Adobe on Developers, Google on Advertisers, Dell on the Bottom Line. Unfortunately, for all of them, it turns out the Users may be the most important.
4) The Right to NOT have my apps "Windowized" - Building apps in a "Unified" environment means we get some kind of gruel that works everywhere and development is slowed down by cross-platform issues. I know this as both a user and a developer.
I've seen this picture before… As a longtime Mac user… I watched Photoshop be windowized as well as FormZ, Electric Image and many others that you probably don't remember… NONE of them improved in the process. Generally what we, as Mac users, got were the crappy interfaces that Windows users are used to (or maybe beaten into accepting)… sometimes with some jelly buttons. As a sometimes Windows developer, we've seen the pain that comes with cross-platform development… where you have this grand vision and, over many compromises, you end up with… bland… because that's what works on all platforms.
----
OK, All of this said, I think Apple needs to do more make all of this work. Here's what I think is missing and if it was sorted out, the pressure on Apple would probably dissipate a great deal.
1) If HTML5 is there… show us… work with folks to build sites that really work. Build Apple web sections that truly take full advantage of the technology. People won't be sold if they don't see it working. Right now it's the holy grail that no one can really put their finger on.
2) BUILD DEVELOPMENT TOOLS - Once upon a time, Quicktime had better interactive features than Flash. No you say? Yea, you probably missed that story. Why? Because Apple's tools and the only real alternative, LivestagePro… practically required a Ph.D to use (Adobe, ironically, built the easiest Quicktime interactive editor into GoLive). Flash blew Quicktime out of the water because it's development environment was better… and then because Apple gave up and starting stripping out the feature set until we reached the bottom of Quicktime "Development" (Snow Leopard).
This process of making tools really isn't hard… Apple makes development tools… good ones. If Pages exported iBooks… people would use it… a lot. If DVD Studio Pro exported interactive solutions for the iPad - it would have a new life (Someone said plastic was dead… oh right… that WAS APPLE… so why are still getting an App that prints media for it?). Apple doesn't need to build new tools, just add a few options to old ones and they have a better solution for development than Flash… especially if you allow them to build a front end easily that has backend hooks for Xcode…
The revolution of print design happened with great tools… not writing Postscript from scratch… but that's still what we're doing on the Web and for iPhone and iPad development.
3) Be Clearer about the Guidelines - What makes people insane is not the rules but the random application of them. If you are going to get rid of skimpy swimsuits, Playboy and SI need to go. If you are going to allow Skype and Line2, why are we not getting Google Voice? When people feel like they are shooting for moving goalposts, the feeling of fairness suffers. I'm guessing Payboy and SI are there because of larger contracts and that Google Voice is not there because Google made a phone.
---
Conclusion
I do admit, playing with a friend's Jailbroken phone makes me yearn for the wild open range and the excitement of exploring the unknown. But it's a high-maintenance relationship in an area where I want stability. In the end, Apple has proven that there are many people like me… happy to have something a little sexy but also a little safe. I'm guessing that we are the majority… which is why Apple's competitors are so worried.
But for all of you who think this is being forced down your throat, I wouldn't worry too much. The suburbs are great but there's still the country, the red-light district, the gritty Tenderloin and the edgy Mission. You don't need to use an iPhone. It's not for everyone. If you like to tinker with your phone, have complete control, or use Porn… this isn't the phone for you. There doesn't need to be a majority of you to make it a successful market (3-10% of the PC market has worked for Apple for years). Beyond all the rhetoric… you really don't _have_ to do anything. You still can use Flash on your Android and you probably will for a decade or more! There's plenty of phones and wireless services to pick from… they aren't going anywhere. Apple thrives on minority market shares… so can your alternative devices.
I suspect the cognitive dissonance is related to people desperately wanting the simplicity and power of the iPhone plus all the other doodads that interest them. Some would say this is "Wanting to have your cake and eat it too." The real issue is the simplicity, stability, and power of the iPhone partially comes specifically from the tight controls Apple manages it through. It wouldn't be the iPhone if it was run like other OS's. This is something I think many competitors will learn… painfully.
Of course, this is just what I think. Hopefully, it's the beginning of a conversation that you can continue in the comment area below...
Reader Comments (30)
very well put and I agree 100%!
I can't say anything about the us providers as I am from germany and t-mobile work very well here all over the place (well mostly), but I also agree that all of the phone companies are pretty much the same. and it might lay in the nature of the business or BIG business in general.
and as or the rest... I love my non jailbroken iphone and ipad as they just work... perfectly, not like my nokias and sony ericssons before... the user experience ist great and for me personally that is very important. they deliver enough to be ok with a closed system, I actually prefer that with some things.
all the best,
teymur.
Nicely said, Alex.
I'm particularly in agreement regarding the development tools (or lack there of). I'm currently consulting with a small magazine that has content coming out of its ears and wants to move it onto the iPad (and other devices). But how exactly? The development path is very unclear apart from - 'build an app'. It would be a whole lot easier, not to mention cheaper, if we could export content to an iBook like format, or something interactive, directly from an existing app. I don't care whose app it is... so if Apple has issues with Adobe doing that, then perhaps it should provide a way instead.
We are talking pretty straight forward text and video stuff here - it should be easy and shouldn't require the aid of coders, any more than authoring a DVD or CD-ROM would do. And the tools shouldn't be restricted to the Mac OS either.
Whatever happened to HyperCard, eh?
Amazingly well articulated Alex. This is exactly how I feel too - only I wouldn't have sounded as smart as you do when I said it :) I love the fact that my iPad, iPod, MacBookPro and iPhone simply work. I'll never forget the time that Leo and Scoble were trying to show off their brand new Nokia phone that everyone was talking about. Both of them tried to show me the camera working. Problem - third party apps on their phones caused them to crash - camera didn't work. Nuff said.
Generally balanced article and pretty well sums up why I don't have an iPhone, iPad, or mac but why I allow my family members to own one. I get that there are things that apple provides that make their products attractive. Some of those same features are attractive to me, but the business practices aren't.
And, even though it isn't anti trust technically, it IS anti-trust in spirit. There's something wrong with the concept that just because I own most of the market share I can't do things that might allow me to own more of it. Apple will find out just how wrong it is when they suddenly own most of the market and find out that the things they've been doing for the last 10 years are illegal simply because they now own most of the market.
Well said Alex. I often find myself amused at the rants of geeks that actually think they are Apple's market. When Apple adds or removes a feature or product there is always a vocal minority that scream bloody murder and talks about how this or that will be the downfall of Apple.
Sure I often disagree with some changes they make but I also know that I am probably the 1% that used something that wasn't worth the effort to produce anymore. Apple may have a few missteps here or there but as the villagers with pitchforks start to assemble someone is watching. When the number gets to high enough Apple often fixes the problem by changing back or comes up with a better solution that calms the crowd.
As for the phone companies. I totally agree. If Apple had gone with Verizon instead of AT&T we would be talking about how Verizon's networks is constantly failing. Before the iphone people didn't really use their smartphones the way they do now.
I really like the majority of iPhone users really not bothered about Google Voice not being on the iPhone. Why? It's a non issue for 99% of iPhone users. Google Voice is still invite only, only available in the US. It's just been a vocal minority technorati in the media that have made a fuss over it.
But I agree with your points otherwise, very well put. And lets face it if it wasnt for Apple we wouldnt have the Android phones etc, we would still be stuck with Nokia efforts that are from a company that just dont get smart phones.
I live in a different world, Suburban Alabama. Father of 3, I am an early adopter of most things apple. If I recieved comission for the Apple products and digital slrs I have turned people on to, I could start a business. You would be amazed how many mainstream I phone users never synch their phone. Go ask a genius somewhere other than a big city and I'm sure they will concur. Apple makes products for this majority. An Android phone would not last long in this technological baby pool. Keep doing what you do Apple, and Alex keep making these arguments.
Hoorah!
Alex, this is exactly the stuff I've been saying for a decade and a half, ever since I first saw a mac and tried to get my company (BP Oil) to adopt them.
This is an excellent post. Thank you for it.
- AJ
PS. I use an HTC Desire ;0)
Well written Alex.
I think the whole thing needs to be looked at in balance - as an end user of an iPad etc. I'm happy to have some extra control over the ecosystem by Apple in exchange for a smooth consumer experience. If I didn't want that, I'd invest in another platform / ecosystem.
I like Jobs' singularity of vision, it makes the 'Apple experience' by in large what it is, and it appeals to my consumer wants in the Apple products I buy.
Quality over quantity, every time.
Written on my iPad :)
I agree with what you wrote, however, did you just imply that anyone who doesn't use an iPhone/iPad is a pervert? (ha ha)
I have to confess that I pretty much totally agree with you. I wasn't expecting that.
This whole HTML 5 will kill Flash thing seems rather over heated to me, and a lot more more complex then often depicted. And sure HTML 5 looks like the bees knees, but look how long it took just to get IE sorta standards compliant.. how long till the IE user base moves forward enough that web developer folks can really build HTML 5's grooviness into the core of web sites, never mind the issues of actually agreeing on standards for HTML 5.. and mean while Flash has it's own little environment to run in..
But what really bugged me apple's move to blocking CS5 app development is.. I have a client who might have some interest in creating a kind of magazine app, and CS5 would have made it ultra groovy.. and easy to reach the whole of the market for tablets and smart phones, at a very reasonable price.. and for that kind of application I don't think it would really be too much of an issue, the shortcomings of the CS5 multi platform approach...
As you say, apple represents a small sliver of the market, and not allowing CS5 for development has the effect of making development for there platform a much more challenging business case to make.. my sense is the long term success of the iPad rests on the app market place.. to make the various use cases for the iPad.. so I wonder if Apple's move might have long term negative implications.
And I disagree with the notion that if Apple allowed it there app store would suddenly be flooded with crappy apps.. I think the real problem there is Apple needs to fix there store. I mean does it even matter if there are a lot of crappy apps, as long as you can find the good ones, and the good ones are sorta more front and center, or whatever?
So I kinda feel like the issue of "unified" cross platform development, there implication really depends on what your trying to do. There's a lot of app types that where you'd like the developers to really focus on the particulars of the Apple mobile platform, and that's probably not all cases, but I don't think all cases.
I'm sorta annoyed by the no Flash on Apple's mobile platform. Most of the issues with Flash are more attributable to the developers then the Flash Platform per say, and it seems like, out side of that problem Apple should have just said "look Flash can go on our Mobile platform as long as it meets these standards. Out side of that Adobe should both make Flash development best practices easier and emphasize there importance to there developer community.
One of the things that makes me skeptical of Apple's moves killing Flash is that progressive enhancement is a Flash development best practice: if the browser doesn't have Flash there should still be a usable site.
Further more the implications of the differences between the mobile browsing context and the desktop context is sufficiently different that it probably makes sense in many many cases that they have two different designs anyway. At that point you probably want one design that works for all mobile platforms, and mobile's browser war is where desktops were in the 90s, so again how do you do HTML 5?
I'm not an Apple fanboy in fact the opposite. I'm an Android fan. I made my choice to go with Android because that fits my needs and suites my workflow.
But I like and agree with your arguments. I think the fact is that it IS a choice to choose Apple if that is what you want. I actually hope the iPhone OS vs Android will become like the Aperture vs Lightroom competition. Egg each other on in healthy competion and the consumer wins. (try to sue each other too much. I prefer that money to go towards R&D)
Thank you for this great article I am a middle age suburban mom forced to use windows machines cursing at them and their security and every problem finger pointing to this co or that co. I waited for the first gen iPhone (still using) and loved the experience, even though I dont have a problem with nudity I loved the cleanup app store, waited for a year for tablet from apple to replace my laptop, love the iPad, I don't care about flash if a site doesn't work with my iPhone I don't go there,
We are a group (non techie regular people) that without a voice, thank you for the voice,
Oz
Well said! I wish, however, that Apple were able to give the chance to other developers to add the parts you mentioned (e.g., interactive production tools for iDVD) as add-ons, plugins or some other manner. In other words, I wish developers could interface with first-party apps in a more organic and direct way, which I believe would lead to a lot of what you highlight. No single company can "do it all" and the openness at the application level for Mac OS X is not matched at the middleware level. I can understand the reasons for set experiences in the iPad or iPhone, but it just boils down to the fact that Apple has not completed a full interactivity framework. I wish they let everyone contribute to it. Maybe they could use the App Store model for this kind of development: there are many examples of good solutions adopted by Apple so why not reap the benefits in this area as well?
With the antitrust, I think they are (should be) safe.
With the closed system, I think it is more accurate to say you are only losing Apple's definition of 'porn', Apple's definition of 'buggy' and possibly Apple's definition of what you don't want. You either agree that Apple will make the same decisions that you would, or you relinquish that right to let them take care of it for you. At least in an open system, the public are able to make the decision themselves - just as Aperture and Lightroom have to compete for users. Maybe an extreme example, but who is to say Apple would allow a Lightroom app (maybe it is "porn") ;)
Nice post. Maybe a few to many... but points well taken. And I agree with the commenter who said the iPhone's lack of Google Voice is a non-issue for 99% of users. I would make that 99.9%. It's not something anyone outside the US cares about and, frankly, the only complaints come from the technorati anyway. The average iPhone user doesn't even know it exists and wouldn't care if they did. People also don't care why Flash doesn't work on iPhoneOS - they just know that their Internet experience is partially broken and would prefer it to work properly. If that means we all wait for html5 then hurry up and make it so.
Great post Alex,
I can only comment here as an average user of Apple products and not as a developer. I know software developers have legitimate issues with Apple’s closed environment and these issues will affect us all if Apple doesn’t take notice. That said, Alex is “spot on” with his opinion of the closed environment.
The best analogy (I’ve heard) describing Apple products is that Apple is the Mercedes of computers (and now phones and tablets). Apple doesn’t care about the Chevy drivers or the Ford drivers and they never will. This is not a problem for Apple because Chevy drivers will never buy an Apple product. Apple will do fine without taking a majority of the market and they will never get the majority anyway. Android is proving this in the phone market and someone will soon come in and take the low priced tablet market also. The only way Apple can stay the company Steve resurrected from the dead is to control all the hardware and software. This is what makes them different. Without this control they would just be another Dell, HP, ....etc. and could fade away like the Gateways of the past. People will always hate things that are different and people that try to control them. If Apple goes too far over the line people will begin to jump ship. They know this and will adjust to stay on that line. If you don’t like paying a premium for stability or do not like the control Apple has on it’s system, buy something else. It is important we have as many options as possible and Apple products are a great option.
First of all... sorry for this way too long comment. Anyhow... in parts I agree with you, and I hear what you are saying.
But I want bugfixes when they are ready, not when Apple has approved them.
I want to be able to install any app. You say porn is censored, and that's fine (though I think it shouldn't. It's not like I have to install it if I don't want it, I have an Android phone and I don't have any porn apps installed). But where do you draw the line? In Germany the most popular "newspaper" (which is really awful, but nevermind) has to constantly censor their front page for their iPhone app. Same goes to some edgier fashion magazines. Heck, even the Wikipedia (the German Wikipedia once had as suggested article of the day the article for vulva on their frontpage... with a very explicit photo) has "pornographic" content. So should Wikipedia be censored? Or not for kids? If so, that makes the iPhone a great educational tool... not. That's the main problem I think. Once you start censorship you are going to run into issues. I think age ratings would be best. Perhaps if you have to enter a password if you want to run a rated R app. And perhaps no explicit pornography, e.g. penetration.
Btw. I know developers who don't develop for the iPhone though they wanted too, because of Apples draconian rules.
And what about Apples attempts to kill Flash? Yes, Flash has it's issues (probably more so on Macs), but then they should work on it. I had a Prezi presentation. It ran horrible in my browser (Firefox on Windows). But as a standalone app it was smooth as silk. Perhaps it's not Flash but the integration into the browser that is awful? I've read that the API Apple provides to Adobe to hardware decode Flash is pretty idiotic, though Adobe isn't doing the smartest thing either.
I do agree that Flash shouldn't be used for videos anymore (as far as possible), though I do like the new YouTube player it's a job better suited to HTML5. BUT: what about apps? I love Prezi. It's done in Flash and it works very well. The best online Word replacement is IMHO Buzzword. Again, a Flash application. It is so good that it replaced Word/OpenOffice for me. Google Docs etc. couldn't. Though I do use LaTeX for longer, academic texts. There are also some nice Adobe Air applications. I really doubt it is about quality but about keeping the developers. I think Apple is struggling at the moment. Once momentum has shifted to Android (and it looks like that is going to happen) I think apps are going to be written for Android. Mainly for Android. Apple needs to stop Android before it is too late. And this is how they try to do it. Though I don't think Apple has a chance. History is going to repeat itself, just that this time it's not Apple but Google. Just look at what happened. Partners at first, then backstabbed by the partner, who is much more open, and this openness is what killed the Mac.
Which is a good thing. I used to like Apple. I really did. But not anymore.
Insightful but one-sided. Anyone who thinks this is balanced is an iPhone owner looking for someone to fight their battles. That's not to say I don't appreciate the points raised, but let's hear some counterpoints, shall we?
1) There's more to censorship than porn. It's true that a company can do whatever they please legally and it's merely a business decision. And that includes subtly manipulating which apps get out there *aside* from porn. I'm not saying they're doing this or even that they want to, but they *can*, and for a company that has a hall-of-fame advertisement referencing 1984, it's pretty atrocious to be exercising that privilege in any capacity, even porn. One man's opinion.
2) Are you implying there are no crappy apps on the iPhone App Store? Because I don't even know where to start. I read an incredibly illuminating article in Newsweek (sorry, don't remember which issue) talking about how the lag in the approval process actually *diminishes* the quality of the final product. Basically, developers can't push out updates to fix bugs and add features fast enough because the new code has to go through a slow (but not even that rigorous) approval process every time. And that's not even getting into the fart/soundboard epidemic that exists throughout the smartphone ecosystem.
3) Easy installs and cheap applications aren't unique to the iPhone. They're the standard for smart phone apps in general. So if you're making a case for a closed system, you haven't demonstrated why you need a closed system to do this. If you're claiming the Android Market is closed too, then we're going to have to start defining terms, because they're miles apart.
4) Apple is not focused on the user experience. They are focused on marketing making you THINK they're focused on the user experience (also, if you honestly think even one of those companies isn't focused on the bottom line, you're drinking more Kool-Aid than I can calculate). Maybe Flash is on its way out, and Steve Jobs is right to worry about its stability, but in the meantime, it's still a major part of the web, and denying access to it is a really shitty way to treat customers, developers, and Adobe. Furthermore, I've never seen an Android device crash either. If "it just works" is what you're looking for, I'm not sold that you necessarily need Apple or a closed system for that.
Well written and nicely considered post. Apple makes closed systems. They always have and probably always will. They've never been shy about it, and are very "open" in their belief that such systems ultimately serve users best. Based on my experience with open systems (Linux anyone?), I agree with them, but there are occasional headaches. No system is perfect.
Ironically though, for such a closed system oriented company, they've done far more for open source projects than the other big players. Webkit and Unix kernel work, for example.
Excellent analysis that have stopped at consequences...
Every company has right to pick their business plan and Apple chose one based on advantages you mention. However, we the general public could be hurt by it. Problem is that there are not many large enough and daring enough and innovative companies in this field. Recent leader, Sony brought to us in the past some innovative breakthroughs. However, they fell. Not into oblivion, but out of capability to get us something new and innovative on such scale. There are analysts who placed the blame exactly on such control of the customer and product, though at the time mostly via proprietary non-standard hardware. My worry is that Apple have not learned from Sony fall. Even on hardware side. Why proprietary connector when existing standard can do everything required? Software makes it even worse and proprietary marketplace further escalates the situation. No matter how good the product is, open competition may lay it to waste with a lesser one (there Apple can learn from its own early days).
Danger to general public? It took almost a decade from Sony's capability to deliver breakthrough innovation on large scale to Apple doing it at full power. If Apple loses 1/2 of its current share it will be on slippery economic slope, not out of existence but out of ability to bring new iPod, iPhone, iPad, iSomething... And we'll be at the mercy of "beige boxes" of "play it safe" Dell's and HP's,... for another decade. I don't want that to happen not because I love Apple so much that I don't want them to lose but because as a result I won't have iSomething and its competition.
I waited on my toes for iPad as it is really what my mobile computing needs require. Its foundations satisfy and beat all my expectations. But I didn't get one and I am waiting without "ideal device for me" for the Android competition. Reason is that the level of control obstructs me so much vs. inherent capabilities of this device that I am unwilling to take it. Potential (hey, willing and waiting one) market lost which can lead down. I'd hate if Apple fails because of such obsession with control.
Thank you to all for such insightful posts! Great points. I do hope android thrives.... Even if it becomes the market leader. I think mac users benefit greatly from being the minority (if that happens). I think apple does quite well with even a small market share.
That said, I think the android market faces future challenges as it grows... Primarily fragmentation of it's open market... Many phones... Not all using the same flavor of android. I also think, as apps on android become more complex... Serialization will have to happen. I could be wrong but if the past is a guide...
I am happy with a curated app store for the moment... It's large enough and complex enough for me.
More comments please!
Nice post Alex. Rounds up the whole issue up nicely.
My 2 cents on why Apple allows Porn on Safari but not into the App Store: I think it's because Apple takes a cut of every App Store sale and selling porn apps means Apple's now profiting off of Porn, which Jobs is not comfortable with. Android Marketplace doesn't pose this problem for Google, because Google doesn't take a cut of App Sales and instead gives it off to the carriers. (I posted this in slightly more detail on my Buzz » http://j.mp/dq9l91)
Oh and thank god Jobs has the balls to do whatever it takes to keep the iDevices trouble-free. After 20 years of using a PC, my iPhone is like a breath of fresh air. Not one crash in 3 years of use and everything's gorgeous and well thought-out right down to the fonts and the symmetry! I don't want anyone mucking up this experience because I've never seen anyone else offer a comparable experience**.
---
[except for maybe Google's Chrome browser which, though just an app and not a complicated ecosystem like the iPhone(device+device OS+syncing app+syncing app OS+cloud integration), just rocks the little well thought-out details while being super-fast and stable. A joy to use.]
Here's the big problem with html5... there's no real way to develop in html 5 until Microsoft makes the standard. As a web developer professional, its a lack of resource time to develop... 3 browsers which don't adhere to remotely close to the same standards with regular xhtml 1.0, and now, you're looking to break degredation?
Right now, this is all a catch-22... its cost ineffective to develop in both flash and html 5... and because no one develops in html5, microsoft is slow in supporting it, ... and because microsoft is 70ish percent of daytime browser market share (even though its 50ish percent overall)... you're having to cater two at minimum, two different standards of html 5 implementation and support, which means you need to develop in flash until html 5 catches on... when IE9 releases (who knows when that will be...) and then, how is Microsoft going to get that 50% to upgrade (when, admittedly, IE7 and IE6 still have over 20% of the browser market...
So, yes, its a worthy goal to develop in html5... but the feasibility is rough when your considering development times. It thus becomes a... which would you rather do? Spend 2x time developing for one project or develop 2 projects instead of one (substitue time with cost if you outsource that sort of thing)... its the same issue when developing mobile applications... only there isn't as much of a stranglehold like IE has with browsers... the trend is swinging away from apple, as androids and pre having more open development tools that allow one application, multiple platforms... the real game changers, in my opinion, is how quickly flash gets on mobile platforms and youtube/google's course. Funny thing being that google has the #3 platform too... once flash launches for android and blackberry, the game ceases to be Apple's to push.
Apple isn't as relevant in the html5 debate as Google is... And yes, they rhetoric well, but really, their in a power position for a brief moment. And thank god, because it looked like it was going to be a jobs-a-thon...
Good post Alex.
I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this, so forgive me if they have. It is my hope that Flash will evolve into a tool, more than the technology we know it to be now. Let me explain.
The days of Flash as we know it, are numbered. Still, as a web developer, I see an opportunity for the IDE to be a gateway to HTML5 development. I have not seen an IDE for developing HTML5 compatible animations. Is it not possible for Adobe to turn Flash Professional into the ultimate development environment for HTML5 animations?
I as a Flash animation developer, I cannot give up the productivity a tool like Flash Professional provides when I need to make nice animations for my clients. I can make them right here and now. To go "cold turkey" and switch technologies and ask my clients to wait for me to catch up will kill my business. I am sure there are others in my position. Are there not?