Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You are not forced to buy an iPhone - in fact 85% of the world doesn’t.

In every day life, the number of people who think “App Stores suck” is infinitesimal.




That's the same excuse my employer (Google) makes. Competition is just a click away. You're not forced to use Google, use Bing, use Fastmail. Brand surveys show Google is also one of the most trusted brands, ergo, the number of people who think it sucks is small.

Does that mitigate any of the concerns people have about either company?

This community used to have a strong focus on openness, open source, permission less innovation and the avoidance of checkpoints and tolls, but what it's turned into is often a battle of fanboys, who roll out excuses and lowered standards for their favorites.

Yours is an easy position to maintain, until you have invested a lot of money and work in an app which gets booted from the App Store, or because Apple decides to shake you down for even more money.

Apple fans simultaneously say Apple has a small marketshare, but also brag that earn the majority of all smartphone industry profits. If the latter is true, it means that anyone wanting to make money on mobile software has no choice but to publish on the App Store, ergo, effectively a monopoly.


And your employer is correct. We don’t need the government to protect people from their own decisions.

I’ve made the same argument about Google, FaceBook, Apple, and Amazon (even before I started working for AWS).

This community used to have a strong focus on openness, open source, permission less innovation and the avoidance of checkpoints and tolls, but what it's turned into is often a battle of fanboys, who roll out excuses and lowered standards for their favorites.

Did the open source community whine about mean old Microsoft or did they create alternatives to the point where even Azure runs more Linux VMs than Windows VMs? They went out there and built something better. They out competed.

Every single one of the big tech companies got there through better execution.


> We don’t need the government to protect people from their own decisions.

Citation needed. Many parts of our government do just that (FDA, EPA). We need these because many decisions would otherwise be uninformed. If you don't know what is in your food, how can you make informed decisions? If you don't know what is in your drugs, or what the side effects are, how can you make informed decisions?


Yes because taking bad drugs which you can’t know that they are bad without multimillion dollar drug trials and stopping a corporation from polluting is the equivalent of typing in a url bar to choose an alternate search engine or choosing an alternate phone.

Are you really saying that Google doesn’t have the capital or reach to better market the “openness” of Android?


A lot of people who would have a problem with it are also convinced they have no power to affect its existence, so you never hear from them.


Right “the silent majority”.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: