Sure, and Sony should also be taken to task for predatory behaviour. But videogames are a lower priority for this than general purpose computing platforms are, so we'll focus on those first.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Restricting New Pebble Smartwatches From 'Being Awesome' With iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My point was there are options and you should purchase the option that works best for you. If you don't like a closed ecosystem, don't buy into one - Apple has 30% smartphone marketshare in the EU. But rather than saying "it's a good thing consumers have an option for an open ecosystem and a closed one, and they can choose what's best for them" the EU is forcing the market competitor with 30% share into a carbon copy of the platform that has 70% marketshare, depriving consumers who want a closed ecosystem the model that they prefer.
“Predatory behavior”? 😂. I guess every business that curates their store shelves and decides which products they will sell in their stores must be just exhibiting “predatory behavior”… 😂. It’s Apple’s platform. Apple has the right to build it the way they want. Apple has the right to curate what third party products (aka apps) will be stocked on their platform, and they don’t owe anyone anything. It’s literally their platform. If you don’t like it, there are plenty of alternatives out there. It would be like complaining that Walmart doesn’t stock Kroger products, and claiming Walmart should be forced to accommodate Kroger in their stores… Or that McDonald’s should be forced to lease out space to Burger King on their properties. It’s silly. Apple has the right to control their own property. Apple’s OSes are Apple’s property. Pebble didn’t do any of the work to build iOS, so they’re not entitled to anything…
Your point was whattaboutism. It is the weakest form of argument that exists. This "you had a choice" tripe is the same nonsensical BS that apologists have been spouting for years. There is more than just "closed" vs "open" ecosystems that differentiate the two platforms that exist today. You seem smart enough to know this, so please, come up with something a bit less disingenuous.
Exactly this! For all of the talk of “consumer choice” with the EU’s actions, they have actually taken away consumer choice. Many have chosen Apple’s ecosystem for the benefits of a “closed” system (in reality, iOS is an open system, just a “less” open system than Android due to privacy and security protections): privacy, security, easy of use, etc. All the EU is trying to do is trying to turn a situation where people have choices into one where they basically don’t because they’ve essentially tried to force everyone to be the same instead of allowing competition to work. The EU has basically issued out silly edicts trying to tell companies what they can or can’t do with their own property. It’s exactly like if the EU dictated that McDonalds should be forced to lease space for Burger King at all of their locations on their property. Or they should be forced to offer Burger King menu items. This is far outside of the proper scope of government authority. This constitutes severe government overreach. Socialism at its ugliest.
Competition works a lot better. Consumers can decide for themselves which platform they want to go with.
Even If Apple wanted to make iPhones run only apps made by Apple, that would be completely their prerogative as well. iOS is Apple’s property, they can do with it as they like, and they can choose who can distribute their wares on their property, just like McDonald’s can decide whether or not they want to make a deal with Snickers and sell a Snicker branded shake or not…
In other news, my car is only going to have warranty if I use the OEM parts.
If consumers were equally tied to Walmart as iPhone users are tired to the Apple App store, your argument might make sense. Perhaps if we reach a point where, as a condition of buying your house in a certain city, you are only allowed to shop at Walmart, then maybe it would be close to the same thing. Of course, if that kind of thing were to exist in the real world, people would absolutely expect Walmart to be required to carry competing brands. This of course is a pretty silly exercise because the parallel you are trying to point to doesn't actually exist anywhere in the world.
Exactly, and third party smart watches actually work quite well with the iPhone. I use a third party smart watch, and I can receive and initiate phone calls with it, control music playback on my iPhone with it, and all of the health data even syncs with Apple Health. It can even control my iPhone’s native camera app as a remote shutter. It can sync with my calendar. To claim that Apple makes it “nearly impossible” to mirror the Apple Watch experience is silly, basically the only thing my third party smart watch can’t do that an Apple Watch can (other than existence of some third party apps) is sending a reply to a text, which doesn’t make much sense on a watch anyways except possibly pre-typed responses, and even then, those often don’t make sense. And the reason third party smart watches can’t access iMessage is obvious, it’s a privacy and security thing. What’s the point of iMessage if you’re just going to send those messages on to a third party who doesn’t necessarily care about your privacy…
Really? Because the warranty for every car I've ever owned was still valid despite me installing non-OEM headlights, wipers, oil, gasoline, tires... You must have a BMW. How's that heated seat subscription going?
Point being - vertical integration is not a crime. That's why Android and iOS have the respective market shares that they do. Apple knows this very well, and they made the conscious decision to give up market share for profits.
Sure there is more than just "closed" vs. "open" that differentiate the two ecosystems, but that's far and away the biggest difference, and the difference that the EU and others are demanding Apple change, so it's not disingenuous. And it is 100% true that there will not be a closed ecosystem available on the market if the EU gets its way - why should your desires for an open iOS outweigh my desires for a closed ecosystem?
You do have a choice - just like everyone else. It's not "nonsensical BS." Just because you would prefer to have your cake (iOS) and eat it too (have an open ecosystem), doesn't mean you should get to. Take ownership of your decisions, and if what Apple is offering you isn't to your liking, then vote with your wallet. If, as I suspect is true for most users on MacRumors, you actually would still choose Apple closed over Android open, then that's on you.
I also suspect that most who think they prefer Apple but want an open ecosystem don't realize a large part of the reason they prefer Apple is because Apple's rules result in massive benefits for users (while admittedly making life more difficult for developers), and that opening the system would make for a worse experience for the vast majority of users. But that's an argument for another day.
Nobody is forced to buy an iPhone. People do so knowing the limitations. And if they don’t know the limitations, then that’s on them… Absolutely nobody is forced to buy an iPhone.
Your fictional example of buying from Walmart as a condition of buying a home is a strawman comparison which has nothing to do with the actual point at hand. People can choose to buy whatever device they want, whatever device will work best for their wants and needs. It’s in no way comparable to buying a home… You don’t own iOS. iOS is Apple’s property. They can do as they deem fit with it.
“I’m not a fan of Nintendo’s lack of graphical impulses so I’ll go buy an Xbox.”
“I’m not a fan of Microsoft’s business practices. I’ll buy a PlayStation.”
“My PS5 is bolted to the TV. I’ll buy a Steamdeck.”
“Steamdeck is too big. I’ll buy a Retroid. Or a Play date. Or an Anbernic. Or maybe one of those posh Analog Pockets…”
Vs
“I’m not a fan of Apple so I’ll buy an Android.”
“Im not a fan of Google’s business practices so I’ll buy a…. Oh.”
Its not the same.
You mean like the equivalent to replacing the CPU, modem, display, speakers, or battery on the iPhone? Because I'm pretty sure those have nothing to do with smartwatches or application APIs.
You are twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to find an analogy that actually exists elsewhere in the world. It is very telling.
It is the same. There are other options than Android as well. There are just two options that are the most popular, but there’s nothing stopping competitors from creating smartphone OSes. And many companies actually have. There are Linux phones, used to be Windows phones, and even recently you have Hauwei with Harmony OS. There’s just currently less major players in the smartphone OS market, but that isn’t Apple’s fault…
I'm glad you identified my obvious point. Your Walmart/Kroeger/McDonalds example was ridiculously simple and doesn't come anywhere near the same situation as what Apple is doing. I'm glad you agree.
I don’t agree, you clearly seem to not understand the point… The problem is with your analogy of buying a home, which has nothing to do with businesses choosing what to do with their own property… iOS isn’t your house, it’s Apple’s property…
Last edited:
Heated seats are useful, unlike turn signals.🙃🙃🙃
Why on earth would you replace the drivetrain with non-OEM under warranty?
It's under warranty. Have the dealer replace it for free.🤨People replace minor parts (headlights, wipers) with aftermarket for better performance or aesthetic.
Correct, it is not fair to other manufacturer's. Nobody can fully compete with the Apple Watch because Apple restricts features at the OS level for other devices. And yes, I should be able to decide what smart watch I use on my iPhone without having to lose features like responding to notifications because I am not using an Apple Watch.
I'm saying if you make something for use on someone else's product, you can't complain if you get locked out. If you want your product to function how you want, do it everything yourself.
Again, so you have never ever installed third party apps on your Apple devices then? See how that conflicts with your analogy?
This is a wild argument. The Pebble guys aren't asking for Apple to give them anything. They are just asking to be able to implement some features. They are willing to do all the leg work to put those features in place. Apple just says, "No, you can't have those features. Only our watch can have those features." Apple has set things up in a way that makes it impossible to compete with the Apple Watch on a level playing field. It is really wild that anyone would argue that this is okay...
Pebble doesn't want "50% of the market share". They just want to create a watch that does a few convenient things for a small group of people. Your argument about "letting people in on what their engineers spent years developing" is also a weird argument. That's how APIs work. You make them for other people. Imagine if Microsoft said that only their games could access the graphics card APIs and 3rd party games had to do all of their rendering in the CPU. Their games would run faster and look way better than the competition... which would make it impossible to make a game as great as what Microsoft could make. Surely you can see how that would be a problem.
"I'm pretty much happy that Apple keeps this kind of people away from the ecosystem." What kind of people? People who want to make smart watches? You are suggesting that Apple should be the only people allow to make smart watches? Once again... that's quite a wild take.
Also, third party smart watches can integrate with Siri, which enables most of the things people are claiming “aren’t possible” on third party smart watches. Like you could just ask Siri to reply to the text message. You could ask Siri to mark something completed. Third party smart watches can replicate just about every function of the Apple Watch…
No, Pebble is asking Apple to do a significant amount of work to enable those features to function on third party watches. Apple engineers don't work for free, what's the ROI for Apple to do that?