I am not sure why both Apple and Google looked at Microsoft of late 90s and decided to behave the same way.
It would have been completely unimaginable for Microsoft to dictate what software people were allowed to install on Windows, how to pay for it, and then take a revenue cut.
It would have been unimaginable for Bill Gates to issue whiny statements about developers feeling entitled to a free ride on his platform because they refused to give him a cut.
The 1990s controversies were all about preinstalling and bundling stuff. To a lesser degree it was also about access to undocumented APIs and the right to implement proprietary Microsoft network protocols.
Granted, Microsoft had an even tighter OS monopoly than anyone does today. But the control it gave them was nothing compared to what today's oligopolists have.
It was not really unfeasible technically, but socially. Like selling "hats" or lootboxes to gamers were not unfeasable, but they refused to pay even the tiniest amount.
But Microsoft has a much tighter grip of the software market today than they ever had. They are in almost every vertical and they are number 1 or 2 in each. That's probably worse than a near monopoly in only one of the verticals.
Nintendo/Sega/Sony did essentially do the same thing in the 90s that Apple does today with cartridges and CDs in their consoles. I guess Microsoft just didn't have enough leverage to push a closed platform (considering previous non-IBM PC platforms were also open) in the 90s (licensed boxed software) or in the 2010s (windows store).
It is a hive of individual people with ambitious KPIs and personal goals, forming an echo chamber of self-confirmation. Increasing commercial success moves the boundary of what's feasible/acceptable, increases the confirmation bias and feeling of entitlement.
But otherwise yeah, this is how any corporation this size behaves always.
Microsoft was in monopolistic position and yes it was a serious issue, but at least it was on standard computers. It was a de facto monopoly but you were mostly free to escape by removing Microsoft from your computer (which basically meant installing Linux).
Nowadays, our platforms are heavily locked, which gives Google and Apple an unprecedented power over all the computers of the world.
For sure, if you aren’t satisfied anymore with your phone / tablet because your OS vendor changes the rules months or years after your purchase, you are "free" to switch … as long as you are ok to lose all your investment in the platform, as long as you have hundred of dollars to throw into another phone for the the same usage, and as long as you are confident that the only other OS vendor will not make another stupid decision for the years to come.
The world is trapped between two aggressive monopolies and everyone acts like the market offers enough competition to fulfill everyone’s needs.
The state of affairs is bad enough that the most probable new competitor could have only been Microsoft.
Now we are dealing (among others) with the same topic, but are already much deeper in the swamp:
Several companies are actively working to replace the internet with a walled abstraction they own and monetize, for more than a decade now, trying to argue "it's not the internet, it's an app!" or "it's not the internet, it's a profile-page on our portal!"
IMO we're deeper in it now, because of how much better these arguments seem to work now among tech-people I talk to (compared to how futile Microsoft's arguments were for tech-people back then)
And you are not even free to switch really except between android and ios. I do not know what others here used their phones as, but for me it is a lot about essential and quasi-essential apps ranging from banking, mobile paying, 2fas, chats, and several service-related apps. A lot of these are almost essential in everyday life and not replaceable by something else. I do not want to risk to get some custom OS that offers some interoperability and discover one day that app X that I need cannot work there. I do not really use my phone as something that replaces my computer.
I am locked into platforms, completely at mercy of corporations that can completely fuck me over (see for example when Google decided that you violated some ToS and locks your account), and that happens for a device that that had "essential and quasi-essential apps". Hell, right now I wouldn't even be able to pay for electricity if Google looked at me the wrong way.
It's precisely on that device that I want interoperability, open platforms, etc.
If you look into it with a "fresh eye", you may find that this is about several companies competing to replace _the internet_ with an abstracted platform they own and monetize exclusively.
We're just so deep into that journey already that it's not that obvious anymore, not noticing how some of those companies actively limit their contributions to open standards in favor of having proprietary advantages in this competition for "the next internet".
All this behavior is not sufficiently regulated (because 20 years ago it wasn't necessary as tech companies HAD TO collaborate across industries to make big things happen), but I'd argue that it should be.
Apple isn't the best in any category anymore, so they have to cheat.
Samsung's HW and Android implementation and skin, is in many ways superior to Google's Pixel but the overall packaged is hammered thanks to their bloat trying to replace Google's apps with their own offers to replicate Apple's ecosystem but with Samsung apps instead of Google and it ends up with a confusing duplicate mess. Observe:
Google Chrome and Samsung Browser, Google Wallet and Samsung Pay, Google Keep and Samsung Notes, Google Drive and Samsung Cloud, Gmail and Samsung Mail, Google Photos and Samsung Gallery, etc.
Oh, and the "best" part is, the functionality of certain Samsung apps like Pay is region locked for some reason, so in some EU countries like Germany you can end up with Pay refusing to work if you didn't buy it locally(even though this is the EU so region shouldn't matter). So if you buy your Samsung phone online from some small retailer running a sale you need to make sure the retailer is selling the right SKU for your region otherwise you can end up with Pay refusing to work with some obscure error. Thanks Samsung, great UX. The EU should look into this and maybe fine them as well.
Having a better screen and camera, like GP points out? Yeah, that's something actually important to customers.
So they don’t pick apple because it has a better CPU or GPU. They pick it because it gives them a superior experience and does what they want.
And I don't mean this as to diminish iphones usage experience or capabilities. It is the same for people buying one of those über expensive Samsung folding phones, cars, clothing or the latest Thermomix.
Really. At least they're not the clear favorite. It's not like 2010 when the best phone and laptop hardware was clearly, indisputably Apple.
Samsung phone hardware is better, vanilla Android is better than iOS (ex: recent HN threads raging about iOS not even having schedule-to-send for SMS), many laptops are better than MacBooks or are at least very competitive.
M3 chips are be the best laptop silicon available, but I don't think the average consumer knows/cares much about that.
> Do you have any evidence for this?
It's an opinion, so no.
Without regulation on what defines acceptable competition, everything is acceptable competition.
The EU is in progress of updating these terms, no longer accepting the practice of "silos" which hinder consumers from moving freely as acceptable competition, which is the root of all this drama.
The whole package is just a sum of what fits anyone's requirements / preferences.
The problem is you have to run Windows, and while Apple is starting to go nuts with their OS, Microsoft is still outdoing them in the insanity department.
I'm just setting up a new win 10 install for development... takes longer to disable the spam and upsells than to set up the actual project.
B) Use ShutUp10 to automate the cleansing process.
IOW are you arguing that it is a preference that you can guarantee you never have a working environment with reflecting lights in your screen?
For those who aren't aware, Heise Verlag is a German publisher with several top computer magazines, notably biweekly c’t with a circulation of 270.000 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/C't
If I was travelling a lot and spending a lot of time outside home I guess the battery life would trump any other factor and it would be a better option. In my case this is not a deciding factor as my laptops spend most of their time at home and as long as battery last a couple a few hours they will be plugged before it gets empty. I still benefit from the laptop form factor as I can still move them from one room to another easily or use them outdoor.
Besides premium price + sustained higher price in the second hand market make it so that at an average of around 350€ the cumulative price of all the computers (5) in my household is lower than the asking price of a single Macbook Pro with only 8GB of memory and a single 1TB hard drive.
It's quite a requirement that to be considered overall best, a product must be best at every conceivable niche. You wouldn't disqualify Lionel Messi from consideration of being the world's best football player by saying that he is (probably) not a very good goalkeeper? Not to say that a MacBook is the Lionel Messi of laptops, but just that a laptop can overall best, while also being a bad fit for a particular role.
I also think price while obviously relevant when it comes to a purchasing decision, is irrelevant when talking about which product is better. To determine which tool is best for hammering nails, it's irrelevant that a rock is cheaper than a hammer. The only relevant criteria is which you would pick if you were free to choose. And, it would frankly be strange if the better product weren't also the more expensive product.
My personal opinion is that Apple has been killing it with their laptops since the introduction of the first M1 MacBook Air. This seems to also be the universal sentiment in the Apple community. I'm aware of no product in the PC space that seem so universally acclaimed, let alone could plausibly serve as basis for a claim that Apple is somehow behind in this category.
Well, a brazing toch is certainly a better and more precise tool to apply a flame and heat stuff, but this is not the device you would choose primarily to lit a cigarette.
> And, it would frankly be strange if the better product weren't also the more expensive product.
It happens in a lot of domains.
> This seems to also be the universal sentiment in the Apple community.
Well, it would be stupid to buy and continue using something you don't like no?
A Macbook air or Macbook Pro surely fill a lot of checkboxes for a majority of the population. Having said that, the very fact that the macbook is offered in 3 different forms factor shows that you cannot really define any clear winner anyway. A Microsoft Surface is probably (haven't tested personnally) both an inferior tablet and an inferior laptop to the iPad and macbook air respectively, but it might still be a much better option for someone who fit the need for a 2-in-1. There are other better options for people who want to have a gaming laptop and don't want to rely on a cloud gaming subscription. And in my opinion, and until Asahi linux experience is more polished, running a MacOS desktop immediately dismiss any macbook at being the best laptop.
Yeah well, saw that often enough when I was young... ;-)
When the brazing torch is the tool you already have in your hand and is already lit, it's definitely the best tool to light your cigarette, too.
They didn't. They truly deeply believe that they are behaving differently to the evil 90's Microsoft.
It is possible to have an 120 IQ and still be dumb, especially from the comfort of your private jet.