Re:Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly reve...
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on Sunday May 23, 2021 @04:48PM
(#27258466)
"When questioned by Epic Games lawyers, Cook declined to answer a question about whether Apple's iPhone competes with Google's Android in the operating system market."
Let us rephrase the question. Does iOS compete with Android in the operating system market.
"Customers don't buy operating systems. They buy devices," Cook said."
True. Operating systems can be had for free. Customers generally do not buy them (as a separate item), but they do choose them, when they are allowed to do so.
What if customers had the option to buy Apple devices without Apple's choice of operating system pre-installed. Apple would never let customers have that choice. A million excuses.
"Tech" companies, as well as Microsoft and Apple, remove choice. Users pay nothing for the OS. Someone else pays (OEMs in the case of Microsoft). The OS is pre-installed. Choice is removed. No different than a "default setting" (e.g., "default search engine" for which Google paid $1B to Apple in 2014). The friction to change a pre-installed OS or default setting is too great for most customers. The companies know this and exploit it.
Cook suggests that if the customer wants another OS, one that allows a wider variety of apps to be installed, then she can buy a different device. How is that for interoperability.
The OS, when controlled by an intermediary such as Apple, is a means of control over users (as well as developers). Any argument that theroretically the most safe, secure and private OS by design is one that the user cannot fully control is unconvincing. If a customer wants privacy against Apple or its business partners, for example, iOS is not designed to offer that.
Let us rephrase the question. Does iOS compete with Android in the operating system market.
"Customers don't buy operating systems. They buy devices," Cook said."
True. Operating systems can be had for free. Customers generally do not buy them (as a separate item), but they do choose them, when they are allowed to do so.
What if customers had the option to buy Apple devices without Apple's choice of operating system pre-installed. Apple would never let customers have that choice. A million excuses.
"Tech" companies, as well as Microsoft and Apple, remove choice. Users pay nothing for the OS. Someone else pays (OEMs in the case of Microsoft). The OS is pre-installed. Choice is removed. No different than a "default setting" (e.g., "default search engine" for which Google paid $1B to Apple in 2014). The friction to change a pre-installed OS or default setting is too great for most customers. The companies know this and exploit it.
Cook suggests that if the customer wants another OS, one that allows a wider variety of apps to be installed, then she can buy a different device. How is that for interoperability.
The OS, when controlled by an intermediary such as Apple, is a means of control over users (as well as developers). Any argument that theroretically the most safe, secure and private OS by design is one that the user cannot fully control is unconvincing. If a customer wants privacy against Apple or its business partners, for example, iOS is not designed to offer that.