Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

While the OP's tone may have been a bit brash, it is true that this policy smacks of anti-competitive practice. Recall the (often quoted) Ma Bell rhetoric: "You may have any color you like... as long as it's black". The same applies to browsers on iOS: "You may use any browser you want... as long as it's WebkitWebView". When Microsoft did this same exact thing; building IE into the OS, people freaked! And I believe they used the same "It's to protect you" line. You may not care, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have a "run untrusted browser" option.


That quote, "You can have any color you like... as long as it's black" was said by Henry Ford: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henry_Ford


People freaked at Microsoft because at the time they were essentially a monopoly. Apple has nothing like a monopoly. Do we need to go through this every time someone tries to make this broken comparison?


Yes, because it's STILL a shitty excuse for millions of iOS users to not be able to use and install some types of apps on their devices.


When you deal with a commercial product your are subject to what vendor wants the product to be.

Don't like it? Buy elsewhere and help other vendors.

I do not care for those that give the money to Apple and then complain.


And Apple doesn't have a monopoly on iOS?


With this (uncommon) usage of the word "monopoly", all companies of course have monopolies on their own products. Honda: monopoly on Accord, etc.

This isn't what monopoly means in normal legal usage.

edit: typo


As defined by law, no.




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

Search: