Openness Is A Winning Business Strategy
from the it's-not-just-a-philosophy dept
For some unfortunate reason, there seems to be this idea that "open" solutions are somehow a less feasible business strategy. There are still those that sneer at open source companies as somehow being less-than-true-businesses, despite an awful lot of evidence to the contrary. But beyond just being a good business strategy, it's worth pointing out that "open" solutions will almost always win in the end, because they simply provide more opportunities. For years, AOL insisted on a walled garden strategy -- and in the mid-90s there were many who believed that AOL's proprietary system would "beat" the wider internet. How's that looking these days?More recently, there's been concern about the various "walled gardens" in the mobile space -- which folks like Walt Mossberg have referred to as "the Soviet ministries." Jonathan Zittrain has been beating the drum, insisting that a closed system, like the iPhone's, is a dangerous trend. However, it seems quite like looking at AOL vs. the internet in the early- to mid-90's. While the proprietary iPhone system may seem a lot better at first, there are problems under the surface -- and openness is coming to the rescue.
Now, we've been beating on mobile providers for their silly "walled garden" approach for years, so you'd expect that maybe we'd be pessimistic. But, competition does wonderful things for innovation, and Apple's presence in the market is driving everyone else to become a lot more open. Hell, even Apple is now a lot more open than it was just a little while ago, when Steve Jobs thought that 3rd party native apps would ruin the iPhone. He changed his mind when he realized that the iPhone needed a more open app environment to compete with what was coming down the road from others (competition drives innovation again).
But, Apple's iPhone apps aren't really that open -- something that we warned would be an issue. That's getting some attention now as Apple is, without explanation, making some apps disappear completely, without even telling the developers why. That will cause one (or maybe both) of two things to happen: developers will start concentrating greater efforts on other, more open, platforms to avoid having to deal with the mysterious Apple gods, or Apple will have to give in and be much more open itself.
In discussing this phenomenon, Princeton's Ed Felten points out:
Generally, the closer a system is to being open, the more practical autonomy end users will have to control it, and the more easily unauthorized third-party apps can be built for it. An almost-open system must necessarily be built by starting with an open technical infrastructure and then trying to lock it down; but given the limits of real-world lockdown technologies, this means that customers will be able to jailbreak the system.Openness isn't just a business strategy -- it's the natural evolution of the marketplace, because, in the long run, it will be the business strategy that succeeds.
In short, nature abhors a functionality vacuum. Design your system to remove functionality, and users will find a way to restore that functionality. Like Apple, appliance vendors are better off leading this parade than trying to stop it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: competition, iphone, mobile phone apps, openness, walled gardens
Companies: apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Bean Counters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hitting the nail on the head
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't pass opinion as rule
In your examples you seem to talk more to compatibility as "open". Being able to work with other applications is a feature that allows a strong or weak symbiotic relationship with one or many other products. This increases value for a product surely, but does not make a product "open" in the traditional definition.
Open can work when the core competency or monetization of the product is increased by uncontrolled variations in the marketplace. The owner can almost certainly expect loss of exposure of his on flavor. A good example of this working is with LinkSys. The WRT54G sells like wild fire because of the company allowing third party firmware. The firmware that comes with it is mediocre, yet adequate, but is enhanced by third party firmware. The firmware is not how the product generates revenue, it’s in the selling of the hardware, and so making it "open" for firmware flavors increased the products value. This would have been a better example of how it works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Android
Now the carriers will be pressured to be more open; that allows Google to impose less restrictions on developers. Besides, there's the potential of a much bigger market to distribute apps to than the iPhone could ever deliver.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm done with closed phones
[ link to this | view in chronology ]