What If Microsoft Had To Approve Every App On Windows?
from the playing-the-what-if-game dept
I've been pointing out why an open platform beats a closed platform over the long haul with regards to the iPhone, and linking to various stories concerning the arbitrary nature of being allowed (or not) on the iPhone. But, Harry McCracken, over at Technologizer, does a great job illustrating the point by playing the "what if" game, and thinking about how Windows would have developed had Microsoft similarly controlled every app. It doesn't take long to realize how much slower innovation would likely have been on the PC platform (though, it might have opened up more of an opportunity for other platforms):Would Microsoft have distributed Microsoft Office rivals such as SmartSuite or WordPerfect Office via its app store?And it goes on from there. Fun thought experiment if you're one of the believers that Apple's closed iPhone system is somehow "good" for innovation.
Well, maybe, in theory at least-after all, it doesn't sell Microsoft Office as part of Windows, so it couldn't use the "it duplicates functionality that's already in the product" excuse. Call me a cynic, though, but I suspect that competitive office suites would have run into trouble if Microsoft had controlled all Windows software distribution. And hey, didn't WordPerfect duplicate features in Notepad?
How about Netscape Navigator?
When Netscape first appeared in 1994, the current version of Windows (3.11) didn't have a browser. Even Windows 95 didn't have one at first--Internet Explorer was part of the extra-cost Plus Pack. Then again, Windows 95 did ship with the dreadful client for the original version of MSN, a proprietary online service which definitely did compete with the Web. That might have been reason enough for Microsoft to nix Navigator for duplicating Windows functionality. And once IE was part of Windows, Microsoft could have given Navigator the boot retroactively.
Safari? Firefox? Chrome?
They all appeared long after Windows got a browser as standard equipment. No, no, and no.
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: closed, innovation, openness, platforms
Companies: apple, microsoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Dammit, I forgot that I jailbroke my iPod Touch for certain command line functionality. There went that argument.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/ipod-fire.htm/printable
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eric
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The claim can be made that a Windows machine will run beautifully and never crash ... as long as you never install any programs on it. It's poor 3rd party applications that typically cause most Windows problems. If Microsoft had maintained a tight control on all applications that could be installed, then they could create an ecosystem that tightly monitored apps to give the best customer experience.
That is precisely what Apple is claiming to do. You get a solid, usable iPhone experience, because Apple is the gatekeeper to protect you from all those crappy apps that will crash your phone and bring about total world destruction.
But, in allowing the system to be open, then that allows 200 duplicate programs (which Apple's App Store won't allow ... once a particular app niche gets filled with an unknown quantity of apps, Apple will start rejecting more apps with similar features) ... and maybe the 200th version did things so much better.
It also means that people can do core OS features, and do them better. IE has been integrated into Windows since XP, and Safari is integrated into OSX on the iPhone ... and Apple will not allow any other browser on the phone that does use the provided WebKit rendering image. So, no Firefox, IE, Opera, or Chrome on the iPhone that doesn't Safari to render pages. Image if MS had that level of control for Windows. No other web browsers for you, because they have to protect the experience! And now, iPhone users are at Apple's mercy for web browser upgrades, forever. No Flash for us because Apple feels Flash Lite is too small and Flash too big ... the user gets NO CHOICE, because Apple decided that Flash wasn't good enough for their users.
What will be interesting to see is how the Android App Store & Android App Ecosystem in the next year or two develops compared to the Apple App Store. Not in number of apps (as Apple's App Store is mostly made up of an app with a book embedded in it, and not an original applications, so instead of an eBook reader, you get an eBook, and each eBook counts as a seperate app ... so their numbers are inflated), and see who has a healthier variety of developers, apps, and users.
I dislike Microsoft more than the next person, but they've learned to play better with others lately, and Apple has been walling off their garden more and more. Owning an iPhone has actually completely turned me off from wanting a Mac computer.
My next phone will be an Android-based phone. I'm done with opaque, arbitrary App Store rulings and limited choice. If someone wants to compete with Apple's built-in apps, they should ... if Apple's apps are better, then let people waste their time and let the users speak with not buying a different web browser or music player. If someone puts up adult content, they should ... particularly when a web browser gives access to a world of adult content already. If someone wants to charge $1,000 for an app of a jewel, they should ... if someone is dumb enough to buy it, then that's their fault.
Essentially, I don't need a set of parents telling me what I can & can't do with my phone. I wouldn't tolerate it on my PC, and I'm done with it on my phone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apple seems to be doing fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"is" != "will be"
"works now" != "will continue to work"
"what if"s are not a waste of time, but a way to take past experiences and build a picture of what may come based on those past trends. If you don't play "what if", then you'll be playing on the sidelines before too long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Besides, given that the iPhone was marketed as a status symbol for idiots with too much money rather than a practical device for doing something useful with, I suppose I can hardly blame Apple for not trusting their user base to not screw their phone up and then whine to them about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
another reason i love winmo
google voice?
there's several apps, some made months ago, some free, some not, all unrestricted, none banned by microsoft.
and yet, somehow, sprint's cell towers are still functional...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It wouldn't make a difference
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It wouldn't make a difference
-slightly embittered iphone owner
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It wouldn't make a difference
Until people get sick of being told what they can and can't do, and an open system is able to deliver a compelling alternative system. And with not 1, not 2, but 3 NEW smart phone app stores (Google, Palm, & Blackberry's), that are more open ... in the next year or two is where Apple's walled garden is going to have to defend itself.
Apple was first to market with a clean user interface for a portable multimedia Internet device, and they've reaped the initial rewards. Now it's time to see if their closed system is going to stand against increased competition. It's worked for them in the music player market, but customer frustrations in the phone market are gaining much faster because people want to do more, and keep getting told "no".
Streaming movies from your home PC to your phone? Not on the iPhone! But you can with the others.
Google Voice? Not on the iPhone! But on every other smart phone.
Internet tethering? Not on the iPhone! Again, every other phone, even on the AT&T network, allows this.
Alternate web browsers? Not on the iPhone! Yet, other phone users have choices and options.
Widgets?
Adult apps?
Customizable text message alerts?
Skins/themes?
I mean, it took Apple 2 years to bring basic features like Copy & Paste when if you jailbroke your iPhone, you could have installed a Copy & Paste feature a year ago (I did). Apple's walled system has prevented innovation for the iPhone and hampered the phone from excelling and being all that it can be. The jailbreak crowd has had more apps, more features, and a more advanced user experience over those who didn't take the leap, which shows how much innovation happens when you don't have a gatekeeper mandating what's cool enough to be on someone else's phone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It wouldn't make a difference
Umm no. Try Samsung I730 which came out in 2003!!!!!!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It wouldn't make a difference
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It wouldn't make a difference
But, remember, 3000 units were sent and used as display models in retail stores, so I guess they only sold 400 units...
But it was a clean, intuitive UI that sold 400 units that runs Windows Mobile!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It wouldn't make a difference
This is AT&T's problem not Apple's. Tethering is supported in the iPhone OS 3.
Apple will open the App store up more when they're ready or the market actually forces them to. Apple doesn't like to do things the Wild West style where everything is uncontrolled. Apple is about the whole customer experience. For now even though there are a lot of complaints they are still doing fine, and raking in boatloads of cash.
Does it hamper "innovation"? Maybe to an extent, but Apple seems to keep that going, and other companies "innovate" to keep up. These are all just progressions though. Are any of the Apps for any of these phones really innovative. That word is really overused.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It wouldn't make a difference
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It wouldn't make a difference
Apple has done a decent job with developer tools and the whole app store, but limiting what is available is a horrible way to do business. Obviously it stifles growth and innovation. What if Apple said iTunes was going to stop distributing any and all explicit music, just because they don't agree with it? Obviously they're not going to do this, partly because they don't compete in business against the music industry. But nevertheless, it's OK for them to do it against Google, and lots of other independent developers, etc.
Not cool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's like comparing a big apple and a small apple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
The imminent tablet device? That's a different story. I think we'll see some marked differentiation in the distributed software model upon it's arrival.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
That still doesn't change the fact that all the little gadgets, gizmos, and features I enjoyed on past phones are now controlled ENTIRELY by needing a different app, which I may or may not need to PURCHASE.
Let's just take Pix messaging for instance. How long has the ability to send/receive pics from your phone been around? To do that with the iPhone, you need to go find the app; and even then, there is still no app for RECEIVING. It can't be done. How is this better?????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
It's the only way they're going to create anything to sell for under $1000, let alone $400 to even get it near the netbook market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
Don't get me wrong, I do like the iPhone (it's the standard business phone where I work), but saying that it should be a closed platform because it's a phone is kind of a weak argument, especially since you generally can load your applications on a typical cell phone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The iPhone Is Not A Personal Computer
If that's the case, it's a pretty poor excuse for a phone -- lower-end phones do the essential phone stuff much better than the iPhone does. The real draw is that it is a personal computer.
And as such, it is one I will never own or develop for, for two reasons: the fact that Apple has to approve all apps, and the fact that it locks me into a particular cellphone provider.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Typo?
I've reread that part of the sentence about 8 times, and though I have no idea what it is, I'm fairly certain there is a word missing somewhere in there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Typo?
and linking to various stories concerning the arbitrary nature of [apps] being allowed (or not) on the iPhone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am disappointed in you TechDirt commenters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm betting that Apple HAS to do its best to protect the network.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The same comparison done today with the Iphone to Windows might make you think that open is better all the time, but as shown above, we all ended up at about the same place in the end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if i have to wait for aproval..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad comparison
Oh...and to aguywhoneedstenbucks who said in the first post Um...see that's why you pay attention to what you are installing. I can install any app I want on my phone, but that doesn't mean I'm going to install any and every program I can think of. I have a number of third party programs on my phone and it still runs great. To the iPhone users here...Can you use RDP with your iPhone? How about remote controlling your phone from your PC? I don't know if there are apps for that on the iPhone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bad comparison
Yes. Google is an amazing free tool. Check it out sometime. A search for "RDP iPhone" yields 1.3M results. This is the first result:
http://www.dabcc.com/article.aspx?id=8387
Of course, there are also VNC clients, and VMWare management tools as well.
How about remote controlling your phone from your PC?
What do you want to do? Bonjour is a pretty extensible protocol, and the iPhone can support it. Again, there are articles on this thing called "The Google" (Available for free at Google.com) that mention people being able to view webcams and transfer files between systems, print, and other things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bad comparison
Pretty sure he was being sarcastic...
You can use both RDP and VNC with the iPhone. Both are also very usable, surprisingly, even over a cellular connection. The lack of a keyboard can prove to be a pain if you have a lot to type, but for most administrative tasks it works well.
I don't believe there is any way to control the phone from the PC. Strangely, all of the cheap Motorola phones that I've owned offered that ability, as well as full tethering support. It all seems kind of backwards to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Game consoles: economically successful, very closed
Nintendo, Sega, Sony & Microsoft platforms all share a common characteristic: software developers need platform owner permission to do nearly anything, and all developers tithe back a fraction of their revenue to the platform. No 'open' gaming platform has been able to put a dent into this model, not even the well developed and otherwise successful PC-based gaming market.
In the balance of forces, the closed systems have sacrificed a large measure of innovation and diversity in favor of standardization, editorial control, and cross-subsidization. When performed skillfully, all three of these things add value for the consumer. For example, via their monopoly platform vendors force the few, chosen developers to invest particularly large sums into game production, sums that probably wouldn't be feasible in a more competitive market. It's central planning, to be sure, but in this limited case it's been done well enough to defeat the open system competition, especially as the platform guys have proven themselves to be 'fast followers' to innovation coming from the PC side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Game consoles: economically successful, very closed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
interesting "what if" but ultimately ...
The Cydia store seems to be a hotbed of innovation by those standards, a staging ground before submitting to "the man".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this is a realy dumb argument
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]