
I Still Don't Want To Be Part of Your Fucking Ecosystem - edent
http://shkspr.mobi/blog/2014/02/i-still-dont-want-to-be-part-of-your-fucking-ecosystem/
======
yuvadam
Cory Doctorow calls it "the war on general-purpose computing" and it's a
pretty damn good read [1] (or talk [2]).

[1] -
[http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html](http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html)

[2] -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEvRyemKSg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEvRyemKSg)

~~~
rimantas
Don't you think that it is a stupid name? Why should it be a zero-sum game?
Also, I still do eat with spoon, fork and a knife, but I do not call that "war
on spork".

~~~
toomuchtodo
Bad analogy. Your utensils don't prohibit you from eating certain foods
because they've chosen not to support them.

Come to think, that's pretty hilarious actually.

~~~
stephencanon
Not arguing with the basic point, but I find it rather humorous that forks
essententially do prevent you from eating soup because they've chosen not to
(literally) support it. You need to use a different device to consume that
media.

~~~
codelap
Not quite, forks are ill suited to the job of consuming many soups. This is
more akin to how the Samsung watch is ill suited to host a Super Bowl party.
All devices cannot be all things, nor should they be, and this has nothing to
do with content licences.

------
davexunit
The author is mixing together several problems here.

1) Amazon bundling a video service with their free shipping program.

2) Amazon's proprietary software locking in you into whatever platforms that
are in their business interests.

3) Panasonic's proprietary TV platform that people can't be bothered to
develop for.

4) Digital Restrictions Management that prevents one from downloading a movie
via Amazon Prime and playing it in any other video player on any other
platform.

This is just the usual awful situation when you rely on proprietary software.
Stop using Amazon Prime to watch videos. Write to them about the problems you
have. I recently wrote to Audible because their ebooks come with DRM and
cannot be played on GNU/Linux using Free Software.

~~~
dmlorenzetti
There's also a hardware ecosystem problem. Apparently we live in a world where
people expect a TV to have a web browser with Adobe Flash on board.

I have a 30-year-old amplifier that still works just fine, despite having been
built before CD players and MP3 players came along. Sure you could buy an all-
in-one device that integrated the amp and the tape deck, but a lot of people
avoided those because they wanted flexibility, expandability, and robustness.

Similarly, back in those days it was quite common to see little TVs with an
integrated VHS player. But if you were the sort of person who bought
individual audio components, you probably also avoided those things, because
you recognized that the function of projecting a moving image on a screen was
independent of the function of reading a signal from a strip of magnetized
tape, and so keeping them in two separate devices bought you flexibility,
expandability, and robustness.

Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into
TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the
TV apparently is not just a display device. It's pulling double duty as a web
browser also (and who knows what else is in there). Unfortunately, a year and
a half is a long time in terms of web technologies, so a perfectly good device
for projecting moving images onto a screen is now deemed obsolete.

~~~
commandar
>Now, apparently, those old lessons are still useful. I'm not very much into
TVs, so I don't know, but to me the real "ecosystem" problem here is that the
TV apparently is not just a display device.

For a while, the appeal was that it was cheaper and simpler to just buy a
smart TV that had Netflix, etc integrated than it was to put together some
other solution yourself.

Turns out the reality is that the integrated smart functionality tends to be
slow, clunky, and rarely updated. Now that things like Roku, Apple TV, and
Chromecast are so cheap and easy, the tides have turned there.

While I was somebody that bought a smart TV a few years ago for those reasons,
I've gotten to where I haven't touched those features since Chromecast
launched. If anything, it's become an annoyance that my TV has a 15-20 second
boot time when I turn it on. I know I've decided that my future TVs will be
TVs only, and that seems to be a common theme among others I've talked to with
smart TVs.

~~~
rdeboo
This seems especially true with cars. I lease a new Volkswagen and it comes
straight out of the factory with a navigation system that looks and feels so
outdated that it makes you wonder why car manufacturers even bother trying..
It's just so slow and ugly compared to an iPhone or other smartphone that I
cannot imagine anyone using it in a few years.

------
joelthelion
Meanwhile the pirate bay is still compatible with pretty much any system on
the planet.

If you want my money you'll have to provide at least the same amount of
service. And stop being assholes trying to pass massive surveillance laws
every three months.

~~~
rayiner
If you don't like the terms for which someone is offering their original
creations, why don't you just buy a different product sold on terms you agree
with? There's no shortage of indie content out there, you know. Or maybe
create it yourself? By pirating it instead, you acknowledge that these content
creators make something unique and non-fungible and irreplaceable, but then
assert that nonetheless they shouldn't have the right to set the terms on
which they distribute those creations to the public.

I think the pro-piracy position is just totally irrational. If I'm gay and I
don't like Chick Fil-A's anti-gay message, should I: a) refuse to do business
with them; or b) steal chicken sandwiches instead?[1] The big media companies
don't have a monopoly on content. The costs to both produce and consume indie
content are lower than they ever have been.

[1] At this point someone will bring out the "copying isn't stealing"
hypothetical. Technically true, but consider this: any product has a delta
between its market price and its marginal cost of production. The marginal
cost of producing a copy of a piece of digital content isn't zero, but it's
very close to it. But lots of products sell for far more than their marginal
cost of reproduction. Is it okay to steal sandwiches from Chick fil-A if you
leave an amount of money that covers the cost of producing the next sandwich?
Apply that reasoning to products like Apple computers or Prada handbags that
sell for far more than their marginal cost of production. Is it okay to take
those items and leave an amount of money that compensates for the cost of
replacing it? Or do we have a general understanding that companies that
produce things have a right to the profit they can earn on each item?

~~~
selmnoo
You've raised some valid points, but I'd like to respond simply: I
(personally) pirate most things that I pirate because a lot of these things
are not comfortably affordable to me. I _wish_ I could buy all the books that
I want, the entertainment to keep wife & me (and the kids) happy and up with
current culture such that I have a proper sense of what everybody's like these
days so I can communicate with them easily, buy the design and video editing
software for my startup, - and then have all these things work in my own terms
without being a total pain in my a-hole. (mp3 works on my phone... but not on
my wife's? Fuck that, I like being able to share songs I like).

But... I can't really do all of this, I don't have the money. If and when I
have the means to do this comfortably, I'll do it! Until then, this is the way
I'm gonna go. And the thing is, if I was not pirating all of these things and
simply abstaining from enjoying these costly goods, it still would all be the
same to the entity I'd buy it from -- because from their view it's a) simply
not consume, or b) consume -- and for the time being at least contribute to
fulfilling a network effects popularity of the thing, or at least get
interested enough to be a willing buyer sometime in the future, (see Adobe and
Microsoft leaked documents expressing their being okay people pirating their
products. I'm sure you understand that Adobe and MS would indeed that you
rather use a pirated copy of Windows/Photoshop than to go with Linux (or
GIMP)... because this way you at least get hooked/familiarized with it, and
might buy it legally when you're a business owner or something).

~~~
aestra
>I (personally) pirate most things that I pirate because a lot of these things
are not comfortably affordable to me. I wish I could buy all the books that I
want, the entertainment to keep wife & me (and the kids) happy and up with
current culture such that I have a proper sense of what everybody's like these
days so I can communicate with them easily

Have you checked out the selection at your local library?

My parents go down there and take out multiple movies a day, for FREE. I also
hear they have books there.

~~~
hrkristian
By that logic, it's not morally objectionable to pirate.

Free from the library, free from The PirateBay, who cares, right? Either way
you're not eating into anyone's profits.

~~~
danielweber
No, because the library needs to buy one for each thing a person has out at a
time, and they eventually wear out, and you have to wait in a queue to get it
instead of getting it right away, and a zillion other extremely obvious
objections.

------
vidarh
I first started buying Kindle books once I was confident that I could
trivially rip the DRM off them via Calibre.

(EDIT: And I'm very glad I did, as just the other day I bought a book that in
its original format causes the Android Kindle app to go back to the main
screen if I remain on the same page for more than a few seconds(!) and lose
its position in the book - thanks to Calibre I know I have alternatives,
including converting it to other formats and/or reading it in other readers,
if Amazon doesn't manage to figure out what the issue is; that's within the
first dozen books I've bought from the Kindle store)

I will start buying video online when I'm equally confident I can do the same.

The free videos via Prime I'll be more lenient with. Even rentals. I don't
_mind_ DRM on that per se. Except that the DRM generally prevents me or make
it hard to access it on all my devices. If they won't run on my Linux laptop
(they might, as I understand it, via Pipelight, but I've not tested), or on my
Android TV stick, or on my Android phone, they might as well not exist.

In that case the value of Amazon Instant Video to me is arguably _negative_ :
I receive zero value, and there's a an added negative value in having it
shoved in my face knowing they're choosing to artificially limit my access.
I'm less happy about my Prime subscription today, knowing the amount of
potential hassle might be involved in trying to get access to these videos
than I was before I received the e-mail saying they'd added Instant Video to
the UK Prime accounts last night...

------
girvo
As crazy as this sounds... I've got no problems with being in an "ecosystem"
as long as it can be run on any device. See Kindle for a perfect example -- I
have it on my iPhone, iPad, desktop and my PaperWhite. Perfect.

Or Netflix: runs on everything. But if your "ecosystem" is limited to
particular devices (see: iMessage, or the OP) then it may as well not exist as
far as I'm concerned.

Hell, even Apple knew iTunes needed to run on Windows to matter. Eventually,
anyway.

~~~
odonnellryan
I think it's fine, but I also think some middleground has to be taken so that
we aren't slowly tied into a "ecosystem."

The example I like is Netflix on Linux. Now, boredom will find a way - and I
use Wine and FireFox - but, does it really have to be like that?

I understand Linux is (without looking it up) something like 1% of the desktop
market. But really... why should that matter? I know, business..but it's a
consumer product.

When I'm trying to look through Netflix's website to see what's supported, all
I can find is them trying to sell me proprietary devices. I don't mind so
much, because I still like Netflix.

~~~
davexunit
GNU/Linux users are not in their business interests. And you can't fix that
problem because the software is proprietary. The only acceptable option is to
stop using Netflix.

~~~
odonnellryan
Okay - I understand. And use what, though? Pirate Bay? Maybe launch a startup
that has only public-domain videos to start?

There has to be a good solution.

~~~
davexunit
> And use what, though? Pirate Bay?

I know of no place to legally purchase DRM free content that you would find on
Netflix. It's a sorry state to be in.

> Maybe launch a startup that has only public-domain videos to start?

See: [http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2013/05/03/a-kill-hollyweb-
plan...](http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2013/05/03/a-kill-hollyweb-plan/)

Feel free to take the idea and run with it.

> There has to be a good solution.

I think you or I or someone else needs to make the solution. Though the
problem is not simply technical. It's social and political, too.

~~~
odonnellryan
I agree with you. I'd love to be a part of a solution, but it would take some
serious commitment and big-backing. At least, as you say, on a social level -
through HN and similar communities.

------
josephlord
I used to do business development work at Sony bringing content services onto
the TVs although this is a few years ago now. It is complicated and messy and
there are many aspects both technical and commercial[0] that can cause
services not to be available.

Lovefilm were one of the most flexible and adaptable service providers
although I don't know the extent to which this still applies with Amazon.

I don't blame Panasonic for not supporting Flash/Silverlight in the TV.
Adopting either of these is likely to require unpleasant licensing terms AND
opaque binary blobs into the TV software.

On the service provider side they cannot just drop the security measures (DRM
or other security measures) as that would likely be breaching their own
licenses from the content owners (film companies). If not supporting a major
recognised DRM approach it can be a real sticking block.

[0] Including placement, branding, design and obviously any revenue share
arrangements.

------
Touche
While I agree with his point about ecosystems (I strongly avoid them), these
examples are a bit weak. Android is not an "open standard", it's a code-dumped
open source touch OS controlled by 1 company. Amazon should make an Android
app, but by doing so they are contributing to an ecosystem.

What's not widely known is that, unlike smartphones, HTML5 is the dominant
platform for TV-based apps. That's why every TV has Netflix, not because
Netflix is employing an army of engineers to make a new app for each TV model.

However, TV based apps are still apps that are installed and controlled by the
TV vendor. Which means Amazon has to strike a deal with Panasonic to get their
generic HTML5 app on Panasonic TVs.

If HTML5 DRM (which, to clarify, I am opposed to) becomes a standard this
whole mess could be avoided and Amazon could serve their videos on any TV with
a modern browser.

~~~
danieldk
_While I agree with his point about ecosystems (I strongly avoid them), these
examples are a bit weak. Android is not an "open standard", it's a code-dumped
open source touch OS controlled by 1 company._

Evenmore, Android doesn't support standards very well. E.g., the default IMAP
mail client didn't (probably still doesn't) have IDLE support, it doesn't have
CardDAV/CalDAV support (luckily, there are external connectors), and XMPP
federation is gone, so you can only talk with your Hangouts buddies via
Hangouts.

The 'problem' is that from a user's perspective Android is great. The
integration with the Google ecosystem in Android is impressive. And given that
many westeners already have GMail et al., Android provides a great and smooth
out of the box experience. So, there is little reason to switch, as long as
the ads don't become to intrusive.

------
DanielBMarkham
This is one of the reasons why Net Neutrality is so important.

Everybody and their brother wants to lock you in to their platform (whether
it's a phone or an ISP) then split, differentiate, and bundle the product in
so many complex ways you'll be lucky if you even understand what you're
purchasing.

Cell phone companies have already done this. Airlines as well. So have
insurance companies. They make money by farming the walled garden in such a
way as to make it look like you have increased choices, but, mirabile dictu,
all the choices end up with you paying more money each month.

Enough is enough.

~~~
rrorty
It's always sad to see Libertarians sacrificing their principles as soon as it
involves a slight inconvenience to themselves.

Net Neutrality means handing control of the internet to the government.
Regulatory capture and special interests will ensure any Net Neutrality
legislation is an unworkable mess that sets investment in the internet back
decades.

For video things would be even worse. Do you want Congress telling Amazon
which video formats they have to use, and which formats the devices they sell
must support? When Amazon doesn't want to support some proprietary standard
that congress members got bribed to pick then the thugs with guns will turn up
at Amazon HQ and Amazon will be unable to defend themselves.

We know that markets are inherently self-correcting, we just need to have
patience.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Whoa horsey!

Nobody's asking for regulations here. I think in a digital age, "Product
Definition" benefits everybody in the marketplace, and there's no reason we
can't come together on that, whether by industry association or legal
definition.

No regulators or laws necessary. I simply need to know when I'm buying an
"apple" that I get a red thing that's somewhat round and good to eat -- all
without spending 3 years studying the nuances of apple law. That's good for
everybody because it encourages and supports a free and open market. This is
what we want, no?

I'm not asking for a bureaucrat, or an agency. I just want bins in the market
where vendors put stuff where I can easily tell what the thing is, that's all.

~~~
mattcwilson
Honest question - if you're not going to regulate or outlaw it, what's going
to stop providers from engaging in it? "It" being charging more for /
throttling bandwidth for service A and not service B.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Tort law?

I bought an apple and you gave me a squash. What's going to stop that? My
taking you to court for damages, that's what. But it won't just be me -- it'll
be everybody you ever did business with.

Do you want to face one regulatory agency, where regulatory capture is always
present, or do you want to go to court with a million angry customers, perhaps
one at a time, that bought one product and were delivered another?

~~~
mattcwilson
Right - no argument there. I buy X and get Y, that's breech of contract (for
demonstrably different/inferior Y).

But I'm asking a slightly different question. I'm operating from a definition
of "net neutrality" as "non-discrimination of all kinds of bits flowing
through internet wires/beams/tubes." And my question is: what stops
VeriComAO&T from selling internet service defined as 2kbps of Netflix and
75gbps of CrapVideo(tm brought to you buy VCA&T)? What guarantees/enforces
that kind of net neutrality, if not laws or regulations?

------
far33d
It's not clear that Amazon has 100% control over how they distribute video.
Rights holders are pretty controlling about DRM, distribution, and what
devices can use their content.

I don't know anything about the specific deals here, but I wouldn't be
surprised if an open Amazon Instant Video was an Amazon Instant Video without
very much content you'd care about.

------
techsupporter
I'm really beginning to think that views like this (which I share) are in the
minority, at least so far as the "making astounding quantities of money" crowd
are concerned. Even downloading an MP3 from Amazon--a process that used to
just result in an MP3 link being presented after payment--needs a client and
wants to sync to the cloud. Vendor lock-in has been a thing for as long as
there have been computers, it's just that our interconnectedness has made it
even more visible and incredibly more lucrative.

~~~
thaumasiotes
Doanloading an MP3 from amazon doesn't require a client. It does sync to the
cloud, but it doesn't require a client. I guess I don't see the vendor lock-in
there?

~~~
grey-area
I just tried a few days ago. They heavily promote their client and I couldn't
find a link to just download the MP3s.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I started my post with:

Sign into Amazon. Hit this link:
[https://www.amazon.com/gp/ays](https://www.amazon.com/gp/ays)

View->View By Type->Music->Amazon MP3

But then tried to actually download my music or Kindle books. You're right.
It's actually quite difficult to. Not pleasant.

EDIT: Apparently I'm a dolt; see /u/thaumasiotes's response below.

~~~
thaumasiotes
Well, come on. You could at least go the the pages that offer the
functionality you want. Hit "Manage Your Kindle" from the "Your account"
dropdown and download Kindle books to your heart's content; they really
couldn't make that any easier. You'd download your music through "Your Cloud
Player", just like Amazon tells you to do when you buy it. Alternatively, your
order history for any item will include the relevant link.

~~~
grey-area
Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for as they have download links in
there under cloud player, but on purchase, I got a choice of Cloud player I
think or Download Amazon music player (which also gives access to files).
_Your Cloud Player_ doesn't sound like it'll let you download files, so I
ignored it, but that's where they have put it.

IMO it should be called _Your Music_ instead, because people want their music,
not Amazon's software for playing their music, which is exactly what this
article is complaining about.

~~~
thaumasiotes
Well, I'm completely prepared to agree that downloading music after purchase
is both () less convenient than it used to be and () filed under an
unintuitive name. But on the other hand, the cloud player sync does let you
redownload already-purchased music, which I don't think you could do before.
Mainly I was responding to the idea that downloading was being obstructed,
which I don't agree with.

------
skywhopper
The trend of vertical hyper-integration combined with Comcast's hegemony over
broadband and gradual creeping loss of Net Neutrality means that we're
gradually moving towards a less and less useful Internet. Unfortunately,
whatever benefits these companies might reap in the long-term from wide-open
media standards and net neutrality are too small or too uncertain to allow
them to move towards openness. I hate to say it on this site, but government
does have a role to play here in establishing rules for basic market fairness.
Unfortunately, so far the government rules have all been in favor of the media
industry and against consumers. Abolishing DRM and going strict on net
neutrality are, I think, the two key pieces of the puzzle. Much of the other
problems would quickly fall away. Stronger fair use and compulsory licensing
across a broader spectrum of IP would also help.

------
brador
Spread information. Just like you're doing with this article. Eventually,
enough decisions will be made based on that information, that was previously
unknown or hidden, that companies will change their practises.

------
Tloewald
The basic issue is lock-in. Ideally we'd have no lock-in, but that's a benefit
balanced against other benefits (e.g. having a good UI, ease of setup and
maintenance, enough scope for vendors to make money and stay in business). In
practice this means we tolerate a certain amount of lock-in for other
benefits.

But, the problem comes when everyone thinks that they can be the guy with the
tolerable lock-in. Use MY video service -- anywhere, MY platform -- running on
anything, MY app store -- on anyone.

Amazon's model is illustrative. It's hard to read non-Amazon content on a
Kindle (harder than any other platform!) but easy to read Amazon content on
any rival platform. They've been less successful with video because they
aren't able to leverage their existing near-monopolies as well.

~~~
acjohnson55
I agree. The Kindle is broken is this regard for me. It can't sync my notes or
progress from books I didn't buy on Amazon.

I have The Cloud. All I want is a system that lets me read and sync all eBooks
(and PDFs too please!) on all readers. Does anything like this exist?

~~~
taeric
I thought this did work if you put it in your "library". It at least seems to
do so with the books I purchased through the humble bundle.

------
quasque
Is this really that important? If you don't like it, don't use it (it being
Amazon's video streaming service). There are plenty of competing services if
you have a burning need to watch films via the Internet. No need to throw a
tantrum.

~~~
claudius
It’s annoying because now they expect me to pay 49€ rather than 29€ for the
same service, namely for them to ship stuff to me at costs competitive with
going out to buy said stuff directly.

I don’t know of any company competing with Amazon in that space, sadly.

~~~
quasque
If shipping cost is important to you, then indeed why not just go out and buy
it directly?

~~~
claudius
I like the convenience of ordering online, but paying 5€ for each order is too
much and makes me want to combine different orders, which takes some of that
convenience away again. Just paying 29€ flat for a year was perfect, I could
order online whenever I needed something without worrying about shipping and
the like (the actual items being roughly the same price as in local shops).
49€ is slightly too much for that usecase, and the price increase only being
justified by zero extra value only furthers its unacceptability.

------
dredmorbius
The relevant book to read on this topic is Varian and Shapiro's _Information
Rules_. Aimed at companies, and written in the late 1990s, its concepts are
now increasingly applicable to the consumer information/IT space. In
particular it discusses lock-in, or what we're now calling "fucking
ecosystems".

[http://www.amazon.com/Information-Rules-Strategic-Network-
Ec...](http://www.amazon.com/Information-Rules-Strategic-Network-
Economy/dp/087584863X/)

------
Fuxy
I think the smart TV is inherently a lock in platform like the old phone
market use to be when Nokia phones were all the rage.

If the smart TV runs android I'm ok with it the apps are already there but if
anything else i would rather have the "smart" part outside my TV and just get
a regular old TV.

Say for instance using XBMC I know it's a lot less likely the apps will get
out of date or I'm going to be forced by some vendors whims to use certain
service because they need to increase their profit margins.

------
arca_vorago
Let just boil this issue down to what it really is: closed source vs open
source. With the "in-your-face-doubters" revelations of Snowden that many of
us have been raving about for years, it still boils down to the main issue
which is control of data. Closed source and you never fully control your data,
it's that simple. Stop making it more complicated than it really is, and once
again, I say that RMS was a man that will be increasingly vindicated over
time.

Also, fuck the "cloud".

------
skywhopper
As far as TV support goes, no one should expect their TVs to handle streaming
media for them. That was and is a terrible idea. A TV should be a monitor, end
of story.

------
staticshock
> Even Microsoft, the technology's creator, sees no future in [Silverlight]

I don't understand the basis for making such a statement. The last Silverlight
release is not very old; the linked "lifecycle search" lists mainstream
support for the latest version of Silverlight until 2021; there are no
announcement that the product is being abandoned. Is it just hyperbole?

~~~
gtirloni
Agreed. Also, if rumors are to be trusted, there will be a new release of
Silverlight: [http://www.zdnet.com/a-new-year-a-new-microsoft-roadmap-
step...](http://www.zdnet.com/a-new-year-a-new-microsoft-roadmap-stepping-up-
the-delivery-pace-7000009402/)

I think people are overreacting to the fact that Microsoft improved support
for HTML5+JS in Win8 apps, WP8, etc, and are assuming they will let all other
technologies die. Even if true, how long of a death it will be?

People have also assumed Flash is completely dead as of _now_ since HTML5+JS
is getting increased attention. Then putting Silverlight in the same position
and calling it a day. IMHO, these technologies will stay with us for a while.

~~~
edent
That article is from January _2013_. Referencing a document from _2012_.

Their blog hasn't been updated in 2 years -
[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/silverlight/](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/silverlight/)

They haven't tweeted for 3 months -
[https://twitter.com/silverlight](https://twitter.com/silverlight)

Perhaps they're all working _really hard_ on Silverlight 6...

------
logicallee
I don't mind being part of your ecosystem as long as I'm part of your family,
you care for my needs, think about me, and the whole company is built around
my lifestyle and serves it really well leaving not much to be desired. The
loss in interoperability is worth it in this case.

If you're not going to be the above, then act like a pipe-able Unix process.

------
jokoon
Part is how business is done when you have a patent system in place.

It's hard to innovate when you're an investor, so those who do manage to sell
in a certain market tend to milk their users instead of trying to get more
customers. They don't really understand very well why people use IT products,
so they tend to take no risks and lock in.

This could be solved like this:

* Be a company who doesn't lose lawsuits to patent trolls. I don't really know the details of that. I don't know how the justice system technically manage those things.

* Fix the patent system to have an healthier innovation landmark.

* Have a business model where companies who do innovate refuse to be bought, and only agree to do partnerships with other companies so to avoid the lock-in between giants. If you get bought by google or microsoft, it will indeed change how your product will end up being used or not. This solution is naive.

------
javindo
The thing I'm most pissed off about is having this rubbish bundled in with
Prime at a non-additional extra cost. As a current Prime customer, I will not
be renewing next year.

I generally respect Amazon, Bezos, most of what they do and their business
strategy, but this is a real shitbag move towards paying Prime customers.

------
anabis
As a TV developer, I say connect a PC to the TV already. Making a 37-in TV
that sells for £479.00 is a major feat in itself. The panel leaves scant
margin for a SoC. Porting various codecs and runtimes to run on the said SoC
is easier said than done.

------
Qworg
There is a misalignment of incentives.

You want to be able to consume X on any Y.

Companies want to sell you X on the expectation that you've bought their Y.
Given that they've already been extremely successful doing this, X is only
available on their Y.

Why should they change?

~~~
Fuxy
Because if they do they might just create another extremely profitable market
place.

Remember when all phones expected you to use their own proprietary OS with
their own proprietary apps and developers had to make apps for every brand and
model separately?

That's vendor lockin taken to such an extreme that people can't even be bother
to make apps anymore.

Plus these apps are quickly going to become obsolete or outdated base what
developer can be bothered to keep up with all that crap.

Same logic applies just this time it's not phones it's smart TV's.

~~~
Qworg
Except that Apple is still making money hand over fist with a proprietary OS
with their own proprietary apps, happily built by people who aren't Apple
employees for 70% of their value.

Where does the profit in the new marketplace come from?

~~~
Fuxy
Apple was the first to implement the concept properly before android caught up
so they had a head start.

The combination of excellent implementation of a touchscreen in the phone (it
was done multiple times before but every other implementation sucked) and the
combination of that with a proper app store (by today's standards) gave them
the push necessary.

Notice it wasn't any of the regular players at the time that took it in the
right direction but a no name in the phone industry. Everybody else was too
busy fighting each other instead of innovating.

The profit is where it gets a bit odd since most likely the only profit the
manufacturer of the TV gets is the price of the TV and maybe some bonuses from
the companies whose app get installed by default on the TV.

No different then a laptop now.

The TV may become popular because of its great flexibility app wise but the
bulk of the profits will be earned by software companies distributing the apps
through adverts or by charging for the app.

------
frik
HTML 5.1 will feature DRM ("Encrypted Media Extensions"):
[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-
standard...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-standards)

Sadly Microsoft, Google, Netflix and BBC want this in HTML 5.1. We can only
hope that Mozilla [1], Apple, Adobe, etc. won't support DRM in their products.

[1]
[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=872125](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=872125)

~~~
w1ntermute
Mozilla most definitely won't support it, but Adobe will. Apple will implement
their own, incompatible-with-everyone-else, DRM instead.

~~~
frik
You are right about Adobe, I found a source:
[http://blogs.adobe.com/standards/2013/06/19/adobe-support-
fo...](http://blogs.adobe.com/standards/2013/06/19/adobe-support-for-
encrypted-media-extensions/)

I haven't found a source that details Apple's plan.

------
tps12
My car and phone both "have" Bluetooth, but I can't use them together because
the car doesn't "support" the phone. Doesn't really make sense to me.

------
scrittler
They aren't ecosystems - they're biospheres. They look like a functional
system but by operating independently of external forces they stagnate
quickly.

------
tootie
Amazon most definitely has an android app for instance video. That's how it
runs on Kindle Fire devices. They just don't approve it (or enable it to work)
on non-Kindle devices. You can find leaked apk files on various forums, but
they don't fit most screens and crash frequently. On the flip side, you can
stream movies via their website in Firefox for Android which still supports
Flash.

------
dankoss
The problem here isn't ecosystems, it's standards. Standards that allow us to
move MP3s, emails, books, etc. between providers.

I'd like to believe that HTML5 will eventually be the standard for video
delivery, but this may never happen. There's no incentive to standardize
streaming content delivery because it would increase competition and take
power away from the corporations.

------
shurcooL
Just to be clear, I upvoted this, but I thinking TVs being anything but a dumb
display is a really bad idea. It wastes developer time trying to stuff support
for proprietary technologies and reinvents the wheel.

Just... just be a display and let me connect whatever proper devices to it,
instead of trying to put a crappy and slow YouTube app that gets obsoleted
within a year.

~~~
edent
I would agree - but does that mean I need to buy a NetFlix box, a cable TV
box, an Amazon box, a YouTube box, a Vimeo box etc.?

Or, do I run one box that magically supports them all? Apart from DailyMotion
who've decided they want me to buy their special adapter....

~~~
shurcooL
> Or, do I run one box that magically supports them all?

A computer? That's what I would use.

~~~
edent
Where do I find a computer which runs all these services, has a nice easy to
use front end, and doesn't cost a fortune?

------
alextingle
Meanwhile, in the Pirate Bay ecosystem...

------
nayefc
This sounds utopian but not practical; a typical dev-only mistakes with poor
business perspective. How else will they make money? Making money is the most
important thing, and without it, none of this would have existed.

------
peterwwillis
Oh hey. It's a bitchy consumer with entitlement issues. Fancy seeing one of
those on HN.

You know what ecosystem _is_ nice? Earth's. Go outside and play in the snow
for fuck's sake.

------
jotm
The main problem is that most consumers don't really care about openness,
functionality and anything that requires a bit of brain power to understand.

They get a TV, smartphone, PC - it works, cool. That feature is missing - oh,
shucks, whatcha gonna do? It was probably too hard to implement anyway, right?

Which is why ecosystems exist - once people learn how to use that one simple
system, they'll tend to buy stuff from the same company for convenience's
sake. Most poeple don't want to figure out how to install apps, why this web
page isn't displaying correctly, or how to make those mp3 files smaller.

------
ilbe
Why not just get a $300 projector and plug your laptop in?

~~~
Shorel
Native Resolution: 800 x 600

------
qwerta
I think basic problem is 'smart tv'. I got cheap android HDTV, it handles
everything including flash videos and streaming from FTP server...

------
nhangen
This article is a misguided attempt to bemoan Panasonic for not enabling
Amazon Prime video on their devices, which really has nothing to do with
ecosystems and more to do with inferior technology and/or poor pre-purchase
research.

I don't view Prime Video as an ecosystem but more as an added value type of
thing. Beyond that, it's opt-in, therefore not limiting.

If the OP wanted Prime Video on their TV they should have purchased a TV that
offered it, or buy a box that does it as an add-on.

~~~
justincormack
Prime Video did not exist when the OP bought his TV.

~~~
nhangen
So he's expecting Panasonic to upgrade the software to support it? I don't see
how you can blame Panasonic for not having something that didn't exist when
the TV was made.

I'm not a Panasonic fan, but I would guess they a) can't afford to add Prime
and/or b) are trying to offer what they can in place of it.

------
LeicaLatte
What next? I want horses, not cars?

Sorry but crapping about ecosystems is crapping on a fundamental construct of
human organization.

------
josinalvo
maybe it would be good to have some sort of (general) index of compatibility
for consumer products. A one-number thing. "how likely this product is to lock
you out of something good".

If this information is valuable (and I think it is!) even small fluctuations
on the index could push a given product up.

------
beachstartup
i have a panasonic viera from 2011 and it includes an amazon video player in
its built-in apps (along with netflix, and a couple of other services). i use
it all the time to watch movies and tv shows using prime, for free, and for
pay. is the author talking about a different service?

~~~
edent
Interesting - are you based in the UK?

~~~
beachstartup
i bought my TV in los angeles and live here.

------
PaulHoule
This reminds me of the bad old days.

Around 1980 you'd buy an Apple ][ or a TRS-80 or a Commodore VIC and they all
were incompatible, although most of them still had Micro$oft BASIC.

~~~
muyuu
There were better justifications back then though. Stuff ran on completely
different hardware and layers of abstraction weren't really workable. Some of
the BASIC was more or less compatible but then again most stuff was machine
code and BASIC was usually just the OS's terminal and bootloader of sorts.

One could not reasonably expect the same software to work unchanged on a MOS
6502 based computer like the VIC or the Apple ][ and in a Z80 based computer
like the TRS-80. And there were many more differences at the hardware and ROM-
kernel level that made cross-platform software largely unworkable.

------
lurkinggrue
One reason I never buy drm'ed media.

------
aet
Roku

------
RRRA
Flash is such an ecosystem...

------
peligoose
I'm a fan of ecosystems.

