While this sucks for iPhone developers who want to branch out / use other languages (clojure, etc), it might persuade these developers to move over to the Android platform. Especially given the several Android tablets forthcoming...
Apple is of course conscious of this trade-off (attractiveness of the platform+customer base vs. unattractiveness of being treated like shit by Apple).
The thing is, they can easily back off when they will have to: today, most app developers won't snob the iPhone even if they're treated miserably. If they can't afford Android+iPhone portability, most of them will choose iPhone-only over Android-only.
If/when a competitor starts to be attractive enough to represent a treat, Jobs will announce a big change towards a more developer-friendly policy. Today, he thinks he can get away with being a dick, and he's probably right IMO.
If they can't afford Android+iPhone portability, most of them will choose iPhone-only over Android-only.
I'd agree with you, except for one thing. I developed an enhanced version of my app for Titanium with many new features. The idea was that I would be able to quickly upgrade my iPhone app, and as a bonus might build an Android app. Now that this has happened, I've already invested all the time and money to make the conversion, and I'm not back-porting to Objective-C. I'll release the new, significantly better version of my app on the droid. If Apple comes to their senses, I'll release it there too.
These companies have never been nor tried to be emotionally appreciated. Their success had nothing to do with appreciation.
IBM has been swept because, as a big hardware vending corporation, they refused to see that hardware was doomed to commoditization(1), and that software was what would matter in the future. They never enjoyed goodwill, and never needed to.
Microsoft took off because they've been the first and most ruthless hardware commoditizers. Then they maintained their position thanks to the interlocked Office / Windows monopolies. They didn't need any goodwill to get there, only IBM shortsightedness. And apart from XBox, which is far from being a monopoly, they consistently failed to sweep any market that wasn't closely tied to Windows/Office, maybe in part because they don't know how to build sympathy (who in his right mind would want to be labelled a Zune fan?)
(1) Interestingly, Xerox failed the same way to become Microsoft: although they invented the modern GUI and workstation decades in advance, they never truly tried to turn it into a cash-cow, because they kept seeing themselves as photocopier makers.
Was it Microsofts business practices that brought it down a few notches? or was it their lack of quality products?
Currently, business decision makers are likely looking at the market penetration/mindshare of iPhone vs Android.
However, in the coming months, I suspect we'll see a few points which steer businesses away from the iPhone.
1)you'll be able to develop apps to run on Android, WinMo 7, RIM and Palm, all likely using a single code-base and hooking into a framework which manages the different device api's (such as PhoneGap, or even Flash).
2)the overcrowding of the Apple store means as a business, you are trying to compete with thousands of others, while the other stores have less apps (at the time being), and more overall users.
The AppStore is like a huge mall with 50 million people and 150,000 stores.
The competing stores is like a mall with 100 million people, and only 10,000 stores.
I'd much rather be one of fewer stores in a larger market, than the one of many in a smaller market.
I think the main cause for Microsoft's weakened position is the web. Their core products are high quality in my view, but they just never wholeheartedly embraced the web. Neither technologically nor in terms of the business model. Fighting the web moved them from being seen as a freedom fighter against IBM to the position of a ceaselessly scheming oppressor that keeps inventing new ways of ruining the fun for the tinkerers.
They have alienated an entire generation of hackers and that's why in spite of all the money that can be made on their platform the interesting stuff happens elsewhere. Apple is on route to follow them, once the hype around their glitzy fashion items subsides.
"Was it Microsofts business practices that brought it down a few notches? or was it their lack of quality products?"
Their business practices gave us a reason to hate them; their low quality products gave us a reason to not buy them (many people hated them before that as a company; the lowering of quality and the rise of competitors gave them the impetus to switch away losing MS market share).
I'm not sure if the former was causative of the latter, but the likelihood of that being true is high.
A few years back, I predicted that Apple might get high-handed and inadvertently make OpenMoko/Android more attractive. OpenMoko has gone by the wayside, as perhaps it should have.
Here's an irony: my Windows XP tablet is now where I run my Open Source apps and where I have the freedom to install whatever I want. Newer, slicker Android tablets may take its place.
