Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Apple owns their platform. It cost a fortune to develop, and it's theirs.

Imagine it's the 1800s and you wanted to develop technology to let anyone listen to music anytime. You'd have to invent the computer, an operating system, and the internet (some means of distribution), then invent Spotify. (Or maybe not all those things in their entirety, but just enough to support the Spotify's functionality.)

Since it's 2019, there are platforms that provide the operating system and means of distribution, and Spotify merely has to deliver an app that floats in high-level-land. They then complain that that platform, who did all the work Spotify didn't have to, isn't being "fair." What does that mean? What are they rightfully owed?

Why doesn't Spotify create their own OS and App Store, and develop/distribute Spotify there? Because it's inconceivably hard? Surely that's why the people who did it get to set the rules.

Maybe Intel should only allow Apple to run Intel approved apps on Intel Mac's, because it's Intel's CPU running the show? And what about the modem chip vendors? Shouldn't Qualcomm put a firewall in firmware and filter all traffic on the iPhone that it hasn't approved? What about the ISP carrying those packets? Shouldn't they lay claim to packet ownership?

This platform ownership piffle Apple has sold for eons is pure horse shit, and the EU regulators will rule as such. Simply put, a fridge manufacturer cannot control what items get stored and cooled in the fridge, after the customer has paid in full for both the fridge and the item. And the fridge manufacturer certainly cannot restrict items only sold though it's own stores

Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

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