Preference is subjective. I hate touch screens in cars that so anything but provide a screen for my phone, others love them. Should we ban touch screen controls because of my preference? I like to have a curated app store for my phone and not have a free-for-all with multiple stores of varying quality where I need to set up a new store just to use a popular app. So I can buy an iphone and people who have a different preference can buy an Android phone. If consumers actually cared that much they'd just avoid iOS. It's the magic of the market. Let's have consumers put their money where their mouth is! Stated preference and revealed preference often differ for a reason.
Your cars touchscreen is not a marketplace. The M in DMA is for markets, which is what the regulation targets. Now if your car manufacturer sold the car and someone else sold the touchscreen then you could talk about this but as it stands its a false equivalence.
Apple has a market within iOS over which it can arbitrarily enforce anti-competitive rules, the EU regulates this type of behaviour.
Sure, just one person's consumer choice to curb anti-competitive behavior which is artificially raising prices for everyone and restricting innovation. Among other fringe choices like having electrical appliances that don't kill us, paint that doesn't cause brain damage, cars that don't poison our air, and rivers that aren't full of toxic chemicals.
Mobile phones have had one of the most rapid price plummets and feature additions in history. The only thing stopping another competitor is the fact that it's so hard to compete with them, because they're incredible value for money and there isn't a market being gouged that can be un-gouged.
But still - think how much more you'd need to buy and validate it all works together. Microsoft gives you AD, which works with Outlook, Sharepoint, Azure, Office365, Teams, then all of those, plus Excel, Word, Powerpoint all bundled, and not for very much money.
True, but it varies depending on how well those fit your organisation's needs whether buying into the full bundle is what you want to do. The less of it you want, the less the advantage.
Most people using MS desktops use AWS rather than Azure. Lots of software from other vendors does reliably work on Windows.
Nokia and the rest of the Symbian ecosystem actually led the market by a long stretch, just a short while ago. If they hadn't hired a former Microsoft exec to lead the company, and perhaps with a bit of luck, Nokia/Siemens/etc would have been that alternative. But that is another discussion.
I 100% disagree, and that's as someone who was both a fan of Nokia and even of Windows Phone.
And even if I agreed, they did hire that former MS exec. So they wouldn't have been that alternative, because in no universe would Apple or Google put Stephen Elop in charge of iPhone/Android, and in this universe, Nokia would.
This is a very good idea. I see a lot of friction (and lack of process) with product -> UX -> dev than with product and dev able to iterate on things like screen flows very quickly, and UX feeding in more from the user research angle.
Currently a lot of UX work is "translate what you said into Figma and wait for comments" which is very automatable, and I think frustrating for UX people as much as anyone.
I just had a cool experience with it doing some simple design. It prompted back to me usefully as well.
I can imagine also uploadnig a component library that this thing then uses the components from, to add styling for higher-fidelity designs, and allow app designers/builders to just use the components built by an internal team (who might also use magic patterns, I suppose).
> Before Twitter did any sort of verification it was not difficult to determine whether an account claiming to be someone was actually that person for anyone who was actually interested.
It was if you were a regular, non-technical user or not terminally on Twitter.
> the public opinion might change so that juries (representing the public opinion in courts) will indeed begin to judge against Microsoft in the way that I described
I'm pretty sure that's exactly how juries shouldn't work.
Because they're considered important, and definitely take a long time to make. Try making one.
reply