Apple is the New Microsoft

I'm pretty sure my karma will take a hit here.<p>Apple is hardly the new Microsoft. Microsoft's developer relations are bar none the best for any commercial entity or platform I've ever developed for. That's not saying their API's or SDK's are well designed, what it is saying is their developer support simply cannot be beaten.<p>Now, I've been entirely Apple based for the last three years and - in terms of hand holding tool chain support - it's a relative ghetto in contrast to what MS provides.<p>MS is definitely more open than Apple is, specifically when it comes to the iPhone, so I'm not sure how Apple is the new Microsoft in the slightest sense. Now, I don't mean open in terms of open source and all that, but I mean open in terms of what, when, where you develop and deploy.<p>In many ways, I wish they were the new Microsoft. That would mean that iPhone is an open landscape with API's that aren't encumbered with a "father knows best" mentality, which, as a developer, is frightening if it's a picture of what's to come. Can you imagine a future where Apple dictates what you install on your laptop or desktop? Why is the iPhone/iPod Touch any different? Because it has a GSM chip?<p>The problem is that if consumers accept this scenario, which they've readily done with the App Store, then the next logical conclusion is that the next device from Cupertino that isn't a laptop or desktop will come with the same closed, crippled, handicapped (from a developer's perspective) ecosystem. Then the next iteration after that will move it closer to the reality that your desktop will be locked down in the same fashion.<p>No, Apple is not the next Microsoft. They've become their own brand of monster.

Honestly, I stopped reading after the first few paragraphs. "The iPhone has taken the world by storm." We know. "The Apple AppStore is not an ecosystem and it's not a new market where companies can participate freely." We know. "So why do I think Apple has created the modern equivalent of the La Brea Tar Pits?" Let me guess... because of the App store gatekeeping? "So Apple controls the gateway to even offer an application to the market." Bingo!<p>I'm not trying to be condescending, but these points have been beaten to death on HN already, right down to barking "Just open the iPhone for third-party developers and allow other application stores," which, while it gives me warm fuzzies, is just clearly not something Apple is willing to do without serious forethought. Why not add something novel to the debate?

Forbes, 2005: Is Apple the new Microsoft?<p><a href="http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/04/cx_ld_0304aapl.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/04/cx_ld_0304aapl.html</a><p>SitePoint, 2006: If I had my doubts before, I stand corrected: Apple is the new Microsoft.<p><a href="http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/01/17/apple-photocasting-mac-only-uses-invalid-rss/" rel="nofollow">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/01/17/apple-photocasting...</a><p>Macworld, 2007: It's official: Apple is the new Microsoft.<p><a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/59914/2007/09/newms.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.macworld.com/article/59914/2007/09/newms.html</a><p>So is it a seasonal thing? Like brown becoming the new black in Autumn?

<i>"First of all, to be an ecosystem there has to be an open marketplace."</i><p>I know we're speaking in analogies, but Wikipedia defines ecosystem as:<p><i>"An ecosystem is a unit of interdependent organisms which share the same habitat."</i><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem</a><p>...I fail to see what disqualifies the App Store as an ecosystem, analogy-wise.<p>I've had enough self-described "rebels" (in this case, <i>"heretic"</i>) who think they are going out on a limb criticizing Apple and making broad statements such as "Apple is the new 'X'". The author doesn't appear to know much about how Microsoft operates or how it attained it's current (perilous) position, otherwise the flaws of this comparison would have been obvious during the first edit.<p><i>"...comparisons are odious, Smith."</i><p>Has Apple done some questionable, uncharacteristic things lately? Sure. Does it make life difficult for Developers? You bet. Is this something they've never done before? Absolutely not.<p>So instead of trying to draw attention to yourself by invoking dramatic characterizations (I once heard someone say that anytime someone compares something to Hitler in an argument, they automatically lose) how about "sticking it to the man" by building something better yourself. If you're right, maybe someday someone like you will come along and write a rambling diatribe about your creation (and then you'll know you've really made it).

"Is the new" is the new "fucking annoying".

But I thought <i>Google</i> was the new Microsoft?<p>How many New Microsofts can we have? :)

Every article I've seen on this topic (and there have been many) confounds what it means by "the new Microsoft." Most use the term to mean "plays hardball and engages in appalling practices that alienate certain groups of people," which, while arguably true, are not against the law. The discussion then gets defined by a group of folks pointing out the problems with this behavior, opposed by libertarians who claim that they should be allowed to do whatever they like. In turn, this leads to an uninformed, boring discussion: I'm not interested in discussing what other people believe Apple "should" do from an ethical/moral perspective -- Apple clearly knows its own interests better than any johnny-come-lately blogger, and they have decided that screwing around with their developers is good for their bottom line.<p>The proper point to focus on is a simple one: is Apple using its monopoly power in one application area (e.g. the App Store), to gain a monopoly in another (e.g. voice applications)? For to do so _is_ illegal. Our lawmakers have already pondered this issue and deemed it unacceptable. They have stated the illegal behavior precisely. A proper DA should have no difficulty prosecuting this behavior.<p>P.S. I also don't understand the level of whining among the iphone devs. The Android is an open platform, move over already - you can't choose to be punished and then whine about it.

[I did a quick search, didn't see anyone mention games yet, so I thought I should]<p>People bitch and moan about this, but the fact is that for a lot of developers this won't be an issue. Why? Because the game market for the iPhone is HUGE and you can bet there will almost never be an issue with duplicate functionality or explicit content because a game can incidentally download the Karma Sutra.<p>Games account for about half of the top selling apps (12/25 last I checked), and some games are getting so many downloads they are getting installed on almost a third of all devices (Tap-tap revolution got to 30%).<p>The game market is huge and will continue to thrive. The video game industry is entirely accustomed to this! It's just another console to them, albeit one with LESS restrictive rules. No price restrictions, no strict content or style guidelines, and no content requirements. Apple is hands-off compared to Sony and Nintendo.

HN is the new tabloid. :(

From The Dark Knight:<p>Harvey Dent: You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain

Why? (Article doesn't seem to clarify the title)

I feel like Microsoft has gone through many stages as a company throughout time. Any software company could be matched to be <i>just like microsoft</i> at some point in microsoft's timeline. Same with google...

Hahaha, what a joke.<p>This is what happens when you let propaganda factories take over news outlets.