On Thu, 17 Feb 2011, Brad Knowles wrote: > On Feb 17, 2011, at 1:46 PM, Brad Knowles wrote: > >> So, Apple is protecting their users from being locked into any other >> content distribution channel. That's not anti-competitive, regardless >> of how much the other industry giants might scream and wail and gnash >> their teeth. It's actually the other providers that are being forced >> to open up, and then only if they want to make that distribution >> channel available on iOS. > > Think about it this way -- when Barnes & Noble sets up a book store, do > they allow competing book store chains to come in and set up their own > shop inside and then force those customers to check out only at the > non-B&N registers? > > In this case, Apple is allowing other distribution channels to be set up > on the devices that they designed and built and continue to support, > which is more than B&N would do for any other competitor book store > chain. In return, Apple is requiring that they be given equal content > access and price equity with the competing distribution channel, and > customers have to be allowed to choose which distribution channel they > want to use. > > That seems more than fair to me.
except that apple also prevents you from buying apps from any other store how would you like it if your dell computer only let you buy software from microsoft and microsoft charged the competition 30% for the privilage of selling software to owners of dell machines microsoft has actually made rules for the new wp7 OS that opensource software is not allowed to be in their store. David Lang _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
