←back to thread

1424 points moonleay | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.808s | source
Show context
andrewchambers ◴[] No.45942849[source]
Mark Zuckerberg explicitly called out the airpod pairing being closed as unfair in a semi recent interview, maybe he can throw some dollars that way and get it all working nicely in some meta products.
replies(2): >>45943966 #>>45946843 #
thewebguyd ◴[] No.45946843[source]
That's backwards.

It's not AirPods being closed that's unfair. Apple should be able to sell first party tech that only works with their own products.

What's unfair is Apple locking everyone else out. Not allowing or documenting for third parties to use the same APIs to enable something like automatic device switching in third party bluetooth headphones is the unfair part.

Same goes for the watch. That the Apple Watch only works with iPhone isn't the problem. The problem is no other third party is able to make a smartwatch that competes on an level playing field with the Apple Watch on Apple Devices, because Apple locks them out.

lock-out is the unfair problem.

replies(1): >>45947302 #
intrasight ◴[] No.45947302[source]
"only works with their own products" == "lock-out"

Or am I missing something that distinguishes between these two in your view?

replies(2): >>45947455 #>>45952914 #
1. thewebguyd ◴[] No.45947455[source]
Only works with their own products is lock-in.

Lock-out is Apple preventing third parties from making accessories that can match the first party ones in feature parity and seamlessness.

Apple Watch only working with iPhones=lock-in

No third party watch being allowed to use the same APIs the Apple Watch does or not being allowed to access iMessage, Apple Pay, etc = lock-out.

replies(1): >>45952402 #
2. 4dm1r4lg3n3r4l ◴[] No.45952402[source]
By locking their products "in", they're also locking third parties "out". How on earth would they be able to "lock-in" the Apple Watch to the iPhone while at the same time NOT "locking-out" third parties?

It's the same thing.

replies(2): >>45952948 #>>45958031 #
3. BrawnyBadger53 ◴[] No.45952948[source]
I think they're suggesting that lock in implies apple didn't write the code to help support 3rd parties. Lock out implies they actively wrote code to prevent 3rd parties.
replies(1): >>45959813 #
4. _fuchs ◴[] No.45958031[source]
I have a apartement i rent out for vacation

If i offer to bring you fresh breakfast in the morning but not offer the service to other apartments down the street -> „lock in“

If i do not allow you to get your breakfast (of equal quality)elsewhere -> „lock out“

5. intrasight ◴[] No.45959813{3}[source]
With other companies there may be a difference. But with Apple, for all intents and purposes, it's the same thing. Because they are hostile to third-party integration using undocumented API's or interfaces.