“After initially dismissing the notion that Apple could ever break its way past entrenched rivals and make any significant impact on the smartphone industry, tech pundits are now aghast that Apple is running its business the way its executives see fit. Critics charge that the iPhone and its mobile software store amount to a monopoly and a restriction of free trade. They’re wrong,” Daniel Eran Dilger writes for RoughlyDrafted.
Dilger asks, “How is it that those who were skeptical that the iPhone would take off, or even hopeful that it wouldn’t, are now taking the position that Apple shouldn’t be allowed to chart its own destiny, but should instead be run by the community of pundit opinion that tried to destroy it?”
“The reality is that Apple has earned its success, not by being granted a monopoly by fate that it turned around as a weapon to stop competition, but by actually competing to deliver a better product,” Dilger writes.
“Daniel Lyons, the Fake Steve Jobs who went to Newsweek to write up absurdities about how Apple is like Microsoft because Vudo is going out of business because Apple sells movies in iTunes, is a great example of why the tech media needs to educate itself on the difference between successful competition in a functional market, and Microsoft’s abuse of its monopoly position to prevent competition,” Dilger writes.
“Apple doesn’t have a moral obligation to grant other companies success,” Dilger writes. “[Apple] has already provided them an example of how to attack monopolists and win. If they can’t compete, that’s their problem.”
Full article – recommended – here.
I started reading Mr. Dilgers articles a while ago, and have found them to be among the most intelligent writers on Macs, Apple and Microsoft. A lot of good arguments on why’s and for what. Going into and explaining the details.
On his political article, well I leave to you Americans to debate. But that should absolutely not overshadow his articles on computers. There’s just too few of his class!
However I can’t resist bringing some fuel to the fire, I partially side with his political views. They’re quite to the centre from my left…
“you can prove that Dan is wrong”
Class today we’re going to star with proving the totally obvious.
@Guffaw
If you have the nads to revisit this thread:
You behaving in an intellectually weak way. I don’t have to prove anything. You don’t even understand your own position. You made statements. I challenged you to provide evidence. The onus is on you to back up your statements. You haven’t. You are a typical troll who can’t intellectually reason anything. I recommend you read Jamie Whyte’s “Crimes Against Logic” and educate yourself.
I’ll let you in on a secret. I rarely post on this site because I’m pretty lazy myself. I have opinions, and they’re based on reading and education and my (almost) 44 years. But I don’t spout them off all the time because I’m too lazy to do the research I know I’m capable of to back up my own statements. I read a lot, literature, non-fiction, the net, and have for years. And I form opinions based on what I read, and logic, and on FACTS as I can ascertain them (see my post above). If I’m too lazy to find citations to back my points, I simply don’t make them. I don’t usually care if others have opposing opinions, if they take the time and spend the mental energy to back them up. I admire the posters here, like Ampar (dude, where you hiding?), who go to great lengths to back up their statements with citations when they argue. But when some blowhard like you posts asinine comments without backing it up and tries to smear the name of someone who DOES go to great lengths to write thoughtful, well documented essays, then I feel compelled to call you on it. (Note: I agree with other posters that Eran should not mix politics with tech, but its his blog, so read it or don’t.)
So. I call bullshit and it’s up to you to defend yourself. If you can’t do so, be a man and own it. If you can, unleash your intellect and prove to all of us that you aren’t ten pounds of shit in a five pound bag. Go for it.
Didn’t you ever study research in school? You have to cite every fact and opinion you write. You need to learn that lesson. Spout opinions without backing them up, and you’re useless.
Christian
Whoa. Too many Flying Dogs at happy hour.
Lets try, “You are behaving…”
Chrissy 1, I miss you.
“write thoughtful, well documented essays”
Guffaw
“You have to cite every fact and opinion you write.”
Not when the situation is so simple anyone could interpret it without backup facts.
Did you ever take a course about recognising the totally obvious? Clearly not. You probably should. It’ll help you with your future “reading and education” to not waste the next 44 years in the same way you’ve wasted the last 44.
Nobody is saying APPLE INC is a monopoly, but they have chosen a pretty shady bed partner in AT&T;. That relationship forged is one of monogamy when it comes to phone service. Hence the exclusivity. What else would you call it when there is another cellular company in the United States that doesn’t have a chance to compete? Do the echoes of monopoly ring in anyones ears?
@bizlaw
Can a sector of the population be excluded from the purchase of a product by an entangling alliance with another company? Does this exert market forces that are not in the interest of the consumer? GSM is a standard that is used by only a couple of US cellular services. Could the exclusivity damage competition where the consumer has the right to only choose one service? I still hear the echoes of a monopoly being practiced under the guise of proprietary equipment.