Platforms, bundling and kill zones
ben-evans.com
Platforms, bundling and kill zones
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#2What we lack is ambitious law makers or sensible elite.
Beyond that it is quite easy to force car makers to create modular cars with parts that fit on any car. We create standards all of the time.
Each large nation could provide a team of experts and together they could draft a plan for a digital platform to run a government on. It might be able to run on mac, windows and linux, it might require some dedicated hardware.
If the standards are open and we can all develop add-ons for it I cant see any way for it to turn sour.
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#3It would be nice if cars actually could have user-configurable lights and such but the cost (financially, yes, but in structural change and reliability) aren’t worth it. Plus who cares any more about their car, at least enough to change any defaults? Even laptops get at most a sticker or to and that’s it.
The phones and apps are infinitely customizable, the dimensions though is user generated content. Instagrams have a standard “frame” but within that constraint (and benefiting from it) each subscriber can run free.
I actually agree that the unification of features in Google and FB is somehow wrong but, as the author says, it’s hard to draw a line dispassionately. I feel less so (also wrong but perhaps less so) about Apple, as they aren’t a majority in any market except perhaps tablets, and they make relatively few acquisitions. But because the line is so hard to draw this logic could be wrong too.
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#4What we lack is ambitious law makers or sensible elite. Beyond that it is quite easy to force car makers to create modular cars with parts that fit on any car. We create standards all of the time. Each large nation could provide a team of experts and together they could draft a plan for a digital platform to run a government on. It might be able to run on mac, windows and linux, it might require some dedicated hardwa…
Can you think of any examples of the kind of effort you describe that didn't turn into a bureaucratic and extravagantly expensive mess?
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#5What we lack is ambitious law makers or sensible elite. Beyond that it is quite easy to force car makers to create modular cars with parts that fit on any car. We create standards all of the time. Each large nation could provide a team of experts and together they could draft a plan for a digital platform to run a government on. It might be able to run on mac, windows and linux, it might require some dedicated hardwa…
"Beyond that it is quite easy to force car makers to create modular cars with parts that fit on any car."
This is by far one of the most naive things I have read in a long, long time.
As for standards: https://xkcd.com/927/
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#6[deleted]
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#7What we lack is ambitious law makers or sensible elite. Beyond that it is quite easy to force car makers to create modular cars with parts that fit on any car. We create standards all of the time. Each large nation could provide a team of experts and together they could draft a plan for a digital platform to run a government on. It might be able to run on mac, windows and linux, it might require some dedicated hardwa…
Here we actually do have modular parts for cars (at least common consumables, like headlamp bulbs, are normed into a range of a handful of types which are then stocked in all service stations) Schrader valves also mean that stations only have one type of air filler (which here is also always the same: a small bottle with a tyre pressure gauge which can be carried between the refill station on the wall and your car wherever it may be)
As for ways to turn sour, I'm afraid you're underestimating humans. We can't have nice things. (Ok, we can, we at least get some nice things with something like the square root of time... but we can't have all the nice things we could have had if we weren't so prone to defection)
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#8It would be nice if cars actually could have user-configurable lights and such but the cost (financially, yes, but in structural change and reliability) aren’t worth it. Plus who cares any more about their car, at least enough to change any defaults? Even laptops get at most a sticker or to and that’s it. The phones and apps are infinitely customizable, the dimensions though is user generated content . Instagrams hav…
I find it strange when people who happily use Office* (because it's "easier" than, say, Arch Linux) also complain about enjoying the sausage of "big government".
* my metaphor is probably out of date. please replace by whatever the bundle-du-jour may be. Happily use Facebook?
Edit: consistent for me would be to consistently be pro- or anti-bundling. If you have an argument for being pro-software-feature-bundling but anti-state-service-bundling, please make it.
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#9This article misses the point in that these companies have taken _active_ anticompetitive actions to intentionally crush competition; and not simply out-compete it.
This is like Microsoft adding charts to Office, and then banning anyone from installing competing chart apps on Windows unless they pay a 30% tax. Or Ford voiding your entire warranty if you install aftermarket lights (this has been clearly ruled illegal).
The simple fact that these platforms started out with these anticompetitive restrictions (because they’re smart and play the long game) doesn’t change that these are active anticompetitive actions.
Saurik’s lawsuit highlighting Apple adding contractual restrictions, preventing App Store developers from publishing on Cydia, should be a slam dunk case.
--
A perfectly legitimate example of bundling is Sherlock/Finder: Apple added a feature, Sherlock wasn't limited in any way.
An illegitimate example is Screen Time: when Apple added the feature, they went on a delisting spree banning any other parental control apps.
Re: Platforms, bundling and kill zones
#10This article misses the point in that these companies have taken _active_ anticompetitive actions to intentionally crush competition; and not simply out-compete it. This is like Microsoft adding charts to Office, and then banning anyone from installing competing chart apps on Windows unless they pay a 30% tax. Or Ford voiding your entire warranty if you install aftermarket lights (this has been clearly ruled illegal)…
Thanks for the comment. My piece contains half a dozen specific examples of exactly the thing that you claim it misses, and most of the second-half explains why the things you think are okay are in fact complicated and subject to lawsuits.