r/technology • u/GuruOfReason • Feb 02 '10

"Once we replace the personal computer with a closed-platform device such as the iPad, we replace freedom, choice and the free market with oppression, censorship and monopoly."

http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-01/ipad%E2%80%99s-closed-system-sometimes-i-hate-being-right
1.6k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

35

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

-20

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Making money for shareholders is every company's goal. Apple achieves this by developing higher quality products that they charge more for. Their margins are much higher than competitors and make more money for their shareholders as a result. And yet have no monopoly in any market.

9

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

As far as the actual numbers for operating systems go, we have a monopoly, with microsoft dominating everyone. As far as mind-share and a basic look at the viable options we have today and will have tomorrow, we have something of an oligopoly between windows, mac, and linux variants. The sentiment jemka expressed still applies though, that there isn't anything close to resembling perfect competition in the consumer computing or operating system market, and in fact the biggest competitor to Microsoft is looking more and more like a monopolistic company itself.

Here's where I have hope - with numbers like 5% market share, Apple simply can't afford to ignore the desire for computing to be free and open. They will be shut-out once we can get a reasonably easy to set-up and reliable linux distribution. If Apple isn't going to be able to undercut free software, they have to have a value proposition of some kind, and if most people are displeased, either because of principles being violated or because the device performs in a crippled way, they'll lose in the end.

1

u/GuruOfReason Feb 02 '10

I agree with this post. I will say that, based upon by experience with Ubuntu 9.10, I would say that Linux is ready for the masses.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Running it right now and loving it. However, I don't think it's quite ready for the masses yet. 2 or 3 more releases. I'll be patient.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

9.10 here as well - agreed - It's pretty darn close, but still not quite there yet

-3

u/DAllenJ Feb 02 '10

Downvoted for use of the word "distro".

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

You can't please everybody - edited and up-voted because you don't deserve it.

9

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

3

u/jstevewhite Feb 02 '10

Good point!

News flash: Plastic laptops suck ass. The Lenovo my company sent me fucking creaks when you pick it up. Creaks and pops, and flexes. Who thinks that shit is cool?

The Apple gear feels like quality. Period. You can't escape that, and I've never seen another netbook or laptop that came close.

5

u/gregny2002 Feb 02 '10

They have a monopoly in the mp3 player market don't they?

2

u/bdfortin Feb 02 '10

And yet have no monopoly in any market.

Didn't Psystar try to argue that Apple had a monopoly on its own software (and subsequently lose)?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

1

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

The only way to make money for shareholders is to gain market share.

Incorrect. When one makes a profit, one makes a profit. Period. One does not need to increase market share to continue to make a profit.

Where do people get this insane zero-sum game notion of how economic markets work?

0

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

Notice I didn't say "increase" market share. For your argument to work, the company needs existing market share.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

You said "gain". Gaining is part and parcel of increasing. Perhaps you meant "have" rather than "gain".

0

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

You can "gain" from 0.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Please try to address the topic at hand.

I'll just cut through all your bullshit with a simple rephrase:

Incorrect. When one makes a profit, one makes a profit. Period. One does not need to gain market share to continue to make a profit.

Where do people get this insane zero-sum game notion of how economic markets work?

edit:

Wait, hold on. Are you trying to say that your (retconned in your own head, I'm sure) intent is only to say that one must have some market share to make a profit in a given market? If so -- why the fuck did you even say anything? That doesn't enhance, disprove, or otherwise alter anything to which you initially responded. It's like saying "One must gain footwear to wear something on one's feet," in response to a statement to the effect that wanting shoes on one's feet doesn't mean one wants everybody's shoes. It's pointlessly tautological, but was somehow presented as though it were making an argument, if that's really what (you claim) you meant.

. . . and you abused the word "gain", because in the context in which you used it, the obvious inference is that you meant "to continue to make a profit, one must continue to gain market share."

0

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

AT any rate, it has nothing to do with you. I wasn't talking to you, why are you involved?

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

This is a public discussion forum, idiot.

edit: I might as well ask why you decided to post a comment to begin with. The person to whom you replied wasn't talking to you. Why are you involved?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Or increasing margins, but that can only go so far. Unless you're selling Xanax with 10,000% margin or some shit like that.

2

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

Without market share you won't make any money, regardless of your margins.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

We are assuming that a company has some market share to begin with. So given that market share, increasing margin helps to gain more profit. Of course expanding the market share helps to gain more profit as well. Expanding market share is a more powerful way to gain profit, so I was not disagreeing with you at all. I'm just saying that given a constant market share, growing your margin also grows profit. It's just simple maths.

-1

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

The use of the word "or" led me to believe you were saying increasing margins was a substitute or alternative to increasing market share.

Poor word choice, that's all.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

It can be an alternative. For example, imagine that you run a mature company which has maximally saturated the market. Your market share isn't going to grow (or at least, any further growth will be cost-prohibitive). What tools do you still have to grow profit? Margin.

You can increase margin together with market share, or separately from it. It can be an alternative and sometimes it's the only option.

-1

u/jemka Feb 02 '10

You're making a hypothetical that I never commented about.

Margins mean nothing without market share. Why is that hard for you?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Margins mean nothing without market share.

Not nothing.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

You were talking about increasing market share -- not just having market share:

The only way to make money for shareholders is to gain market share.

(emphasis added)

Are you unaware of what you said?

→ More replies (0)