I disagree with a lot of this list, it this particular item I think deserves so,e attention.
> #4: Give third-party developers equal access to APIs.
AirPods are great. Maybe a little… too great. It is actually impossible for a competitor to make a pair of earbuds that matches with the iPhone as easily as AirPods because that API is private. This strikes me as unfair and anticompetitive; no matter how much better a particular pair of earbuds might be, they cannot work as well as AirPods because Apple doesn’t want them to.
There’s a similar thing happening with the Apple Watch. Google Maps has abilities that Apple Maps doesn’t have, but Apple won’t let you use drop-in replacements for mapping. So instead of a safe bike ride, I’m heading the wrong direction on one-way streets or on freeways thanks to Apple Maps. This just sucks.
Some commenters here say “I don’t want third parties to have access to private information.” There’s a line somewhere, I don’t think anyone sane would demand access to _all_ APIs. But there are some clear examples where the platform maker is giving unfair advantage to their own accessories and services, this is dipping into antitrust territory.
One could argue, that you can create an experience as good as AirPods or even exceeding it. All you need to do is to develop a 'protocol' better than the horrible Bluetooth, make it an industry standard and convince companies to adopt it.
The only reason why Apple had to (and could at the same time) work on that aspect of headphones is because Bluetooth sucks and Apple is in a business of taking things that are widely used and suck, making them suck much less and selling them for a premium price.
Right, that’s sort of the “well if you don’t like Apple, you can always use Android” argument.
The problem with that is, let’s say there’s one thing on the Google-controlled platform you don’t like (let’s say privacy, to over-simplify)… “well if you don’t like Android, you can always use iOS”
Platform makers have a level of power over consumer choice that monopoly law isn’t equipped to address.
Mind, I've said nothing about operating systems or platforms nor have I said about abandoning them if you don't like one thing about them. I have said, that if you don't like something and if you do come up with a better standard/protocol and convince companies to use it, it will show up on all of them (just like Bluetooth is on macOS, BSD, Linux, Windows, iOS, Android, etc.).
Until better solutions are available all companies are free to and most likely will try to find better solutions themselves and to do it in a way that will give them an edge over competition. Some more than others, and Apple here is known for being in exactly that type of business.
> #4: Give third-party developers equal access to APIs.
AirPods are great. Maybe a little… too great. It is actually impossible for a competitor to make a pair of earbuds that matches with the iPhone as easily as AirPods because that API is private. This strikes me as unfair and anticompetitive; no matter how much better a particular pair of earbuds might be, they cannot work as well as AirPods because Apple doesn’t want them to.
There’s a similar thing happening with the Apple Watch. Google Maps has abilities that Apple Maps doesn’t have, but Apple won’t let you use drop-in replacements for mapping. So instead of a safe bike ride, I’m heading the wrong direction on one-way streets or on freeways thanks to Apple Maps. This just sucks.
Some commenters here say “I don’t want third parties to have access to private information.” There’s a line somewhere, I don’t think anyone sane would demand access to _all_ APIs. But there are some clear examples where the platform maker is giving unfair advantage to their own accessories and services, this is dipping into antitrust territory.