Why I Blog about Apple

It has become obvious to me, that people quite easily misunderstand my posts about Apple. They are not really about technology. Anything related to technology is really just supporting data. They are about two things.

The first is the iPod+iTunes monopoly, and the long-term negative effects that will result from supporting a closed system monopoly.

I am trying to convince people that we should be asking Apple to license FairPlay. This one is not about Apple vs. Microsoft. In fact if Apple did follow my advice and license FairPlay, it would be a sure fire kill shot for WMA. Why would any store or device prefer the relatively unused WMA over FairPlay? Simply put, they would not. Without the option to do this they settle for WMA.

In the long term, I think Apple will lose, not because WMA or Microsoft is better, but because the combination of the entire industry is better than Apple alone. By all appearances Apple will not realize this mistake until it is too late, and all of their potential partners are firmly bound to WMA and Microsoft. By being open with WMA licensing, Microsoft is slowly binding the entire industry (other than Apple) to their format, much as was done with MS-DOS and Windows.

I do not consider this process evil. In fact, the process itself is beneficial. The binding is a negative side effect, but the overall benefits of open licensing outweigh that side effect. I think it makes sense to try to mitigate this binding through intelligent regulation, but that is another topic for another day.

The second is about the Apple community’s assumption that the world would be better off with Apple having 80% OS market share, rather than Microsoft.

I really should not care much about this, considering that Apple’s basic business strategy is flawed in a way that will prevent them from ever having 80% OS market share. Unlike portable digital music, Apple does not have the opportunity any longer to grab market share in an emerging market. The OS market is far too mature for that to occur.

Despite this, I hear this argument so often that it does tend to get under my skin in a way that I feel a palpable need to refute it. I am not suggesting that Apple users need to stop using their Macs. If you like it, use it. There are some benefits to OSX.

However, be honest with yourselves and admit that most of those benefits derive from elements that would either disappear or be very negative if Apple had 80% market share, rather than 3%. Security is one example, and lack of conflicts with closed system hardware is another.

Also, be honest with yourself and admit that your biggest gripes come from these elements as well. A closed system with 3% market share will not have the same amount of compatibility with hardware or software, as the 80% system that is openly licensed.

If you really want to advocate a better dominant operating system, I suggest you choose one that is open. The Linux group, or better, BSD group, have a better argument for this then Apple does, because they are open. However, I think you do get a better user-experience through Apple than through Linux/BSD. Just because Apple is not Microsoft, does not make them Linux. Also, since I am sure this will come up, just because Apple uses BSD, does not make them BSD. OSX is as free as a man in Alcatraz, and as open as the ground beneath your feet.

I will however try to refrain in the future, as I think I have made my point in as clear as manner as I can manage.