Hacker News Reader

Comment by softwaredoug | Hacker News Reader

The problem with antitrust enforcement w/ Big Tech will be users actually want vertical integration in a lot of contexts. And this vertical integration aligns consumers with the large tech companies in a way that hasn't been true with previous antitrust cases.

Yes we could have more open standards, but the cartesian product of every integration eventually doesn't scale. What Microsoft did with Windows in this regard in the PC ecosystem is actually quite phenomenal

But I know my Airpods will integrate seamlessly with my iPhone, which integrates seamlessly with my Apple Watch, etc in a way that's clearly very intentional, works, and saves endless headaches. I also know that there's entire companies going out of business because a company like Apple will gobble up prominent accessory markets.

View on HN

I think you're conflating "able to do" vertical integration with "must do" there, fwiw.

If you want to use the apple watch you must have an iphone, which somehow seems worse: https://www.imore.com/can-you-use-your-apple-watch-your-andr...

It doesn't seem worse to me. Apple is free to make and sell accessories for its own hardware products. It would be a problem if Apple sold its smart watch while also breaking iPhone's compatibility with third party smart watches.

It's also a problem that Apple sells its own phones while breaking the Apple Watch's compatibility with other phones.

They never did that. “Breaking” implies it was ever there to begin with.

The result is exactly the same.

Whether it is or not, it’s fundamentally useful to use accurate language or people will dismiss your underlying point because of the dishonest premise.

It's fundamentally useless to nitpick like that and accuse someone of dishonesty for glancing over irrelevant details.

Critically, if I want to use a smartwatch with an iPhone, I’m not limited to the Apple Watch.

But the analogy here is that if you buy Apple Watch, it is reasonable that it is tied tk iPhone.

just like you are buying oculus quest knowing that it is tied to FB

I don't own any Apple products personally but I would say that the difference is that an Apple Watch is specifically sold as an accessory to your iPhone. You wouldn't, for example, buy an X-Box controller and expect it to work with a Playstation.

On the other hand, the Oculus is not an accessory to Facebook it is a platform for playing games.

People had no problem with tying their Oculus to an account, to manage their purchases, etc.., but people do have a problem with being forced to have it tied to a social media account.

I would say the difference here is that when we create a social media account we know, to a degree, that we are making a Faustian pact to have our data harvested in exchange for free services. But the Oculus is actually purchased with real money so we don't expect to have our privacy violated so the company can make even more money off us by harvesting our personal data.

There are legitimate and practical reasons for tying an Apple Watch (hardware) to an iPhone (hardware).

You can also use both without an Apple account.

As an analogy, this is like Geico insurance requiring you to sign up for a United MileagePlus account because Berkshire Hathway owns both (hypothetically).

Critically, as an Apple Watch owner, if I want to buy a different phone I will lose access to my watch. Which is the situation I’m actually in right now. I hope it’s clear why this is anticompetitive.

The watch has been a disappointment anyway, so once this phone craps out they are both gone.

Vertical integration already existed before they decided to force people to log in. You could already log in using your Facebook account. I just don't want to be forced to do so.

Don't buy one?

I bought one before facebook made the announcement. But thanks for the flippant comment.

So a facebook account isn't required

For now

https://twitter.com/oculus/status/1295769342034849792 https://www.oculus.com/blog/a-single-way-to-log-into-oculus-...

> After January 1, 2023, we will end support for Oculus accounts. If you choose not to merge your accounts at that time, you can continue using your device, but full functionality will require a Facebook account. We will take steps to allow you to keep using content you have purchased, though we expect some games and apps may no longer work. This could be because they include features that require a Facebook account or because a developer has chosen to no longer support the app or game you purchased.

There is a two year grace period, after which everyone will be required to use a facebook account or have the hardware they own retroactively handicapped.

Are you going to keep making uninformed comments? They are going to eventually force owners of oculus devices purchased before this policy to log in.

They are retroactively forcing people to do so.

I worked at a company many years ago and one of my coworkers used to work at microsoft.

we were talking about some technical thing and I said - Yeah, microsoft broke <some feature> but they don't know what every company is doing and you get a young programmer in there and he just has to get somethign done...

My friend said - don't be naive. microsoft has meetings... How can we own this? and they devise strategies.

I think the strategy is seamless integration for us AND screwed up standards that make it hard for others to seamlessly integrate. Maybe it's a proprietary standard, maybe it's a "security" certificate, maybe it's a "quality gate", maybe it's dark patterns, maybe it's a hard login requirement (that's harder with GDPR).

You should read the halloween documents.

The end result is -- you the customer will get fewer, more expensive, less private choices in the end.

How do you have any clue what users want? How are you confident that what you value is what others value? I suspect most people are informed what they want via commercials and would probably be open to other ways of integrating electronics and services than the ones beneficial to the few players we all know and use.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com