Anyone remembers the "browser war" era? For those who don't, Microsoft began dominating the internet browser landscape when they added IE to Windows 98, and by keeping all version of Internet Explorer free for Windows users.
Since IE was generally regarded inferior to many other browsers, plus because nobody likes the big steamrolling corporations, Microsoft was branded as "evil" (though my personal conclusion at the time was that 98% of the people claiming to hate MS had no technical insight to make such claims).
Let me get this in bold. MS is/was bashed for including a browser in their OS by default. Even the EU decided that was an unfair move, demanding a version of Windows to be released w/o Media Player and Internet Explorer over here.
What Microsoft never did was banning browsers (and for that matter, media players, e-mail clients, text editors, etc.) from Windows. Even if their solution was always there, included for free, their platform was opened for third party companies to develop and introduce whatever applications they wanted to.
With the iPhone, Apple took the next step Microsoft never dared to do: lock out competition by claiming they've already provided software that does the same as Google's Latitude and Voice.
Which they didn't, as - technically - both applications are way more advanced. Latitude ties in with Maps, features a rich social networking possibility, and is a great way to share your whereabouts with anyone, regardless of the OS and platform they use. Voice is much more than another phone call application, as I've described below, it allows users to handle multiple phones by providing a unified call number and advanced call forwarding settings, and ports your voice mail and contact list to the online cloud, making both available from anywhere.
Apple does not come close to matching the raw usefulness of these applications. Your default iPhone software can make calls, and can show your location.
As long as Safari does not beat Firefox as a browser, and it doesn't, Firefox too should be allowed on your iPhone. Why? Because it's better. It is there? Yes.
As long as a Mac's text editor does not beat Microsoft Word (and Excel, and PowerPoint, and Outlook), MS Office should be allowed on Macs. Why? Because it's better. Is it there? Yes.
As long as your options are inferior, you need to allow third parties to offer better solutions. Otherwise people will not invest in your platform, however shiny it looks, if it cannot also perform - not twice. A smart phone is a tool, first and foremost.
Google solutions are a generation ahead of Apple. They are connecting the dots right now Apple is still painting one by one only. Banning them from the iPhone will only achieve one thing - decrease the usability of the tool. (Not a smart thing to do when every other competitor already offers cheaper solutions.)
Microsoft was branded evil a decade ago for offering inferior, but free alternatives. Apple too is offering inferior, but free alternatives, but as that apparently is not evil anymore, they also began directly banning competition from their platform.
They have lost such a fight against Microsoft in 1997, with Office. Is 2009 really the time to pick one against Google?
No comments:
Post a Comment