zlacker

>>kotaKa+(OP)
I never really got into "phone" progrmaming, always waiting for the shenanigans to die down. But somehow the shanigans have gotten worse and for a significant chunk of the world population, the phone is the only computation device they have at all.

>>Kim_Br+ZD
I never got into it because I was convinced developers would refuse to give up control over distribution when Apple started doing it. I wish I was right, but here we are.

>>donmcr+XE
Developers want a stable, secure platform where they can reach customers that trust the platform and are willing to transact. Everything is downstream of that, including any philosophy around control.

Developers are businesses and the economics need to work. For that, safety and security is much more important than openness.

>>askafr+a81
Oh! Classic Survivorship bias. You're only looking at the devs who went into business in the phone ecosystem in the first place. I'm thinking that they're there despite the barriers to entry ('shenanigans'), and the ones you encounter happen to be those who happen to place a higher value on 'other values'. As the ecosystem gets locked down more, this effect becomes stronger.

Meanwhile, you're not looking at those who left, or those who decided to never enter a broken market dominated by players convicted of monopolistic practices.

This seems much more intuitive than a hypothesis where somehow people would prefer to enter a closed market over a fair and open market with no barriers to entry.

Remember, monopolists succeed because they are distorting the market, not because they are in fact the most efficient competitor.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias