While the antitrust spotlight has long been pointed at Google, the company that really has to watch its step is Apple. Beginning in the 1980s, Apple’s Steve Jobs left behind Apple’s original open design and began to champion a “closed”—or as the firm prefers, an “integrated”—approach to computing and entertainment delivery. This fact is familiar to any Apple user. Apple’s products are designed to work well with humans, other Apple stuff, and, at a distant third, other companies. “Foreign attachments” to the Apple system are sometimes accepted, but never quite loved.
Contrary to what devoted “openists” might suggest, there are some advantages to Apple’s approach. Products engineered to work together often work better, if only because the firm’s engineers have more information. An Apple engineer building an application for the iPhone knows much more than someone programming an App for all the phones Android runs on. Moreover, to its credit, Apple isn’t an integration purist, like AT&T in the 1950s. Apple runs standard protocols like WiFi, allows outside Apps on the iPhone, and hasn’t tried to reinvent the World Wide Web. You might say that a clever, nuanced balancing of open and closed is Apple’s real secret.
Post originale: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/1nESdsmuwxo/
Both Amazon and Barnes & Noble have downplayed actual e-reader device sales numbers, instead crowing about the number of e-books sold in the past year. This is an important distinction because it shows us a few things about the Nook/Kindle audience. First, e-readers (dedicated e-readers, mind you, not tablets) are popular with heavy readers and, as a corollary, most e-reader owners buy a lot of books. However, the real value has been in the e-book format itself, as the popularity of the Kindle and Nook e-book stores can attest. Since the first e-readers trickled out of Sony in about 2006, the general audience has complained about the lack of a color option and their interest has been consistently drawn to tablets like the 