Ecosystem battles: how technological empires can start a war to control the digital life of users
Food for the brain: translated a good article The Verge (Dieter Bohn @ November 20, 2012):
First strike: how techs superpowers could start an ecosystem war.
Wargames, your digital life
This is a war for the space between ecosystems in which companies struggle to keep users on their territory and make small but strategically important attacks on the periphery of other players. The ecosystem war between Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, with a limited number of asymmetric vulnerabilities, has become largely a battle of attrition. With a few exceptions, these structures are busy with standard strategies such as lock-in, and made several limited attacks on each other’s territory. However, the relatively “cool” nature of war should not be misleading because of the possibility of more aggressive tactics in the future.
In the arsenal of both large and small players there are tools that have not yet been involved - in most cases for good reasons, given the potential for a “retaliatory strike” and attendant losses. In any case, there are scenarios in which the cold war of ecosystems can turn into something more aggressive. In this review, we look at some strategic assets and how they can be used as weapons.
Although it is obvious that products such as Office, Xbox, and, of course, Windows, are much larger than Skype, it is still a springboard on other platforms. Being available on Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, various set-top boxes, and even legacy systems like Symbian and webOS, Skype does have the potential to become the center not only of the Microsoft ecosystem, but of the Internet as a whole.
')
If Microsoft suddenly decides that Skype will be best only on its own products, this will be a significant change in strategy, and can send tsunami waves across the ocean of the IT industry. Although, in the short term, such a move could lead to a certain movement towards Microsoft products, it is much more likely that users will continue to make purchasing decisions, guided by other factors, and after that they will struggle with the lack of Skype. Microsoft's weak position in the field of smartphones will only push for the rejection of Skype as the main means of communication, if it is tightly tied to Microsoft.
We believe that the blockade of Skype will be a disadvantageous step that will limit its wide (and still growing) popularity as a means of communication. The key advantage of Skype in comparison with other VOIP-services is not so much a technological advantage, as the widespread availability. The blockade of Skype will lead to a decrease in the prevalence and intensification of the search for cross-platform alternatives. In the event of such a development, it is expected that the VOIP and messaging market will become much more fragmented.
For the dominant alternative to appear, some time will pass — perhaps years — and the struggle will be very fierce. The number of interested players who may try to take the place of Skype is striking: large startups like Google and Apple, and even mobile network operators, are likely to all rush into battle, firing right and left.
Fortunately, for now, after the completion of the purchase of Skype in October 2011, Microsoft has not made it clear that it intends to cancel (or limit) access to the service on other platforms. But maybe she has other tactics in stock. By providing the best quality of its products on the Windows platform and not really trying to achieve the same on other platforms, Microsoft could potentially incline users to switch to Windows products. Skype is very deeply integrated into Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8, and will soon replace Windows Live Messenger , thus already giving a much better “user experience” compared to counterparts for iOS and Mac.
One of the key benefits of the Microsoft ecosystem is the Microsoft Office suite of office applications, currently only available on Windows and Mac. As can be seen from the launch of the Surface tablet and the promotion of Windows Phone 8, access to the “real” version of Office, which could read and edit documents in its native format and 100%, is a significant advantage for the company.
But we know that the company has been preparing Office versions for iOS and Android for some time, with a possible release sometime in 2013. Microsoft personally confirmed this information, emphasizing that "Office will work on Windows Phone, iOS and Android." Although there are now third-party programs, the original application will quickly become dominant. Microsoft has released several versions of Office for Mac, but at some point the Mac versions cannot catch up with the development of their Windows counterparts.
Today, Office is not just Word, Excel, and Powerpoint. Microsoft cloud products like SkyDrive and Sharepoint provide advanced communication tools that can take the place of other cloud storages like Dropbox or iCloud from other platforms. If Microsoft pushes Office onto competitor platforms, for users it can increase the attractiveness of the Microsoft ecosystem.
Microsoft's well-known laconism about the release of official versions of Office for iOS and Android signals that Microsoft is risking launching such a product in 2013. Obviously, the basis of doubt lies in the realm of Office and Windows. Of course, Microsoft wants to make sure that most users choose the full bundle of Windows + Office solutions, so releasing full-featured office products for other platforms will weaken the position of Windows.
Microsoft has tried to make some products for other platforms, but not Office. If we assume that losses from non-purchased Windows and Windows Phone will be minimized, the strategy may give the company certain advantages. In the first place, obviously, it will be additional revenue from those who would otherwise spend money on competing office solutions - money that Microsoft practically left on the table. Such solutions — including Apple’s own office suite, QuickOffice, and others — are likely to become less popular when faced with direct competition with the Microsoft office offer.
The effect of novelty may also work. Offering a product that works well on iOS but is better on Windows can generate a number of defectors. Whether Microsoft can win, balancing between the protection of Windows and the increase in revenue from Office - will be visible in 2013.
Quiet and without fanfare, Microsoft Exchange + ActiveSync has become the de facto standard for push email on smartphones. RIM had an early advantage in the business of push email, but Microsoft’s solution quickly took up this niche and now most of the corporations use it to deliver email. mail to smartphones. Even RIM uses ActiveSync as part of its closed mail infrastructure. Although most of the mail services for end users, such as Yahoo and home Internet network operators, are languishing in the POP and IMAP world, ActiveSync still dominates significantly.
Despite this, the ActiveSync position may be vulnerable. Google could disable syncing with Exchange via ActiveSync for its Gmail mail. Moreover, Google’s sync support page for iOS for iOS no longer contains a direct link to instructions for setting up Exchange for Gmail . Similarly, it sends iOS users to CalDAV to sync calendars and CardDAV to sync contacts. Exchange ActiveSync support is still working for all regular Google Apps users, but Google can work on measures that will reduce ActiveSync usage among smartphone users.
Although Google may preserve the interoperability of native clients on platforms other than Android, their functionality may be reduced in the future. Exchange configuration is fairly unified and understandable when compared to more compliant solutions that Google is currently promoting, and which - theoretically - can lead to an increase in the market’s flatness - Google users will have a greater pull on Android, iOS users, on Apple solutions, Outlook users, on solutions Windows Phone, etc.
From the point of view of Microsoft, the ActiveSync infrastructure (theoretically) gives the company a significant advantage, but in reality, it is doubtful that Microsoft will seriously decide to shake things up. Microsoft is unlikely to risk the deep roots with which it has grown into the corporate sector in order to restrict access to ActiveSync on other platforms. Sometime in the future, if Windows Phone 8 suddenly starts to gain momentum - compared to other devices, plans may change, for Windows Phone 8, the company offers more advanced device management tools for corporations.
ActiveSync has recently been one of the arguments for end users in favor of choosing a Microsoft device. If someone from Google or Microsoft takes steps to counteract its prevalence, we can expect stronger linking of users to the ecosystem.
RIM, having dominated BlackBerry smartphones not so long ago, is working on launching a new OS to prevent an accelerated fall into the abyss . However, the company not only put on BlackBerry 10. Last April, after co-CEO Jim Balsillie retired from RIM, it was rumored that the director was planning a " radical revival " of the company, which included the release of BlackBerry Messenger for other platforms.
BBM is one of the most "catchy" parts of the RIM ecosystem, because It combines free instant messages and the like of a social network, and all this is on a device that has recently attracted both top managers and teenagers. The company is under attack from other instant messengers, especially iMessage and WhatsApp, as well as Facebook and Twitter from social networks. Perhaps BBM will become extinct, and very soon. For example, Facebook is already developing exactly the same social application with the ability to send instant messages (and does not require entering a PIN) as BBM, with which RIM once made a pioneer.
Maybe RIM would not have been in such a situation if it had implemented Balsillie’s plan to release a service for other platforms, which was rumored about, but the CEO Thorsten Heins clearly thought that this would reduce the chances of BB10. Heins did not refuse the possibility of such a step in the future, but this is unlikely to happen now.
If such a plan were implemented earlier, it is very likely that RIM would capture the message market, and moreover. Previously, BBM had a solid base of communicating users, including large fish from the corporate sector - but both of them are now in decline. If RIM plans to make BBM cross-platform, the most likely scenario would be to spread BB10 as early as possible. There are technical difficulties: for the success of cross-platform BBM, it must be reliable, fast, and the desired product on iOS, Android, and BlackBerry. Not an easy task for a company that has no experience creating applications for other platforms, not to mention the difficulties of competing with other instant messaging services.
Cross-platform BBM by the time of its appearance is unlikely to be able to significantly press competitors, and BlackBerry 10 will continue to lose users. Of course, this will depend, among other things, on the success of its launch events. If BB10 doesn’t lose users, Balsillie’s plan to turn RIM into a service provider company will be available from the dusty shelf.
As recently reported, Facebook is aggressively trying to infiltrate the ecosystem of iOS and Android applications . If the company succeeds, it will be able to get even more information about users than Apple and Google. The complex interactions between Facebook, other ecosystem giants, users, and the open Internet will make attempts to uproot the roots of the platform of the ubiquitous Facebook super-challenging.
From the point of view of Facebook, in order to better cement your positions on the Internet, you will need to attract more, as much content as possible into your ecosystem. They may even find a way to pull money from Google and Apple, in case they decide to add mobile advertising to their existing set of authorization products using login and social services.
For Apple, Google, Microsoft, and others, Facebook’s potential to embed in their own applications (as has already been done with most of the Internet) means a big problem. Both Apple and Microsoft have made Facebook part of their operating systems, and it is already difficult to root them out. Fortunately, the level of integration is still not very high, but we should expect increased tacit talks about how the data will be used together (and in what proportion).
At the moment, the business models of Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft do not overlap much, but this is definitely not the case with Google. In general, Google+ is the answer to the ever-increasing domination of Facebook in the field of both the Internet and services. No one is surprised that Android does not offer out-of-the-box integration with Facebook (although its openness means that Facebook can integrate there itself as an application).
Among all the battlefields between Facebook and Google, identification services deserve special attention. Facebook shows that in order to reveal their identity, users are not against providing much more information than a simple profile. After all, the Timeline is much more than a cute-looking post history; This is a demonstration to the public that Facebook may know about you as much as Google. What threatens Google’s advertising business, but also gives Facebook unique opportunities for any business that Facebook can decide to create.
It is very difficult to suggest the next move on Facebook, because its prevalence is ubiquitous. Since Facebook is everywhere, he can attack — or be attacked — anywhere.
iTunes is a central part of the efforts of the Apple ecosystem to spread its influence beyond the Mac. iTunes began its life as a music management application, gradually becoming the centerpiece of Apple’s original concept called the digital hub, which tied the iPod to a computer. As time went on, the company added the purchase of music, movies, TV shows, as well as controls for iOS devices (such as the iPhone and iPad).
iTunes for Windows was released in 2003, and after 4 years, Steve Jobs said it was "like giving someone a glass of water with ice in hell." Then it was hyperbole, but now the program has become creaky, albeit a completely controlled warship. For millions of iPhone users, it is a critical link between their smartphone and computer.
No doubt, the Apple ecosystem is still heavily dependent on iTunes, and its fame is positive for most. Although Apple has released iCloud services, which can replace most of the features of iTunes, it will certainly take some time.
ITunes needs changes , as well as Microsoft’s competing product, Spotify, as well as others offering more attractive subscription music and music. Rumors are not dawning that Apple is going to do the same with iTunes , but it is unclear why it does not. A very reasonable assumption is that iTunes generates such sales that music labels are afraid to make strong gestures.
If the moment of change comes, you will need to ask a question - how strong does Apple give a competitive advantage to iTunes? After all, it is used by many, not only iPhone and iPad users. In one of the possible options, Apple can preserve the priority of application functions on both Windows and Mac, perhaps (as rumors are circulating) by adding broadcast services only on Mac and iOS, but not iTunes. Most likely, the Mac will be considered as a real alternative for a regular home Windows user, and may drag a number of users.
Another very real possibility is that Apple will not create a tile version of iTunes. Although iTunes will probably work on Windows 8 in desktop mode, users of Windows RT (and owners of the current Surface tablet model) will remain floating overboard. Since users will be forced to return to the desktop for iTunes, it is unclear whether users will blame Microsoft or Apple for the lack of a new interface. If Windows RT gets distributed as the primary OS, this situation will only get worse. In any case, you need to expect that iPhone users will receive from their computers on Windows 8 a completely different experience than the one they are used to now.
And finally, consider the battle that is taking place before our eyes. In short, Twitter decided to restrict Twitter to customers who “duplicate Twitter’s user experience.” Even though many developers and users now feel as if they had been burned by a flaming radioactive wave, it’s hardly surprising. If you look at the full story about the Twitter API , you can see increased stress from transparent hints in January to almost threats in July and a new developer guide in August . Twitter's new business is Twitter , a walled garden that looks more like Facebook than open internet.
The question is whether an ambush with an API (tactical attack on non-native customers) will allow the company to strengthen its position as a new media, or the attendant damage from bad PR and unimplemented users will damage the company as a whole, and will open the way for competitors. The fact that non-native customers and their developers greatly helped Twitter to innovate makes the problem even bigger.
New rules for Twitter have already led to serious problems. The best of Twitter clients for Windows 8, Tweetro, was “crippled” by a new user limit , while others, such as Tweetbot, were forced to set high prices to keep only the most profitable users. The developers of ordinary non-native Twitter clients, while on a territory of a draw, are trying to survive, despite the strict limitations of Twitter on the maximum number of users they can have. They were “born to die,” and there is no guarantee that even the small space in which they live will not disappear in the near future.
A radioactive contamination zone populated by non-native clients and users who liked them may not be so large, at least in comparison to the growing Twitter area. The record numbers of the presidential elections and the relatively successful (albeit overshadowed by a small scandal ) partnership with NBC show that the Twitter territory is now much larger than before. The most common alternative now, App.net, doesn't even come close to the size of Twitter, and most users use Twitter too.
As a result of this, Twitter has reserved space only for non-native clients who provide information to Twitter, but at the moment there are not a large number of applications noticed. Although B2B applications like Klout can be successful on their own, they are hardly sufficiently developed and developed to make up a decent ecosystem. Twitter has a good chance of maintaining dominance, except that a radioactive crater on the site of the former capital will remain forever.
Illustration by James Chae
Original: www.theverge.com/2012/11/20/3669590/ecosystem-microsoft-apple-google-facebook-cold-war
in this article I was surprised at how Activesync is praised, and nothing is said about Gmail
(the share of which, along with Google Apps, is constantly growing).
ps a new question on Habré - is it possible to include pictures from the original article in the translation? Or is it moveton?
First strike: how techs superpowers could start an ecosystem war.
Wargames, your digital life
We are at the epicenter of the Cold War between the largest companies in the IT industry.
This is a war for the space between ecosystems in which companies struggle to keep users on their territory and make small but strategically important attacks on the periphery of other players. The ecosystem war between Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, with a limited number of asymmetric vulnerabilities, has become largely a battle of attrition. With a few exceptions, these structures are busy with standard strategies such as lock-in, and made several limited attacks on each other’s territory. However, the relatively “cool” nature of war should not be misleading because of the possibility of more aggressive tactics in the future.
In the arsenal of both large and small players there are tools that have not yet been involved - in most cases for good reasons, given the potential for a “retaliatory strike” and attendant losses. In any case, there are scenarios in which the cold war of ecosystems can turn into something more aggressive. In this review, we look at some strategic assets and how they can be used as weapons.
Skype blockade
Skype is one of the most underrated guns in the Microsoft arsenal.
Although it is obvious that products such as Office, Xbox, and, of course, Windows, are much larger than Skype, it is still a springboard on other platforms. Being available on Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, various set-top boxes, and even legacy systems like Symbian and webOS, Skype does have the potential to become the center not only of the Microsoft ecosystem, but of the Internet as a whole.
')
If Microsoft suddenly decides that Skype will be best only on its own products, this will be a significant change in strategy, and can send tsunami waves across the ocean of the IT industry. Although, in the short term, such a move could lead to a certain movement towards Microsoft products, it is much more likely that users will continue to make purchasing decisions, guided by other factors, and after that they will struggle with the lack of Skype. Microsoft's weak position in the field of smartphones will only push for the rejection of Skype as the main means of communication, if it is tightly tied to Microsoft.
We believe that the blockade of Skype will be a disadvantageous step that will limit its wide (and still growing) popularity as a means of communication. The key advantage of Skype in comparison with other VOIP-services is not so much a technological advantage, as the widespread availability. The blockade of Skype will lead to a decrease in the prevalence and intensification of the search for cross-platform alternatives. In the event of such a development, it is expected that the VOIP and messaging market will become much more fragmented.
For the dominant alternative to appear, some time will pass — perhaps years — and the struggle will be very fierce. The number of interested players who may try to take the place of Skype is striking: large startups like Google and Apple, and even mobile network operators, are likely to all rush into battle, firing right and left.
Fortunately, for now, after the completion of the purchase of Skype in October 2011, Microsoft has not made it clear that it intends to cancel (or limit) access to the service on other platforms. But maybe she has other tactics in stock. By providing the best quality of its products on the Windows platform and not really trying to achieve the same on other platforms, Microsoft could potentially incline users to switch to Windows products. Skype is very deeply integrated into Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8, and will soon replace Windows Live Messenger , thus already giving a much better “user experience” compared to counterparts for iOS and Mac.
Office Excellence
To release a fully functional version of Office for other platforms would be a blow to Microsoft’s Windows strategy.
One of the key benefits of the Microsoft ecosystem is the Microsoft Office suite of office applications, currently only available on Windows and Mac. As can be seen from the launch of the Surface tablet and the promotion of Windows Phone 8, access to the “real” version of Office, which could read and edit documents in its native format and 100%, is a significant advantage for the company.
But we know that the company has been preparing Office versions for iOS and Android for some time, with a possible release sometime in 2013. Microsoft personally confirmed this information, emphasizing that "Office will work on Windows Phone, iOS and Android." Although there are now third-party programs, the original application will quickly become dominant. Microsoft has released several versions of Office for Mac, but at some point the Mac versions cannot catch up with the development of their Windows counterparts.
Today, Office is not just Word, Excel, and Powerpoint. Microsoft cloud products like SkyDrive and Sharepoint provide advanced communication tools that can take the place of other cloud storages like Dropbox or iCloud from other platforms. If Microsoft pushes Office onto competitor platforms, for users it can increase the attractiveness of the Microsoft ecosystem.
Microsoft's well-known laconism about the release of official versions of Office for iOS and Android signals that Microsoft is risking launching such a product in 2013. Obviously, the basis of doubt lies in the realm of Office and Windows. Of course, Microsoft wants to make sure that most users choose the full bundle of Windows + Office solutions, so releasing full-featured office products for other platforms will weaken the position of Windows.
Microsoft has tried to make some products for other platforms, but not Office. If we assume that losses from non-purchased Windows and Windows Phone will be minimized, the strategy may give the company certain advantages. In the first place, obviously, it will be additional revenue from those who would otherwise spend money on competing office solutions - money that Microsoft practically left on the table. Such solutions — including Apple’s own office suite, QuickOffice, and others — are likely to become less popular when faced with direct competition with the Microsoft office offer.
The effect of novelty may also work. Offering a product that works well on iOS but is better on Windows can generate a number of defectors. Whether Microsoft can win, balancing between the protection of Windows and the increase in revenue from Office - will be visible in 2013.
Excommunication from ActiveSync
The deep and underlying infrastructure of ActiveSync theoretically gives Microsoft a significant advantage
Quiet and without fanfare, Microsoft Exchange + ActiveSync has become the de facto standard for push email on smartphones. RIM had an early advantage in the business of push email, but Microsoft’s solution quickly took up this niche and now most of the corporations use it to deliver email. mail to smartphones. Even RIM uses ActiveSync as part of its closed mail infrastructure. Although most of the mail services for end users, such as Yahoo and home Internet network operators, are languishing in the POP and IMAP world, ActiveSync still dominates significantly.
Despite this, the ActiveSync position may be vulnerable. Google could disable syncing with Exchange via ActiveSync for its Gmail mail. Moreover, Google’s sync support page for iOS for iOS no longer contains a direct link to instructions for setting up Exchange for Gmail . Similarly, it sends iOS users to CalDAV to sync calendars and CardDAV to sync contacts. Exchange ActiveSync support is still working for all regular Google Apps users, but Google can work on measures that will reduce ActiveSync usage among smartphone users.
Although Google may preserve the interoperability of native clients on platforms other than Android, their functionality may be reduced in the future. Exchange configuration is fairly unified and understandable when compared to more compliant solutions that Google is currently promoting, and which - theoretically - can lead to an increase in the market’s flatness - Google users will have a greater pull on Android, iOS users, on Apple solutions, Outlook users, on solutions Windows Phone, etc.
From the point of view of Microsoft, the ActiveSync infrastructure (theoretically) gives the company a significant advantage, but in reality, it is doubtful that Microsoft will seriously decide to shake things up. Microsoft is unlikely to risk the deep roots with which it has grown into the corporate sector in order to restrict access to ActiveSync on other platforms. Sometime in the future, if Windows Phone 8 suddenly starts to gain momentum - compared to other devices, plans may change, for Windows Phone 8, the company offers more advanced device management tools for corporations.
ActiveSync has recently been one of the arguments for end users in favor of choosing a Microsoft device. If someone from Google or Microsoft takes steps to counteract its prevalence, we can expect stronger linking of users to the ecosystem.
Blackberry Messenger Attack
BlackBerry Messenger may become extinct, and very soon
RIM, having dominated BlackBerry smartphones not so long ago, is working on launching a new OS to prevent an accelerated fall into the abyss . However, the company not only put on BlackBerry 10. Last April, after co-CEO Jim Balsillie retired from RIM, it was rumored that the director was planning a " radical revival " of the company, which included the release of BlackBerry Messenger for other platforms.
BBM is one of the most "catchy" parts of the RIM ecosystem, because It combines free instant messages and the like of a social network, and all this is on a device that has recently attracted both top managers and teenagers. The company is under attack from other instant messengers, especially iMessage and WhatsApp, as well as Facebook and Twitter from social networks. Perhaps BBM will become extinct, and very soon. For example, Facebook is already developing exactly the same social application with the ability to send instant messages (and does not require entering a PIN) as BBM, with which RIM once made a pioneer.
Maybe RIM would not have been in such a situation if it had implemented Balsillie’s plan to release a service for other platforms, which was rumored about, but the CEO Thorsten Heins clearly thought that this would reduce the chances of BB10. Heins did not refuse the possibility of such a step in the future, but this is unlikely to happen now.
If such a plan were implemented earlier, it is very likely that RIM would capture the message market, and moreover. Previously, BBM had a solid base of communicating users, including large fish from the corporate sector - but both of them are now in decline. If RIM plans to make BBM cross-platform, the most likely scenario would be to spread BB10 as early as possible. There are technical difficulties: for the success of cross-platform BBM, it must be reliable, fast, and the desired product on iOS, Android, and BlackBerry. Not an easy task for a company that has no experience creating applications for other platforms, not to mention the difficulties of competing with other instant messaging services.
Cross-platform BBM by the time of its appearance is unlikely to be able to significantly press competitors, and BlackBerry 10 will continue to lose users. Of course, this will depend, among other things, on the success of its launch events. If BB10 doesn’t lose users, Balsillie’s plan to turn RIM into a service provider company will be available from the dusty shelf.
Facebook Identification Options
Facebook probably knows about you as much as Google
As recently reported, Facebook is aggressively trying to infiltrate the ecosystem of iOS and Android applications . If the company succeeds, it will be able to get even more information about users than Apple and Google. The complex interactions between Facebook, other ecosystem giants, users, and the open Internet will make attempts to uproot the roots of the platform of the ubiquitous Facebook super-challenging.
From the point of view of Facebook, in order to better cement your positions on the Internet, you will need to attract more, as much content as possible into your ecosystem. They may even find a way to pull money from Google and Apple, in case they decide to add mobile advertising to their existing set of authorization products using login and social services.
For Apple, Google, Microsoft, and others, Facebook’s potential to embed in their own applications (as has already been done with most of the Internet) means a big problem. Both Apple and Microsoft have made Facebook part of their operating systems, and it is already difficult to root them out. Fortunately, the level of integration is still not very high, but we should expect increased tacit talks about how the data will be used together (and in what proportion).
At the moment, the business models of Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft do not overlap much, but this is definitely not the case with Google. In general, Google+ is the answer to the ever-increasing domination of Facebook in the field of both the Internet and services. No one is surprised that Android does not offer out-of-the-box integration with Facebook (although its openness means that Facebook can integrate there itself as an application).
Among all the battlefields between Facebook and Google, identification services deserve special attention. Facebook shows that in order to reveal their identity, users are not against providing much more information than a simple profile. After all, the Timeline is much more than a cute-looking post history; This is a demonstration to the public that Facebook may know about you as much as Google. What threatens Google’s advertising business, but also gives Facebook unique opportunities for any business that Facebook can decide to create.
It is very difficult to suggest the next move on Facebook, because its prevalence is ubiquitous. Since Facebook is everywhere, he can attack — or be attacked — anywhere.
Provocation iTunes
Steve Jobs once became famous for saying that iTunes is “it's like giving someone a glass of ice water in hell.”
iTunes is a central part of the efforts of the Apple ecosystem to spread its influence beyond the Mac. iTunes began its life as a music management application, gradually becoming the centerpiece of Apple’s original concept called the digital hub, which tied the iPod to a computer. As time went on, the company added the purchase of music, movies, TV shows, as well as controls for iOS devices (such as the iPhone and iPad).
iTunes for Windows was released in 2003, and after 4 years, Steve Jobs said it was "like giving someone a glass of water with ice in hell." Then it was hyperbole, but now the program has become creaky, albeit a completely controlled warship. For millions of iPhone users, it is a critical link between their smartphone and computer.
No doubt, the Apple ecosystem is still heavily dependent on iTunes, and its fame is positive for most. Although Apple has released iCloud services, which can replace most of the features of iTunes, it will certainly take some time.
ITunes needs changes , as well as Microsoft’s competing product, Spotify, as well as others offering more attractive subscription music and music. Rumors are not dawning that Apple is going to do the same with iTunes , but it is unclear why it does not. A very reasonable assumption is that iTunes generates such sales that music labels are afraid to make strong gestures.
If the moment of change comes, you will need to ask a question - how strong does Apple give a competitive advantage to iTunes? After all, it is used by many, not only iPhone and iPad users. In one of the possible options, Apple can preserve the priority of application functions on both Windows and Mac, perhaps (as rumors are circulating) by adding broadcast services only on Mac and iOS, but not iTunes. Most likely, the Mac will be considered as a real alternative for a regular home Windows user, and may drag a number of users.
Another very real possibility is that Apple will not create a tile version of iTunes. Although iTunes will probably work on Windows 8 in desktop mode, users of Windows RT (and owners of the current Surface tablet model) will remain floating overboard. Since users will be forced to return to the desktop for iTunes, it is unclear whether users will blame Microsoft or Apple for the lack of a new interface. If Windows RT gets distributed as the primary OS, this situation will only get worse. In any case, you need to expect that iPhone users will receive from their computers on Windows 8 a completely different experience than the one they are used to now.
Dirty Twitter API Bomb
Right now, you can watch the effects of the API bomb that Twitter dropped this year.
And finally, consider the battle that is taking place before our eyes. In short, Twitter decided to restrict Twitter to customers who “duplicate Twitter’s user experience.” Even though many developers and users now feel as if they had been burned by a flaming radioactive wave, it’s hardly surprising. If you look at the full story about the Twitter API , you can see increased stress from transparent hints in January to almost threats in July and a new developer guide in August . Twitter's new business is Twitter , a walled garden that looks more like Facebook than open internet.
The question is whether an ambush with an API (tactical attack on non-native customers) will allow the company to strengthen its position as a new media, or the attendant damage from bad PR and unimplemented users will damage the company as a whole, and will open the way for competitors. The fact that non-native customers and their developers greatly helped Twitter to innovate makes the problem even bigger.
New rules for Twitter have already led to serious problems. The best of Twitter clients for Windows 8, Tweetro, was “crippled” by a new user limit , while others, such as Tweetbot, were forced to set high prices to keep only the most profitable users. The developers of ordinary non-native Twitter clients, while on a territory of a draw, are trying to survive, despite the strict limitations of Twitter on the maximum number of users they can have. They were “born to die,” and there is no guarantee that even the small space in which they live will not disappear in the near future.
A radioactive contamination zone populated by non-native clients and users who liked them may not be so large, at least in comparison to the growing Twitter area. The record numbers of the presidential elections and the relatively successful (albeit overshadowed by a small scandal ) partnership with NBC show that the Twitter territory is now much larger than before. The most common alternative now, App.net, doesn't even come close to the size of Twitter, and most users use Twitter too.
As a result of this, Twitter has reserved space only for non-native clients who provide information to Twitter, but at the moment there are not a large number of applications noticed. Although B2B applications like Klout can be successful on their own, they are hardly sufficiently developed and developed to make up a decent ecosystem. Twitter has a good chance of maintaining dominance, except that a radioactive crater on the site of the former capital will remain forever.
Illustration by James Chae
Original: www.theverge.com/2012/11/20/3669590/ecosystem-microsoft-apple-google-facebook-cold-war
Afterword
in this article I was surprised at how Activesync is praised, and nothing is said about Gmail
(the share of which, along with Google Apps, is constantly growing).
ps a new question on Habré - is it possible to include pictures from the original article in the translation? Or is it moveton?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/160319/
All Articles