European law is forcing the company to loosen its iron grip on its products. That ultimately could lead to a more dynamic experience on the iPhone as developers create more and feature-rich apps for the platform that capitalize on more of Apple's technology.
The change, long resisted by Apple, could be a boon for the company, too.
iPhone has begun to feel humdrum, and sales have faltered.
The situation isn't helped by the way Apple has restricted developers from accessing many of the iPhone's application programming interfaces, software tools that would help them expand app capabilities to make them more compelling.
But according to Bloomberg News, Apple is now laying the groundwork to let outside app makers use some of the company's most tightly held iPhone technology, including its camera and a communications chip enabling contactless payments. That means iPhone users could soon tap to pay for things using their banking and financial apps, rather than just Apple Wallet.
Apple's decision to allow alternative app stores on its iPhones and iPads, similar to the way Smart Alphabets Google has allowed non-Google app marketplaces on Android devices, also would give consumers a wider array of app choices.
It wouldn't be the first time Apple has won big from being forced open. Steve Jobs famously opposed having apps on the iPhone that weren't built by Apple itself, fearing they would infect the device with viruses, or “pollute its integrity,” according to Jobs biographer Walter Isaacson. When the Apple co-founder changed his mind, that set the stage for a thriving marketplace of third-party services, ushering in the phrase, “There's an app for that.”
Apple is wisely preparing to cooperate with the legislation, having learned from Microsoft's famously painful tussles with both American and European antitrust officials in the early 2000s over the way it bundled Internet Explorer into Windows.
Making its core products more interoperable likely helped Microsoft grow its then-nascent cloud business, for which integrating with other existing systems and building stronger relationships with other technology partners would be critical for its success.
Consumers benefited, too. Were it not for that litigation, “we might be living in a world of Microsoft-designed software only,” says Witt .
Comments
Post a Comment