Apple, Epic, and the App Store
In the spirit of this particular story, I'd like to ask HN the following question:  Should closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell?<p>Yes, it's legal today but <i>should</i> we make it illegal?<p>To try another example besides Apple iPhone, consider the $35000 Prima Cinema movie server to play 1st run movies at home on day of release:  <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22prima+cinema%22&source=lnms&tbm=isch" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?q=%22prima+cinema%22&source=ln...</a><p>In many iPhone debates, we throw around phrases such as, <i>"unlike a game console, it's a general computer"</i> and <i>"I own the device so I should be able to put any software I want on it"</i>.<p>Understandable sentiments.  So the question is, should consumers be able to <i>knowingly</i> buy restricted hardware such as Prima Cinema?  They pay $35000 and own the computer but they <i>know</i> they <i>can't sideload their own movies</i>.  They <i>know</i> can't pick another "movie store", or watch Youtube/Netflix on it, etc.  The hardware has <i>anti-tampering</i> sensors so that it bricks itself if the owner tries to open it.  The hardware is a "general pc".  It runs Wind River Linux.  I think the cpu is x86 but it might be ARM or something else.<p>You can't argue that Prima Cinema should not be locked down (claiming anti-competitive behavior) because the paranoid film studios wouldn't even license their content if it wasn't. If a buyer wants to have 1st run movies at home, all those restrictions in place is they only way to get it.  It's more restrictive than iPhone in that sense.