← Back to context

Comment by array_key_first

18 hours ago

> A company making an integrated experience would inevitably provide a better experience/performance than a company asked to build for 100s of devices with different spec. That Apple did not want to open it up is a separate discussion.

I disagree, this is not a given. Usually the opposite is true.

Meaning, properly designed APIs and protocols for public use are more robust than one-off private protocols. Because there are expectations.

Apple could be malicious and make the API stupid, but if they were genuine then they wouldn't. They would make a good API, which is much more likely, I think, when the API is public versus some secret private API.

> Meaning, properly designed APIs and protocols for public use are more robust than one-off private protocols. Because there are expectations.

This is the polar opposite of my experience. Whether it's Bluetooth, PDF's, or a web audio JavaScript spec, actual products are plagued with inconsistencies and incompatibilities, as they implement the spec in different ways or brand A has bugs that brands B, C and D need to write special code for to get interoperability working. And brand C has other bugs brands A, B and D now need to also handle.

Whereas private protocols are much more likely to just work because there's only one implementation. There are no differing interpretations.