I really dislike the term "lock-in". Not many organizations want to stop innovating and race to the bottom with commodity offerings.
Lock-in is not a matter of forced-to-use-X, but rather making it artificially difficult to switch away from X...
-
-
...or to use X in a manner that's focused on your own (the user's) interests and not the producer's monetization model.
-
I feel this way about many well-scoped projects or ones based on strong standardization. For example, I feel locked-into DNS.
-
When this happens, it's to add a cost that prevents new privatized lock-in from happening.
-
The internet would be a much more awful place if DNS got replaced each year by the latest Facebook or Google naming system.
-
I agree with everything you're saying. I just don't think lock-in best describes things that are not standardized or commodity.
-
I'm just saying "lock-in" is useful language and not the opposite of standardized.
-
An IoT lightbulb with its own vendor-specific protocol is not standardized but not necessarily lock-in.
-
But if the IoT lightbulb can only be controlled through a vendor-provided cloud infrastructure, then it's lock-in.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.