I would make the case the consoles aren't essential for day to day life. They simply aren't general computing devices but have a very specific purpose. They've broaded somewhat to include more media features but few people are securing jobs or submitting government applications on their consoles.
It's the fact that modern living simply requires a phone is why the EU is so upset with Apple and Google putting up their garden walls.
Whenever someone brings up this nebulous "General Purpose Computer" concept, I challenge them to articulate what makes a phone a general purpose computer, but not a game console. So far I haven't heard a convincing answer. They both have CPUs and typical computer architectures, and can run a wide variety of software. Surely the intention of both smartphone makers and game console makers is that their devices are not made for a "general" purpose, and that (so far) has allowed them to justify locking them down.
"Are they essential for day to day life" is a new one. I'm not sure that makes sense either, but I'll give you points for originality! It's also debatable whether phones are essential for day to day life, but we can leave that in another thread.
While i won't aim to provide a full and perfect definition: a phone is a computing device with a generic interface and the goal of being a platform for a wide variety of software aimed at many different goals: 1-on-1 communication (calling), messaging, social networks, document exchange, note taking, web browsing, photography & photo editing, video & video editing, inventory, physical access control, ...
Consoles have a game-targeted interface and a singular focus on games.
I don't know if everything that has been labeled a console matches this description. Some "consoles" have indeed been stretching any meaningful distinction to or even past the breaking point.
But I will unashamedly go "no true Scotsman" on those: If a machine has a secondary (tertiary, quadrutionary, ...) specific focus with dedicated interface, it might still be a console. Illustration: a console that also can play dvd's ia a dedicated dvd interface. However, if the interface is generic and just waiting for the right app, not so much.
The point is not "can it do general-purpose computing" - a lot of devices can be made to run some linux. The pertinent question: is it made to support general-purpose computing out of the box? Things that I would call game consoles aren't - they're platforms for gaming.
The issue with apples walled garden is entirely based around how widespread their use is.
Literally from the first time people argued about this, that was at the core of the issue.
Nobody cares if you're creating a hardware device that can only run your OS and Apps if its not in widespread use. The issue occurs only once they're entrenched and can use their market position as an unfair advantage, which apple unashamedly does.
(And so does Nintendo and Sony with their gaming system, yes. The reason why almost nobody cares is because they're not in widespread use. And if they abuse their market position they also get a lot of flak. A lot more then apple ever gets, that's for sure. Just look at the helldivers 2 debacle last week, Nintendo banning people that mod their games in single player etc.)
> I would make the case the consoles aren't essential for day to day life.
Doesn't matter. If I truly own the hardware, I should be able to run my own software.
Toasters also aren't essential to day to day life. Toaster manufacturers aren't putting sophisticated cryptographic locks on their products to keep me from toasting my own bread.
> Toasters also aren't essential to day to day life. Toaster manufacturers aren't putting sophisticated cryptographic locks on their products to keep me from toasting my own bread.
Don't give them any ideas. Coffee brewing machines are already there (kind of).
iOS only matters in this case, because they have close to monopoly in some areas. But at you listed, in the EU you've got Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and the whole PC market. Consoles are really not a prison in this case.
(I agree the behaviour would be regulated a bit either way. But it's not even close to "prison")
They are prison, and it has nothing to do with either regulation or using the laissez-faire approach. You are being sold a computer which is controlled by someone else, even after the sale takes place. That's essentially it. Maybe it would even require no additional regulation, just interpretation of current regulation (the essential basics of civil law, that is) which would make a contract of sale of such device invalid, as you're not controlling it, treating it de-facto more like as a indefinite rent contract.
> You are being sold a computer which is controlled by someone else, even after the sale takes place.
Sure, but you are in no way forced or pushed to do that. You only do it if you really want to play their exclusive games. It's a completely free choice in a way that choosing a smartphone isn't (due to various apps being close to required for modern life)
Don't buy the console. Or buy it and something else as well. It's a very fancy toy.
Well, I'm pretty much okay using fully open Linux called postmarketOS on a smartphone, plus Andbox/Waydroid for (sandboxed!) compatibility with Android apps. That's also a free choice.
On pmOS, there's also full KVM virtualization support (works out-of-the-box on most aarch64 devices) for more picky apps, as well.
You're still essentially using either iOS or Android if you want to interact with many banks. Sometimes they will let you use compatibility layers, sometimes not. (I can't access some bank apps on OxygenOS, which is actual Android)
But anyway. I don't want to start the pointless flame war for the milionth time. I think I just have a different definition of "modern life", which is based on using what was considered high-tech not so long ago, like high-throughput radio links and instantaneous worldwide communication (including things like video), without giving up any control. It's not needed to do the abovementioned, so why would I?
BTW, 90% of internet services of any kind still serves "web apps". Which is far from perfect, but gives best compatibility and security out of all technologies we've managed to push to very high adoption.
> Sure, but you are in no way forced or pushed to do that. You only do it if you really want to play their exclusive games.
Personally, I think exclusivity deals need to be banned. The are an inherently anti-competitive practice that does nothing to help consumers.
Given that Sony is historically extremely bad about allowing any crossplay, your argument that exclusive games are the only reason people are pushed into buying a PS is false.
Gaming is part of many people's social lives and Sony deliberately exploits this to maintain market dominance.
Insisting that consumer purchasing decisions are the only or best way to deal with monopolies ignores history and reality.
> However, the videogame industry in its entirety was dead-lifted from its premature grave by one "Nintendo Family Computer".
Consoles maybe, but I don't think that the early 8/16-bit microcomputers were affected by the crash of 1983, and in any case the crash was mostly a US phenomenon with minor effects on other regions.
How is a general purpose computer defined? In any case this argument is moot, the point is that once you purchase something, it's yours and no vendor locks and restrictions should be put on it. You are limiting my choices as a consumer by not letting me access multiple stores or modify the hardware.
Not even this. It probably has a full-fledged browser pre-installed, making its classification as a general-purpose computer pretty obvious even for an average user, and far less "hackish" than otherwise.
It is a general purpose computer running a specialized operating system. Something doesn't stop being a general purpose computer when you change the OS.
If only the US had some sort of anti-trust laws, then perhaps we wouldn't need to rely on the EU to regulate US companies. To be clear, that is snark because that's how I communicate, however I suppose it could be argued that the laws we have have effectively been neutered through selection of right-wing justices over the last half century or so, and so we are indeed helpless against the ever consolidating megacorps.
I don't think the tiny amount of games that are get a physical copy makes much of a point here. Most games you need to obtain through the online store.
