In the history of computing and technology,
competition has always been between an open system and a closed system. So, for
laptops and computers, Microsoft represents the open system and Apple
represents the closed system. As for mobile phones, Android would be an example
of an open system and Apple would be a closed system as well. One could argue
which system is better and which system is more popular.
When it comes to the Metaverse and its
utilities in industry and all other sectors an open system is highly inevitable
as interoperability and decentralization are within the DNA of the Metaverse.
An open system is what Meta is advocating and building the infrastructure for
along with hundreds if not thousands of other Metaverse platforms around the
world. While Apple`s plans are not entirely clear yet, whether and when will
they will eventually use the word Metaverse instead of or in addition to
pushing a mainly AR/XR/MR-driven agenda. Yet, it is inevitable that Apple would
be going for a closed system which would be challenging given the
interoperability nature and necessity of the Metaverse. However, Apple does
have the potential and capability to come up with some sort of a “Metaverse
closed system” that people would buy into.
What would be better then?
Neither Microsoft nor Samsung nor Apple is
losing. Each system and company has its audience and a huge base of users. It
will highly depend on the use case and the user`s requirements. For the time
being the infrastructure and development are highly in favor of an open,
interoperable, decentralized system. Creating a closed system will have its
limitations and might undermine the core idea of the Metaverse. An open,
interoperable Metaverse is a necessity for many industries and businesses. The
ability to smoothly use your digital assets, and different types of software
and perform operations in various Metaverse platforms is crucial. The industry
is rapidly developing, and the users of the Metaverse will decide which system
will dominate.