I will tell you why. Ideologically. Currently, the most successful businesses are platforms. Platform business is not a new idea. Shopping centers and newspapers are sort of platforms. They make money by serving as a meeting point for buyers and sellers. Facebook is currently the most successful social platform in the world, but the App Store, iTunes and Apple TV are extremely successful platforms owned by the most expensive company in the world.
Their business models are built on a closed ecosystem where the audience can find and consume content (newspaper articles, posts on social networks, products, videos, music files). Sometimes the audience pays for a subscription, as in the case of Dropbox, Spotify and Netflix, while in other cases advertisers pay to show an audience their ads (Facebook, Google Search, free versions of Pandora, traditional television, etc.). Some platforms directly charge transaction fees (eBay, Etsy, Airbnb, Google Play and the App Store).
Now imagine a world where you can reproduce all of these platforms for distributing and storing content and shopping — with the same characteristics — but without the big companies that own the platforms. The cost will not be centralized and money won’t be going away to several senior executives and institutional shareholders, but will be distributed among users of the platform. This is a kind of a hybrid of Marxism and capitalism, where work and rewards are evenly distributed, and a person can get rich by producing more and working better.
So why saying that DApps aren’t the future if they can finally deliver what we were striving for?