111–120 of 503 posts
The explicit selling proposition of the iPhone is that it is a closed ecosystem. I and my family buy it for precisely this reason.
If you want a choice about what you install, you can have it! It's called Android, and hundreds of phone manufacturers are lining up to sell you a compatible handset. Leave us with the one phone manufacturer who has managed to reliably deliver a mostly safe and secure handset.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's nice and all, but the rest of us would like to be able to use our hardware, that we paid for up front, for whatever we need. Unfortunately iOS boots with an encrypted bootloader, so you can't replace it, and once booted, only supports this lovely walled garden of cat-meme consumption.
Then choose something else? I mean, lobby for the change if you like, but you're eliminating my favored choice if you succeed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree - Apple needs the control to have the leverage that makes their ecosystem better. It's in the interest of their customers for them to have this leverage and it requires that their 'store' is the only available store so app devs can't bypass their requirements. I like Apple forcing use of in-app-payments, I like Apple giving me subscription control to make canceling easy. I like Apple blocking app tracking and…
> Apple needs the control to have the leverage that makes their ecosystem better. It's in the interest of their customers for them to have this leverage and it requires that their 'store' is the only available store so app devs can't bypass their requirements. I don't understand this argument at all. You're almost certainly taking more risk driving in a car than downloading an app, yet you're probably willing to embr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right now, ~100% of the software available for iOS has to follow Apple's rules, offer a consistent and safe payment method, and install through the App Store. I assume you think that would change, else why have other app stores. That's what I don't want. I want as close to 100% of the software for iOS as possible to have to follow the rules. That's part of why I chose iOS.
You could very easily not install any other store or use any other payment system if you don't want them. You can keep your device 100 % Apple approved even if there exist alternatives. Why take that choice away from others?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not incompetence or “reduced mental faculties”, or even removing free will. It’s that we don’t want iOS to be like any other computer system - the simplicity and lack of choice is a feature, not a bug.
Some people need more functionality than iOS and its associated apps provide to do their jobs (ie embedded development/testing) among other things. Sure, "just go to Android/whatever" but Apple is quickly gaining a monopoly on not-shitty hardware and the combination of these two things is not ok by any stretch of the imagination. Apple could provide the option of unlocking the bootloader and providing some driver cod…
The open PC market is doing really well these days. Like, there’s a huge silicon shortage.
“Apple has a monopoly on not shitty hardware”
I have to chuckle. It’s almost like we want Apple to become a utility that must by government fiat build this great hardware but we now are going to force their software to operate the way a committee wants.
I am for regulation when it benefits consumers broadly (though unintended consequences abound). But this feels like pandering to a niche: potential dealers and tech tinkerers that never wanted the PC to become a consumer product.
There is nothing sinister of about running a business with focus and vertical integration. Apple tried an OEM model once, it didn’t work well for them (in part because Microsoft and Intel had that model locked up).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's nice and all, but the rest of us would like to be able to use our hardware, that we paid for up front, for whatever we need. Unfortunately iOS boots with an encrypted bootloader, so you can't replace it, and once booted, only supports this lovely walled garden of cat-meme consumption.
Sounds like you don't want an iPhone. So buy a different phone that does what you want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I choose to spend my money on devices from a company that's explicitly and repeatedly stated that their mission is privacy. But if you choose to buy phones from ad companies, it's your decision.
They'll flip the nanosecond it suits them. Their commitment isn't valuable or enforceable or anything other than a dodgy sales pitch. Really. They can encode it in contact in a second and choose not to.
Apple has invested heavily in this vein.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a user of iOS, this is precisely why I go with Apple, and why I push my family to do the same. Particularly for the more elderly in my family, Apple's setup (by and large) prevents them from doing anything that would screw themselves over. Removing Apple's control removes my desire to be apart of that ecosystem, and I know that is true for many others outside our insular little community here.
I agree - Apple needs the control to have the leverage that makes their ecosystem better. It's in the interest of their customers for them to have this leverage and it requires that their 'store' is the only available store so app devs can't bypass their requirements. I like Apple forcing use of in-app-payments, I like Apple giving me subscription control to make canceling easy. I like Apple blocking app tracking and…
Apple has done a lot to revise the App Store charging policy over the last few years, and I think they deserve credit for that. Also their hosting of free apps for only a nominal developer registration fee is a huge boon to users and a lot of iOS developers.
So I don’t think those criticisms are entirely accurate or fair. I am ok with regulators looking into this though. Apples revisions to their charging structure probably wouldn’t have happened without the threat of regulatory review. It’s important they be held accountable. However Apple invested many, many billions of dollars to develop the technologies in iOS over many decades and took huge commercial risks. iOS and these devices are their product and they have the right to decide how they work and what features they have. Those who don’t like that do have alternatives. The fact is an awful lot of people do like the way Apple does things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. I don't understand the argument Apple users are presenting. Its like they can't comprehend that they can have an option to install third-party apps but they don't have to enable or use that if they like being "protected" from hurting themselves.
Right now, ~100% of the software available for iOS has to follow Apple's rules, offer a consistent and safe payment method, and install through the App Store. I assume you think that would change, else why have other app stores. That's what I don't want. I want as close to 100% of the software for iOS as possible to have to follow the rules. That's part of why I chose iOS.
The same would still be true of all the apps in the App Store. There would just be other stores. You wouldn't have to use them. Other people could.
The issue here is that many people want the hardware or the OS without the App Store. If you give it to them, "people who only use the Apple App Store" will be a smaller number of people and Apple will have less leverage.
That's the point of prohibiting anti-competitive practices. Apple does a lot of things with that leverage that are bad. Like prohibiting apps that compete with theirs (e.g. browser engines), and imposing political censorship in authoritarian countries, and extracting 30% from captive developers.
You presumably want Apple to have the leverage because then they can use it against e.g. Facebook. If everybody on iOS thinks like you then you win -- everybody only uses the App Store even though other stores are available and Apple still has all the same leverage.
But if most of the people disagree with you, right now you're holding them hostage. Forcing them to use only the App Store even though they don't want to, so that the world's largest corporation can have more leverage.