Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So why do you think Apple doesn't want that to happen? lol i can think of a few billion other reasons why they don't want it to happen.
Such as...
I think he means dollars.
Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
421–430 of 903 posts
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? Samsung is the most hostile of manufacturers in this regard. Unlocking the bootloader, installing another bootloader, or running a different kernel burns fuses permanently in the device and renders it unable to use their version of hardware-secured storage, aka "Knox." Kiss some multimedia apps, payment apps, and enterprise security features goodbye...along with a bunch of random features like private mode in t…
Flashing an unsigned (or potentially differently signed) bootloader burns fuses. Sure. However, other manufacturers don't just burn fuses, you specifically need to apply for permission to flash your bootloader e.g. https://www.oneplus.com/support/answer/detail/op588 Samsung at least don't require personal details for you to take control of your device. Sure, you lose access to some multimedia, but don't blame Samsung…
well, Miami and one plus requires you to provide phone number etc., so that seller and other people don't sell you malicious second hand phone or tampered phone. However, there are no fuses, so your phone will still be on warranty if you unroot it.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#423I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…
Then don’t buy Apple. I want what Apple offers. I want a walled garden. And I am willing to pay for it.
You use your propaganda about freedom of choice to demand that I not be allowed to choose. You demand that no device can function the way I want it to because ALL of them must function the way YOU want them to.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you need to ban other people from buying them? You can already just opt to not buy them yourself. Why do you care if others still want to? Clearly not signed everyone - I don’t sign it.
Lol we’re well past that. If you’re willing to ban the NFA/legalize probate nuclear weapons we might be able to talk. In the mean time I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction, and that means banning companies from selling locked hardware is fair game.
Your comment still doesn't answer the question "Why do you need to ban other people from buying them?"
I think it's a good question that deserves an answer.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They want to benefit from the infrastructure, but don't want to pay for it. The infrastructure is already paid for. I paid for it when I bought my $1000 iPhone.
That would be a valid point if the phone wasn't vertically integrated with cloud services and ongoing support from the manufacturer. The terms for access to the app store are based on licensing for the software that's part of the device. I could see a reasonable compromise where you can wipe the iPhone and start from scratch with your own OS/drivers/etc, waive your warranty, and then be free to go nuts installing any…
My last iPhone before this one was also $1000. Oh, also, I pay for iCloud storage. I think I’ve covered the ongoing support and cloud costs as well.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#426I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…
The way I see it the users have two crappy options based on business model: 1) Apple's freedom from inspection: they control your device and their ecosystem because they make money off the ecosystem. The take a cut of the phone/computer/watch you buy then anything you buy in their ecosystem because the ecosystem is their product. Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business. 2) Google…
[deleted]
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#427I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…
I understand where you are coming from, and support you on that. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with the default state of an iPhone. It just manages itself, and all that hard problems (backups, updates, ease of use, experience homogenity, etc.) are solved.
I manage more than enough servers at work, and I don't want to manage another server in my pocket, do nitty-gritty settings, allow selected apps background access, try to find what changed and what broke every update.
I'm using Linux for 20 years, and I'm not going to change that, however Android is not Linux and settings persistence on Android is just not present.
My parents use Samsung A9s, and I help them configure theirs from time to time, and seems like every important setting is either buried six levels deep or is not guaranteed to stick after an arbitrary time.
While iPhone's (or Apple's) ecosystem lacks control, it promises dependability, and this is huge in removing obstacles from your productivity. I can just get things done in my iPhone and never touch settings app ever, except the occasional "is my battery doing good" checks.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? I'm an avid Linux user and an avid Apple user, and I think both systems have their merits. If I had to have only one it would be Linux.
>No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? What is this supposed to be an argument for? Do you think this is an own? Is this statement made in good faith? Did you really let your 10th grade economics teacher tell you what a "monopoly" was and then never question either the usefulness or the validity of the definition?
Yes, it is an argument, if you don't like Apple, if you don't want to be part of their ecosystem, do not fund it. Buy something else. It's your choice as a consumer.
It's especially rich you're against Apple here considering Spotify is also a scourge on many musicians and audiophiles lives too ha.
Spotify wants you to fight against Apple so they can have a nice monopoly on the music industry.
This is the same way Elon wants you to fight for "free speech" so he gets a bigger market share of social media. It's not really about "free speech", it's about Elon getting what he wants.
Wake up to yourself.
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
What the parent is likely trying to point out is that Apple has no obligation to give you the feature the way you want it (in fact, Apple seems to view not providing flexibility as the feature). If you feel this strongly about the feature, then using a different phone (which there are many) is available.
> that Apple has no obligation to give you > If you feel this strongly about the feature, then using a different phone Actually, instead of that, citizens of a nation are free to vote for anti-trust, and pro competition laws that force Apple, under threat of government force, to stop engaging in certain actions. We did it for the railway monopolies a century ago, and we can do it again, by updating our anti trust law…
Cool, so break one of the only stable, reliable, useful and mostly secure devices people have in their life by "forcing" a company to do things against their will?
Why not just throw our the US government and install the CCP too?
We did it for the railway monopolies a century ago, and we can do it again, by updating our anti trust laws to new era.
There are very few places in the world with good trains, unless you're referring to one of them, your argument is pretty weak. Especially if you're in the USA. The trains suck and I hope my devices don't go the same way.
...This again is coming from someone who works with and on open source software, is an avid long term Linux user and owns many "open" hardware devices...
Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? What is this supposed to be an argument for? Do you think this is an own? Is this statement made in good faith? Did you really let your 10th grade economics teacher tell you what a "monopoly" was and then never question either the usefulness or the validity of the definition?
There is a difference between an monopoly and a moat. I think the previous statement is saying that if you want to own your phone you can choose a different path and apple probably isn't the phone you should choose.
Yes, quite simple isn't it?