901–903 of 903 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, it's not about companies right but individuals rights. If I paid money for a device and if I am willing to let go of warranty and updates, I should be free to do whatever I wish with it. I don't think this statement should be as controversial as people make it to be.
You're free to jailbreak
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the “too many eggs in one basket” is really the only thing that persuades me. I don’t care that random developers have to workaround annoying restrictions and pay 30% to apple because it means it does just work and I don’t have to think — no one is trying to persuade me to do anything non Standard because there is no wiggle room. That’s a good thing. But it is a risk — I don’t like what apple is doing in Chin…
> I don’t care that random developers have to workaround annoying restrictions and pay 30% to apple because it means it does just work and I don’t have to think — no one is trying to persuade me to do anything non Standard because there is no wiggle room. That’s a good thing. Remember this in 10 years or so when Apple will do things you won't like and you'll have no way out. I've bookmarked your comment to have it ha…
I’ll be interested to return to this conversation in 10 years because as a priviledged, not-politically-radical (or at least not activist) person my hunch is that apple will still be a reasonable home for me. What I worry about is that it won’t be so comfortable for people who want to protest, or are in the margins in some other way.
I do care about this and would love another solution that worked.
Similarly I’d love not to use WhatsApp/fb and avoid as far as I can, but I want to play tennis or meet friends for bike rides and there is just no way of avoiding it right now without making substantial personal sacrifices.
I think the only solution long term is more regulation of large tech companies so that they act in the common good. That’s a hard problem though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to take Spotify's call for openness seriously when they're just as controlling as Apple is when it comes to how it allows its users to use its product. Most egregiously, they never delivered the promised playback-capable replacement for libspotify, probably because they want to keep their users in their little walled garden where Spotify can subject them to incessant A/B test tweaks to the UI designed to he…
Surely Spotify has reasons related to music licensing that makes them enforce strict control of playback interfaces? I remember the days of libre Spotify clients, but that was during the days of Spotify still being a relatively small service compared to the iTunes' of the world. Spotify won the battle for 2010s music and that made record companies more eager to control the distribution of their IP.