Live data from Hacker News

South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

wired.co.uk

31–40 of 110 posts

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#31

As much as I hate bloatware, this is another example of unwarranted regulation. Encourage more competition in the mobile carrier space and the free market will solve this better than any government can.

If it's a fully competetive market and everyone makes optimal market decisions etc., I agree, but these assumptions are false.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#32
post #12

This unwarranted government intervention is not good though I hate the bloatware. Everytime I visit my parents I end up spending half an hour removing browser toolbars, make your PC fast software. So I bought them a brand new Lenovo laptop just to find that there were 22 different kind of bloatware from DNS related stuff to browser toolbars to some weird webcam and what not software. No matter how much I hate them, t…

This is OK, so long as the social consensus is aware of this fact. When average people hear "This comes with Windows 8", there is an inherit understanding as to what that means, and I don't think the bloatware is assumed, or that the average consumer is even aware that it is bloatware, and not part of the experience marketed to them.

I'm not sure how you would introduce bloatware to the average consumer, but right now it just comes across as a sneaky decision, not consumer-driven one.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#33
I'm surprised that so many people believe in the free market ideology (e.g. market regulation is always wrong). The error in this type of reasoning is very simple. They first assume an idealized market model and then derive conclusions from it – but the idealized market is just too different from real-world markets. It's really that simple but many really smart people fall for it.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's if you get it though Verizon, its better to (byod), not buy on contract...

I think the point is that, regardless of how you get your iPhone, an iPhone will not have bloatware pre-installed. Same thing for Macs.

And regardless of how you get your iPhone, you are stuck with Safari as your default browser. I would rather buy a phone that has bloatware (that can be disabled) than buy a phone on which I am not free to change the default applications.

That said, you can have the best of both worlds by buying a Nexus device.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the phone needs to be rooted for that to work? And rooting normally voids the warranty.

Rooting and flashing another firmware is an entirely different process! Rooting usually involves setting a configuration flag, maybe hacking the bootloader, which is for most devices a point and click op. Flashing a firmware is "real" hacking compared to rooting!

Well, the average user does not know how to do neither, and removing system applications (all bloatware is set as system application) is impossible unless the phone is rooted.

What is the average joe to do to get rid of all the crap that inhibits performance and drains the battery at double the speed to boot?

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's if you get it though Verizon, its better to (byod), not buy on contract...

I think the point is that, regardless of how you get your iPhone, an iPhone will not have bloatware pre-installed. Same thing for Macs.

Depends on what you consider bloatware too though. For instance, the weather app on the iPhone is annoying to me and I never use it, same with the Mail app. I've heard Android users complain about having the Gallery app pre-installed.

Personally I don't consider any of those items bloatware, I just wonder where the line should reasonably be drawn.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#38

I'm surprised that so many people believe in the free market ideology (e.g. market regulation is always wrong). The error in this type of reasoning is very simple. They first assume an idealized market model and then derive conclusions from it – but the idealized market is just too different from real-world markets. It's really that simple but many really smart people fall for it.

I agree with your thinking, though I think we'd still have bloatware on phones even if there were more competition among wireless carriers.

PC market is quite competitive, yet most computers come with bloatware. The difference is, they can be uninstalled, but I suspect that may be due to OEM licensing agreement with Microsoft, than the competition among PC makers.

But at least with PCs, some of the revenue gained from bloatware is passed onto customers by the way of lower pricing.

In the end, this regulation is beneficial as long as the wireless market is competitive, so the carriers simply don't pass off the cost back onto the consumers. In that sense, I share with some other poster's sentiment that government regulations should focus on ensuring competitive landscape first.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#39
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this unwarranted? The free market is there but we still have bloatware.

Road to hell, good intentions etc... Does it need to be a regulation? Silly regulations is what made South Korea entirely dependent on Internet Explorer.

You're engaging in the Libertarian vice with the simplistic assumption that all regulations are created equal:

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/08/the...

South Korea chose to mandate a technology rather than the desired outcome and never to update that law. They could alternatively have mandated multi-factor authentication or even simply made banks liable for any fraudulent transaction without any discussion of technology at all. These are all regulations but would affect the market in very different ways.

Re: South Korea bans unremovable mobile bloatware

#40

I'm surprised that so many people believe in the free market ideology (e.g. market regulation is always wrong). The error in this type of reasoning is very simple. They first assume an idealized market model and then derive conclusions from it – but the idealized market is just too different from real-world markets. It's really that simple but many really smart people fall for it.

People seem to think that the free market will automagically drive towards their arbitrary measure of goodness because, in theory, if consumers share that arbitrary measure of goodness they won't buy something that doesn't offer that. But in reality, there is only one truism in free-markets, businesses need to make money and that sometimes runs contrary to whatever issue I personally think the market should optimize for.
Post reply on HN