Best excerpt of the post:
> We really didn't expect this to work or we probably would have tried it sooner.
Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
151–160 of 390 posts
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple sells $20-30 billion worth of iPads each year. I think they might just survive without your business. And pretty sure it demonstrates that their formula of security and privacy over openness is the right one for them.
Source on this please. I'm skeptical that they sell enough iPads to equal half of all clothing sold on the planet, or they have a larger market or 20% of movies or gaming worldwide.
This is really low effort to look up from reputable sources if you don’t believe it. Electronics have far higher sales prices than clothing, I can’t even begin to fathom why that is a relevant benchmark.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If you do that, guess what Fortnite would do right now. Guess what Facebook would do to get around Apple’s privacy restrictions right now. Guess what a ex-boyfriend would do right now to install a blocked spying app. I guess I don't get your point, if a user wants to sideload fortnite or facebook, good for them? If an ex-boyfriend has your phone and your password you've probably got bigger issues than whether or not…
I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily…
>I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons.
Become "pawns" how? You're again saying that a user being allowed to load things on to their phone is Apple's responsibility. Literally nobody has said it would be Apple's responsibility and we've got a case in point: google. When you sideload an app, you're on your own.
>Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily force users to sideload so that they could use it. Smaller companies would not have the power to force users to sideload, so they would have to follow Apple rules while tech giants would not.
Again, not Apple's problem. If a user is warned that enabling side loading exposes them to tracking, and the user decides to do it anyway, that's their prerogative.
>At this point, for better or worse, what started as sideloading has destroyed the App Store.
Destroyed what app store? Google allows sideloading, I think most people would describe their app store as thriving, not "destroyed"
>Lastly, as for why anyone would go for the trouble, are you really sure that some government agency wouldn’t force users to sideload an app someday? If it had to go through Apple approval, there would be a much bigger legal fight than if they could just force people to sideload it. There are other reasons than just ex-boyfriends, I’m just trying to come up with some examples.
They already force users to load apps directly, sideloading isn't necessary.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#154Where is the Linux ARM equivalent laptop? When I read about Pine laptops, it never seems like they tout the amazing performance like the M1.
As far as I can tell, Apple is the only company out here who has a production chip with desktop class performance. I think the Pinebook’s chip isn’t even very high end. I personally wonder how long before we start seeing desktop SoCs from Samsung or Qualcomm (probably running Windows?)
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
>How to download old versions of apps from the App Store https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/02/08/how-to-download-o...
Not available in 2011.
It was available starting in 2010.
It was also possible to backup and restore apps individually through iTunes.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple sells $20-30 billion worth of iPads each year. I think they might just survive without your business. And pretty sure it demonstrates that their formula of security and privacy over openness is the right one for them.
Source on this please. I'm skeptical that they sell enough iPads to equal half of all clothing sold on the planet, or they have a larger market or 20% of movies or gaming worldwide.
Maybe you don't know what the size of the clothing market is because it isn't $40-60B. If you just look at ecommerce for clothing:
The global fashion ecommerce industry was expected to decline from $531.25 billion in 2019 to $485.62 billion in 2020. The negative compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of -8.59% is largely due to the coronavirus pandemic. However, the market is set to recover and hit $672.71 billion by 2023
The general clothing market is even bigger, obviously:
In 2019, global retail sales of apparel and footwear reached 1.9 trillion U.S. dollars, and were expected to rise to above three trillion U.S. dollars by 2030.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily…
>I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Become "pawns" how? You're again saying that a user being allowed to load things on to their phone is Apple's responsibility. Literally nobody has s…
Right now, every developer will tell you that Apple is significantly more strict with what is allowed on the App Store than the Google Play store is. Not perfect, but more strict.
This has caused tech giants like Facebook considerable hurt. For example, the fact that they have to have those embarrassing privacy labels on their app in the App Store. Or that they have to present that prompt asking for permission to use the advertising identifier.
Right now, even though this hurts tech Giants, this benefits users. Google draws less than 1/10th of the data from an iPhone user as they do an Android user.
If sideloading was enabled, this check on their privacy rules would no longer exist because they could force users to sideload, which means they would immediately do so, and users would lose the benefits that Apple‘s restrictions give them.
If users want to sideload, They should buy an android where this check does not exist, and they can be on the less restrictive Google play store where it doesn’t matter. If they want Apple to constrain the power of apps to spy on them, they buy an iPhone.
Even though you might vehemently disagree with Apple, I respect the right of users to choose whether they want a restricted but more private experience, or less restricted but less private experience.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple’s blanket ban on interpreted code is not arbitrary. It is there to prevent apps circumventing the review process and security model ie. apps pretending to do X during the review process and then doing Y when in use or obfuscating their use of private APIs. Now you can argue these restrictions are unreasonable but many of us don’t want our iPads or iPhones to be like our computers.
> many of us don’t want our iPads or iPhones to be like our computers And many of us do . I would never buy a locked-down piece of hardware like that. But I don't think it matters either way what either side wants, because it's what Apple wants that matters. They want to keep their walled garden's walls air tight, and there are apparently enough people that are OK living in that garden that it works. I'm positive tha…
Don't buy an iPhone then. I used to be all about customizing my phone, but when the "Phone" app on my android crashed repeatedly while trying to call 911 in an emergency, I now only want a locked-down and stable piece of hardware as my phone.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple’s blanket ban on interpreted code is not arbitrary. It is there to prevent apps circumventing the review process and security model ie. apps pretending to do X during the review process and then doing Y when in use or obfuscating their use of private APIs. Now you can argue these restrictions are unreasonable but many of us don’t want our iPads or iPhones to be like our computers.
> many of us don’t want our iPads or iPhones to be like our computers And many of us do . I would never buy a locked-down piece of hardware like that. But I don't think it matters either way what either side wants, because it's what Apple wants that matters. They want to keep their walled garden's walls air tight, and there are apparently enough people that are OK living in that garden that it works. I'm positive tha…
Considering the average user, I think you are in the minority. Still, I don't think there has to be a choice between one and the other.
Re: Temptation of the Apple: Dolphin on macOS M1
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple sells $20-30 billion worth of iPads each year. I think they might just survive without your business. And pretty sure it demonstrates that their formula of security and privacy over openness is the right one for them.
> Apple sells $20-30 billion worth of iPads each year. > I think they might just survive without your business. The parent post makes some the argument that the restrictive nature of iOS makes it unappealing to certain users. You counter that with a discussion-ending argument about how much money Apple makes. Not everything that makes billions of dollars is immune to criticism. Especially since Apple markets the iPad…
> makes it unappealing to certain users. You counter that with a discussion-ending argument about how much money Apple makes.
For a business that makes it's money from consumer spending habits, I think this is a perfectly valid argument. Apple isn't a utility company or something the users are locked in to. If they decided openness was more important, why are they still buying so many iPhones?