For most people, if there computer was ‘theirs’, it would be that way for about 10 minutes until it was pwned by a bad actor. The general issue of other people (I.e. Apple et al) having a lot of control over your computer, is entirely valid even if some of the points in the piece are exaggerations. The problem is that people want it that way. They are in fact correct that computers are scary and too complex for them…
This is the same sort of logic that some people have that people shouldn't be allowed to make choices in life because they "might get it wrong". People should be allowed to make their own choices in what they believe to be their best interests and they should be allowed to get things wrong. > For most people, if there computer was ‘theirs’, it would be that way for about 10 minutes until it was pwned by a bad actor.…
I am not making any argument that can be construed as this. You are misreading me if you think I am. I agree that people should be allowed to make their own choices which is why I strongly oppose government regulation of software distribution. It’s also why I support people’s right to choose platforms like iOS.
“Something has to change. We are sliding back into the 1980s where all the computer hardware was incompatible with one another.”
I’m not sure freedom and compatibility always go hand in hand, but I agree that something has to change.
As to the tinkerers and people building their own rigs - the idea that there is a large spectrum. I potentially agree.
Serving those people well is a hugely untapped potential. I used to believe that Apple would see this, but I no longer do. I suspect that Jobs would have done.
I would like to think the open source community and commercial ecosystem outside of Apple and Microsoft can seize the opportunity.
We won’t if we spend our time feeling victimized by corporations doing what corporations do.