Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually like it the way it is now. You don't hear our arguments, you only want to be represented in that court without us. But conscious apple users are not all pro-sideload. if the App Store is such a tremendous value, why don‘t you ask users to pay for access to that App Store directly Because the value is not in the appstore itself, but in an inability to push uncontrolled spy/trick/crap-ware through side chann…
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. --- You have not changed the end result, simply moved the goal posts for safety. Malicious apps can and do get approved. Malware has been signed by Apple. Millions are still tricked through websites loaded in the browser. You have NOT solved security or safety by sticking with a single store. In retur…
Goals and outcomes have to be realistic, not idealistic. All parties considered, and given how app/media world works, there are two major models that are represented by two big players (google, apple). First one is to build a garden that, barring little fuckups, mostly works in favor of a money-spending user and has no economics in selling them out. Another is a "free as in cheese" model where everything costs less, and is less- or un- controlled, so that various third-party economics who are another giant's infotrade puppets play their game at relaxed rules or at will. This includes phone vendors, other stores and software packages from the internet. There is a third model, a PC, that has a rich history not worth exposing again to an innocent user. And fourth, ubuntu, which had essentially zero economics.
For the context, I own both android and ios devices (and mac, and pc). And android's agenda of being free and doing everything you want simply isn't real. There is basically no possibilities ("freedoms") without some sticky strings attached. I could bring a metaphor of being an android user, but it hardly fits hn format. Let's say that an android user has to make bodily compromises along the way of searching for "freedom", but never finding it. Because no one in the world needs you to be free and happy for free, and your market data costs more than you. They will either sell you a big margin, or monetize it by digging in your laundry.
So basically, there is no choice at all, from the perspective of goals you (and I, ideally) chase. The world and its needs simply do not work like that. I'm not exchanging freedom for safety, I'm exchanging money for privacy, and "free as in freedom" is not an option at all.
And I wouldn't even mind if such ideal world existed, where everyone just writes an app that does great things, then sells/gifts it on an open mobile store and everyone to be happy. But by giving up on a walled garden IRL, I give up on a walled garden and freedom and privacy and hygiene. I'd better not own my device rather than not owning my privacy or checking constantly where my info leaks.
Hope that clears my views.