3 ms·
tl;dr The article basically says: > If you don't like Apple's decisions, then switch. But it's really your fault for using their products for years because you
by tlow 10y ago
tl;dr The article basically says:
> If you don't like Apple's decisions, then switch. But it's really your fault for using their products for years because you've locked yourself in.
There's really nothing new here. The article doesn't present any arguments for why you should actually be mad at yourself and also fails to suggest alternatives.
While Apple is not your typical computer hardware company, there's nothing here that doesn't apply to ANY company.
- drieddust 10y agoI don't think he is arguing against Apple. He is arguing to stop unconditional devotion to a single corporation and start investing time to learn transferrable skills.
- tlow 10y agoThat is a good point. Basically, you've abstracted the argument away from the Apple focus and applied it more generally to any proprietary technology. If one takes this proposed abstract perspective, I think it becomes clear that this isn't even just an issue of hardware or consumer products, but likely applies to nearly every product, service, ecosystem, network or tools provided by third parties -- if their goals and interests diverge from yours, you might be left in the dust and they likely won't care.
- taylodl 10y agoExactly. Just like SystemD. It's caused me to walk away from Linux and on to BSD. Lock-in can happen even in non-proprietary, non-vendor scenarios. The moral of the story is you always need to be prepared to move on.
- drieddust 10y agoYes, but in this case I am sure you were able to reuse a lot of your knowledge.