6 ms·

Apple got this right from the beginning despite years of criticism about the "walled garden". They took arrows for years: all the "open always wins" from the FO

by IBM 9y ago

Apple got this right from the beginning despite years of criticism about the "walled garden". They took arrows for years: all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types, all the press coverage of some app developer crying about App Store rejections or onerous rules. They didn't get it wrong because they know who butters their bread: customers. Developers are rightly prioritized last. Fun to give this Paul Graham essay a read again [1]. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html

headsoup 9y ago
You're comparing Apples to oranges (I'm sorry) Apple doesn't have a social network. They also don't rely on advertising and 3rd party data brokering. It's easy for Apple to be the 'good guys' here when they have physical products as their profit generators. FOSS would have worked better in the Facebook case too as people and developers would know/discover a) where their data is and b) what risks it faces
- thinkloop 9y ago
  I swear there is some kind of downvote bot on HN - reasonable posts are often down-voted grey within the first few minutes (like this one's parent), and then eventually climb up to a reasonable place, when, what feels like, the humans have had time to see it - has this been noticed or discussed before? I'd be curious to know if some accounts are serial downvoters, especially as soon as comments go up - does HN look for that kind of stuff? Of course part of the answer is that new comments have no votes so a quick downvote will make them grey, but there are frequent strange cases. One thing for sure is that a lot of people downvote based on disagreement rather than a comment's quality - which in my opinion is not right (and I think against the intent of a downvote), but that's a different issue.
  - grzm 9y ago
    Similar behavior appears to happen with quality of comments. Initial comments on a story are often insubstantial, knee-jerk low-quality comments. With time, things generally get better. From what I gather (but I don't have any comments at hand), the mods do pay attention to voting behavior, both to detect up-voting rings and to penalize those abusing downvotes. Their usual recommendation, when coming across a comment you think is unfairly downvoted, is to silently apply a corrective upvote.
  - jsjohnst 9y ago
    > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. FYI, want to start off with that to help indicate the likely reason for any downvotes you got on this post. > One thing for sure is that a lot of people downvote based on disagreement rather than a comment's quality - which in my opinion is not right Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it doesn’t make it any more valid than other’s and doesn’t make it a fact either. > (and I think against the intent of a downvote) @Dang has said on multiple occasions that the intent wasn’t as you are assuming. Apologies I don’t have a link handy at the moment.
    - thinkloop 9y ago
      > FYI, want to start off with that to help indicate the likely reason for any downvotes you got on this post. Thanks, I did know the price, no problem. > @Dang has said on multiple occasions that the intent wasn’t as you are assuming. Apologies I don’t have a link handy at the moment. I would be curious to read dang's opinion on this if anyone has it, it's not in the guidelines. > Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it doesn’t make it any more valid than other’s and doesn’t make it a fact either. Yes, that is the definition of an opinion.
      - grzm 9y ago
        > "I would be curious to read dang's opinion on this if anyone has it, it's not in the guidelines." https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20downvote&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20downvote&sort=by... A couple of the more recent comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16569778#16574021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16569778#16574021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336937 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336937
  - jnbiche 9y ago
    I'm fairly sure there are multiple downvote bots operating on HN. Frequently, certain comments to topics considered by some as "political" on HN will get an immediate 2 or 3 downvotes in the first 30 seconds, and then over the course of the next 2 or 3 hours, be upvoted back up to black. Although it's possible that there's some confounding happening here, such as the handful of people who hit refresh on HN hundreds of times a day are also ones who can't stand certain political viewpoints. But it seems unlikely. Far more likely is that there are a handful of downvote bots in operation on a keyword basis. It's not a huge deal to me, but it does seem kind of obvious.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      I get downvoted on agreeable comments on 4 day old conversations....there's definitely bots or something going on.
      - jnbiche 9y ago
        A downvote on a 4-day-old comment is unlikely to be a bot, since it's likely that no one will even see it. If you're seeing agreeable comments being downvoted after several days, it's probably just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off.
        ryanwaggoner 9y ago
        it's probably just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off. I do this :)
        julien_c 9y ago
        just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off. Who's calling me?
        DoreenMichele 9y ago
        A downvote on a 4-day-old comment... Is not possible since they turn downvotes off after 24 hours. /pedant As someone who incessantly refreshes HN and spends a fair amount of time on the Comments page, I see no reason why it wouldn't be people seeing new comments to older discussions via the Comments section rather than bots. Although I am a demographic outlier in multiple ways, I cannot possibly be the only person routinely cruising the new comments section.
  - DoreenMichele 9y ago
    Dang said recent-ish* that upvoting inappropriate comments can cost you your voting privileges. Additionally, there is a karma threshold for downvotes. IIRC, you need 500 karma. Between those two facts, I think downvote bots aren't a terribly likely explanation. You would need to establish an account with downvote privileges and then hope the mods don't revoke its downvote privilege in short order. It seems like a lot of work for probably not much pay off. That doesn't mean there can't be downvote bots, but it just seems to me a much more likely explanation is people cruising the Comments page. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16117475 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16117475
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Apple doesn't have a social network. They tried, and failed. > They also don't rely on advertising They tried that, too.
  - duskwuff 9y ago
    > They tried, and failed. What are you thinking of -- iTunes Ping? That was never really intended as a general-purpose social network.
  - grzm 9y ago
    The key issue (at least for me) is whether they've tried to benefit from marketing user-specific data. I can't recall any such effort, but will gladly to defer to someone more knowledgable. I'm not sure specifically why their multiple ad and social network efforts have failed, but it might be because they haven't been willing to do just that. On a general note, I find it frustrating that a lot of the discussions around this area end up with people talking past each other. Some people are concerned about advertising, others about privacy, others about using user data, others about open source software/hardware, others about encryption. They've got some overlap when it comes to specific features, but often get conflated, making the discussion even more difficult. One thing I've appreciated about reading your comments is that you often are able to cut through that quite decisively. Thanks!
  - r00fus 9y ago
    Is it wrong that I feel glad they failed?
- IBM 9y ago
  Apple operated iAd before shutting it down. One of the former iAd execs said this to the WSJ [1]: >“I don’t believe they are interested in this capability because they have a strict policy around what they do with user data,” Crawford said. “IAd has great assets and great capabilities, but they are going to follow Apple’s policy to the letter of the law.” So they crippled a potential new revenue stream because of their privacy policy. [1] https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/13/drawbridge-hires-apple-ad-executive-to-track-users-across-devices/ https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/13/drawbridge-hires-app...
  - headsoup 9y ago
    Exactly, Apple just doesn't need ads because of their physical product and brand strength. If you rely on ads, what actual value are you (or could you be) providing that you're not charging for. And then, why not, why choose ads instead and data harvesting? If Facebook started charging for their services, would people happily start paying or would they suddenly realise there are equal/better alternatives once cost is a factor? Will be interesting to see what happens with Apple if the i-products do ever decline significantly. (I believe their Brand is strong enough to sell their other services effectively so long as they get the price right).
  - FireBeyond 9y ago
    You don't consider it at all possible that "because privacy" is the PR spin on it? When iAd launched, it required mid six digit buys for ads. Users complained that they only would see the same half-dozen ads. Over the course of the next two years, that was steadily reduced, low six digits, fifty thousand, and the complaints stayed the same. Before iAd shut its doors, you could get ad buys for a minimum of _fifty dollars_. I tend to be a bit skeptical that instead of the platform being a failure, Apple realized after a few years of cutting buy prices that "hey, privacy is important". That sounds a lot more like a PR soundbite.
    - IBM 9y ago
      Those ads were priced that high for a reason, to keep garbage off the iPhone. iAd only really made sense as a way to enable developers to make money from their apps in a high quality way. All the stipulations don't make sense for a pure ad-tech business. And I don't think a former iAd exec has any reason to be doing PR for Apple when the purpose of that WSJ story and his cooperation with it was to pimp his new job/startup.
- majestik 9y ago
  “Apple doesn't have a social network.” What about iMessage?
  - ryanwaggoner 9y ago
    That's a social network in the same way the Pony Express was.
whatshisface 9y ago
An API into a closed service is no more FOSSy than a graphical user interface into a closed desktop app. I don't really understand the comparison, what do you think motivates it? Facebook has open-sourced a few internal projects, but none of them had much to do with our personal data. In fact, it's difficult to blame the API when the problem was that the data was collected in the first place. Surely Zuckerberg has some political opinions of his own, if CA hadn't triggered this media storm what would have stopped him from supporting his own favorite candidate internally? In fact, what's stopping him from doing that right now? Would it even be illegal?
craigsmansion 9y ago
> all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types Can you produce any quote from any Free Software or Open Source developer or advocate that supports your statement in this context of Facebook being better than Apple because they're "open"? Because even though both companies are terrible at freedom, they're terrible in very different ways, turning any comparison into a false equivalence.
aylmao 9y ago
> Apple got this right from the beginning despite years of criticism about the "walled garden". Being a walled garden is independent of privacy. The calendar app on macOS Calendar app allows me to share my calendars in an open format (ICAL) and interoperates with other calendar apps through that specification. It respects my privacy by not sharing anything I don't ask it to without being "walled". Signal is open and secure; iMessage could be a non-proprietary format and remain just as private. > all the press coverage of some app developer crying about App Store rejections or onerous rules. As far as I'm aware a lot of these weren't for privacy matters [1] and are sometimes a little much [2] (this one is specially absurd: [3]). [1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/08/apples-widened-ban-on-templated-apps-is-wiping-small-businesses-from-the-app-store/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/08/apples-widened-ban-on-temp... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/8/16992830/apple-emoji-crackdown-cross-platform-apps-slack-whatsapp https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/8/16992830/apple-emoji-crack... [3]: https://medium.com/@alariccole/apple-literally-stole-my-thunder-253aed27a455 https://medium.com/@alariccole/apple-literally-stole-my-thun... PS: > all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types I don't think that means what you think it means. FOSS and privacy are tangential matters.
- intrasight 9y ago
  > FOSS and privacy are tangential matters I totally agree (because it's true of course). But do recognize that it's in Apple's interest to conflate the two. To make it even more interesting, add "secure" to the list of matters.
- iteriteratedone 9y ago
  No its not ... an open env relies on transparency. No data no ads no money. Where apple can have a walled garden and privacy cause they have customers. Facebook knows who butters their bread too, its the advertisers. You are the product, not the customer.
- arnoooooo 9y ago
  > FOSS and privacy are tangential matters Actually, the only way privacy can be guaranteed is with code you control running on a machine your control. Free Software (and not Open Source) has everything to do with privacy, as it is about control.
IshKebab 9y ago
The "open always wins" wasn't talking about access to other people's private data. It was talking about letting apps run and giving them the capability to act on your data. Big difference. Nobody is complaining about being able to install a Facebook app that harvests your data. The issue is it could also harvest your friends' data by default. Although honestly I think this is all manufactured outrage. The fact that this could happen was totally public in 2012 and the public weren't outraged about it then.
sagargandecha 9y ago
I hadn't seen that before, cheers it was an interesting read. I really want to believe that my mind still can't dismiss acknowledging that there is always a possibility they have undisclosed back doors, it's just a matter of what it takes for them to disclose it. As more time goes by my thoughts on that possibility lower though, as more people are exposed to the code as a potential outsider/doesn't agree with the practice.
sametmax 9y ago
This is completely misleading. 1 - I've yet to learn about a major open source project stealing data from its users. 2 - Open source guaranty the users have the right and access to check how it's data can be used. Apple's products do not. Actually, we discovered they were part of the PRIMS program, which means basically they gave ALL your data away already while actively lying about it (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...). 3 - FOSS people like interoperability and choice, which is one of the major problems they blame Apple not to take care of. This has ZERO relationship with privacy. So on one hand you have privacy savvy communities, giving their free time and work so that everybody can use it to built a better word an understand transparently what's going on. On the other hand you have a multi-billion dollar black box giving away user data, using massive PR to pretend they are privacy oriented while they make money out of locked in devices. Now I get people enjoy the Apple product experience. I get they make a lot of things right for this experience, especially for user friendliness, and integration. And I certainly get they made the industry progress from a technical point of view. But do not compare their moral scale to the one from the FOSS folks. This is literally insulting them.

by IBM 9y ago

headsoup 9y ago

You're comparing Apples to oranges (I'm sorry) Apple doesn't have a social network. They also don't rely on advertising and 3rd party data brokering. It's easy for Apple to be the 'good guys' here when they have physical products as their profit generators. FOSS would have worked better in the Facebook case too as people and developers would know/discover a) where their data is and b) what risks it faces

thinkloop 9y ago
I swear there is some kind of downvote bot on HN - reasonable posts are often down-voted grey within the first few minutes (like this one's parent), and then eventually climb up to a reasonable place, when, what feels like, the humans have had time to see it - has this been noticed or discussed before? I'd be curious to know if some accounts are serial downvoters, especially as soon as comments go up - does HN look for that kind of stuff? Of course part of the answer is that new comments have no votes so a quick downvote will make them grey, but there are frequent strange cases. One thing for sure is that a lot of people downvote based on disagreement rather than a comment's quality - which in my opinion is not right (and I think against the intent of a downvote), but that's a different issue.
- grzm 9y ago
  Similar behavior appears to happen with quality of comments. Initial comments on a story are often insubstantial, knee-jerk low-quality comments. With time, things generally get better. From what I gather (but I don't have any comments at hand), the mods do pay attention to voting behavior, both to detect up-voting rings and to penalize those abusing downvotes. Their usual recommendation, when coming across a comment you think is unfairly downvoted, is to silently apply a corrective upvote.
- jsjohnst 9y ago
  > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. FYI, want to start off with that to help indicate the likely reason for any downvotes you got on this post. > One thing for sure is that a lot of people downvote based on disagreement rather than a comment's quality - which in my opinion is not right Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it doesn’t make it any more valid than other’s and doesn’t make it a fact either. > (and I think against the intent of a downvote) @Dang has said on multiple occasions that the intent wasn’t as you are assuming. Apologies I don’t have a link handy at the moment.
  - thinkloop 9y ago
    > FYI, want to start off with that to help indicate the likely reason for any downvotes you got on this post. Thanks, I did know the price, no problem. > @Dang has said on multiple occasions that the intent wasn’t as you are assuming. Apologies I don’t have a link handy at the moment. I would be curious to read dang's opinion on this if anyone has it, it's not in the guidelines. > Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it doesn’t make it any more valid than other’s and doesn’t make it a fact either. Yes, that is the definition of an opinion.
    - grzm 9y ago
      > "I would be curious to read dang's opinion on this if anyone has it, it's not in the guidelines." https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20downvote&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20downvote&sort=by... A couple of the more recent comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16569778#16574021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16569778#16574021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336937 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336937
- jnbiche 9y ago
  I'm fairly sure there are multiple downvote bots operating on HN. Frequently, certain comments to topics considered by some as "political" on HN will get an immediate 2 or 3 downvotes in the first 30 seconds, and then over the course of the next 2 or 3 hours, be upvoted back up to black. Although it's possible that there's some confounding happening here, such as the handful of people who hit refresh on HN hundreds of times a day are also ones who can't stand certain political viewpoints. But it seems unlikely. Far more likely is that there are a handful of downvote bots in operation on a keyword basis. It's not a huge deal to me, but it does seem kind of obvious.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    I get downvoted on agreeable comments on 4 day old conversations....there's definitely bots or something going on.
    - jnbiche 9y ago
      A downvote on a 4-day-old comment is unlikely to be a bot, since it's likely that no one will even see it. If you're seeing agreeable comments being downvoted after several days, it's probably just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off.
      - ryanwaggoner 9y ago
        it's probably just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off. I do this :)
      - julien_c 9y ago
        just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off. Who's calling me?
      - DoreenMichele 9y ago
        A downvote on a 4-day-old comment... Is not possible since they turn downvotes off after 24 hours. /pedant As someone who incessantly refreshes HN and spends a fair amount of time on the Comments page, I see no reason why it wouldn't be people seeing new comments to older discussions via the Comments section rather than bots. Although I am a demographic outlier in multiple ways, I cannot possibly be the only person routinely cruising the new comments section.
- DoreenMichele 9y ago
  Dang said recent-ish* that upvoting inappropriate comments can cost you your voting privileges. Additionally, there is a karma threshold for downvotes. IIRC, you need 500 karma. Between those two facts, I think downvote bots aren't a terribly likely explanation. You would need to establish an account with downvote privileges and then hope the mods don't revoke its downvote privilege in short order. It seems like a lot of work for probably not much pay off. That doesn't mean there can't be downvote bots, but it just seems to me a much more likely explanation is people cruising the Comments page. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16117475 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16117475
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Apple doesn't have a social network. They tried, and failed. > They also don't rely on advertising They tried that, too.
- duskwuff 9y ago
  > They tried, and failed. What are you thinking of -- iTunes Ping? That was never really intended as a general-purpose social network.
- grzm 9y ago
  The key issue (at least for me) is whether they've tried to benefit from marketing user-specific data. I can't recall any such effort, but will gladly to defer to someone more knowledgable. I'm not sure specifically why their multiple ad and social network efforts have failed, but it might be because they haven't been willing to do just that. On a general note, I find it frustrating that a lot of the discussions around this area end up with people talking past each other. Some people are concerned about advertising, others about privacy, others about using user data, others about open source software/hardware, others about encryption. They've got some overlap when it comes to specific features, but often get conflated, making the discussion even more difficult. One thing I've appreciated about reading your comments is that you often are able to cut through that quite decisively. Thanks!
- r00fus 9y ago
  Is it wrong that I feel glad they failed?
IBM 9y ago
Apple operated iAd before shutting it down. One of the former iAd execs said this to the WSJ [1]: >“I don’t believe they are interested in this capability because they have a strict policy around what they do with user data,” Crawford said. “IAd has great assets and great capabilities, but they are going to follow Apple’s policy to the letter of the law.” So they crippled a potential new revenue stream because of their privacy policy. [1] https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/13/drawbridge-hires-apple-ad-executive-to-track-users-across-devices/ https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/13/drawbridge-hires-app...
- headsoup 9y ago
  Exactly, Apple just doesn't need ads because of their physical product and brand strength. If you rely on ads, what actual value are you (or could you be) providing that you're not charging for. And then, why not, why choose ads instead and data harvesting? If Facebook started charging for their services, would people happily start paying or would they suddenly realise there are equal/better alternatives once cost is a factor? Will be interesting to see what happens with Apple if the i-products do ever decline significantly. (I believe their Brand is strong enough to sell their other services effectively so long as they get the price right).
- FireBeyond 9y ago
  You don't consider it at all possible that "because privacy" is the PR spin on it? When iAd launched, it required mid six digit buys for ads. Users complained that they only would see the same half-dozen ads. Over the course of the next two years, that was steadily reduced, low six digits, fifty thousand, and the complaints stayed the same. Before iAd shut its doors, you could get ad buys for a minimum of _fifty dollars_. I tend to be a bit skeptical that instead of the platform being a failure, Apple realized after a few years of cutting buy prices that "hey, privacy is important". That sounds a lot more like a PR soundbite.
  - IBM 9y ago
    Those ads were priced that high for a reason, to keep garbage off the iPhone. iAd only really made sense as a way to enable developers to make money from their apps in a high quality way. All the stipulations don't make sense for a pure ad-tech business. And I don't think a former iAd exec has any reason to be doing PR for Apple when the purpose of that WSJ story and his cooperation with it was to pimp his new job/startup.
majestik 9y ago
“Apple doesn't have a social network.” What about iMessage?
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  That's a social network in the same way the Pony Express was.

whatshisface 9y ago

An API into a closed service is no more FOSSy than a graphical user interface into a closed desktop app. I don't really understand the comparison, what do you think motivates it? Facebook has open-sourced a few internal projects, but none of them had much to do with our personal data. In fact, it's difficult to blame the API when the problem was that the data was collected in the first place. Surely Zuckerberg has some political opinions of his own, if CA hadn't triggered this media storm what would have stopped him from supporting his own favorite candidate internally? In fact, what's stopping him from doing that right now? Would it even be illegal?

craigsmansion 9y ago

> all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types Can you produce any quote from any Free Software or Open Source developer or advocate that supports your statement in this context of Facebook being better than Apple because they're "open"? Because even though both companies are terrible at freedom, they're terrible in very different ways, turning any comparison into a false equivalence.

aylmao 9y ago

> Apple got this right from the beginning despite years of criticism about the "walled garden". Being a walled garden is independent of privacy. The calendar app on macOS Calendar app allows me to share my calendars in an open format (ICAL) and interoperates with other calendar apps through that specification. It respects my privacy by not sharing anything I don't ask it to without being "walled". Signal is open and secure; iMessage could be a non-proprietary format and remain just as private. > all the press coverage of some app developer crying about App Store rejections or onerous rules. As far as I'm aware a lot of these weren't for privacy matters [1] and are sometimes a little much [2] (this one is specially absurd: [3]). [1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/08/apples-widened-ban-on-templated-apps-is-wiping-small-businesses-from-the-app-store/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/08/apples-widened-ban-on-temp... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/8/16992830/apple-emoji-crackdown-cross-platform-apps-slack-whatsapp https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/8/16992830/apple-emoji-crack... [3]: https://medium.com/@alariccole/apple-literally-stole-my-thunder-253aed27a455 https://medium.com/@alariccole/apple-literally-stole-my-thun... PS: > all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types I don't think that means what you think it means. FOSS and privacy are tangential matters.

intrasight 9y ago
> FOSS and privacy are tangential matters I totally agree (because it's true of course). But do recognize that it's in Apple's interest to conflate the two. To make it even more interesting, add "secure" to the list of matters.
iteriteratedone 9y ago
No its not ... an open env relies on transparency. No data no ads no money. Where apple can have a walled garden and privacy cause they have customers. Facebook knows who butters their bread too, its the advertisers. You are the product, not the customer.
arnoooooo 9y ago
> FOSS and privacy are tangential matters Actually, the only way privacy can be guaranteed is with code you control running on a machine your control. Free Software (and not Open Source) has everything to do with privacy, as it is about control.

IshKebab 9y ago

The "open always wins" wasn't talking about access to other people's private data. It was talking about letting apps run and giving them the capability to act on your data. Big difference. Nobody is complaining about being able to install a Facebook app that harvests your data. The issue is it could also harvest your friends' data by default. Although honestly I think this is all manufactured outrage. The fact that this could happen was totally public in 2012 and the public weren't outraged about it then.

sagargandecha 9y ago

I hadn't seen that before, cheers it was an interesting read. I really want to believe that my mind still can't dismiss acknowledging that there is always a possibility they have undisclosed back doors, it's just a matter of what it takes for them to disclose it. As more time goes by my thoughts on that possibility lower though, as more people are exposed to the code as a potential outsider/doesn't agree with the practice.

sametmax 9y ago

This is completely misleading. 1 - I've yet to learn about a major open source project stealing data from its users. 2 - Open source guaranty the users have the right and access to check how it's data can be used. Apple's products do not. Actually, we discovered they were part of the PRIMS program, which means basically they gave ALL your data away already while actively lying about it (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...). 3 - FOSS people like interoperability and choice, which is one of the major problems they blame Apple not to take care of. This has ZERO relationship with privacy. So on one hand you have privacy savvy communities, giving their free time and work so that everybody can use it to built a better word an understand transparently what's going on. On the other hand you have a multi-billion dollar black box giving away user data, using massive PR to pretend they are privacy oriented while they make money out of locked in devices. Now I get people enjoy the Apple product experience. I get they make a lot of things right for this experience, especially for user friendliness, and integration. And I certainly get they made the industry progress from a technical point of view. But do not compare their moral scale to the one from the FOSS folks. This is literally insulting them.