5 ms·

Apple sells a walled garden that controls what software you can use, forces upgrades by forbidding repairs and slowing down old phones with software updates, an

• robocat 8y ago
  Each of your complaints is because of a well-designed compromise (app quality/safety; preventing abrupt phone shutdown; removing a common failure point). You may disagree with the compromises, sure. PS: I own zero Apple devices (partly because of the reasons you have, not for the way you are misrepresenting those reasons).
  • leereeves 8y ago
    Apple's App Store policies are about far more than app quality or safety. Apple has banned many apps for political or financial reasons. Slowing down old phones without notice or permission wasn't the best response to aging batteries. Even Apple didn't deny it was wrong. They apologized, once they were caught. And the MagSafe connector was not a common failure point.
    • drivingmenuts 8y ago
      Personally, I think the MagSafe connector was bloody brilliant and I'm not giving up my mid-2015 MBP until it absolutely won't function any more, because of that feature (it's saved my MBP several times when I was a bit clumsy or forgetful). Another reason: the multiplicity of ports and bunches of things that all use USB-A.
      • reaperducer 8y ago
        I believe there's a product, or at least a Kickstarter, to add a MagSafe-style dongle to a USB-C port.
        • raarts 8y ago
          I tried several MagSafe-like USB-C cables and found them lacking reliability, ending up having to re-seat the connectors multiple times to get them to connect properly. Don't think USB-C and MagSafe are a good marriage.
    • mcintyre1994 8y ago
      > Apple bans competing apps regardless of app quality or safety. I don't know what criteria they actually use, but this is at best incredibly inconsistent. There's heaps of competing mail apps, calendars, camera apps, photo apps, weather apps, notes apps, reminders app, messaging apps on iOS, including a Google one in most of those categories.
      • leereeves 8y ago
        I know that once upon a time they banned competing apps, including Google Voice. I don't know if that behavior continues but I think it's a bit too soon to forget. https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/27/apple-is-growing-rotten-to-the-core-and-its-likely-atts-fault/ https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/27/apple-is-growing-rotten-to...
        • danaris 8y ago
          This is from nine years ago, when the iOS App Store (then just the iPhone App Store, as the iPad didn't even exist yet!) was less than 2 years old. Calling that "a bit too soon to forget" seems...problematic on several levels.
          • leereeves 8y ago
            Why? They continue to use their control of the app store for financial gain. The clock on forgiveness doesn't start until the abuse stops.
            • danaris 8y ago
              When you're replying to a comment pointing out that there are, in fact, lots of competing apps, and your comment claiming that they're still evil points to an article from nine years ago, you don't demonstrate much credibility to your claims. I think your clocks are just broken.
              • leereeves 8y ago
    • robocat 8y ago
      My problem with your first comment is that you misrepresent the issues. Your second reply is worse because you introduce other different issues, without addressing the point (that Apple chooses compromises that you might disagree with). > Slowing down old phones without notice or permission wasn't the best response to aging batteries. Sure, it wasn't handled well, but you said that they did it to force upgrades... That is patently incorrect in my opinion. Apple are far superior at keeping old devices updated than most actors in the Android world (as a comparison point). > And the MagSafe connector was not a common failure point. And your original post complained that "and sells more dongles by eliminating features and changing ports". What does replacing a proprietary magsafe connector with USB C have to do with Apple selling more dongles? There are now plenty of compatible third party options available in more than one category. Regards app store policies: see sibling reply.
      • leereeves 8y ago
        My second post addressed your claim that these issues are "well-designed compromises" by disproving it with counterexamples. MagSafe was at once an example of a port changed (MagSafe 1 to 2) and a feature removed (replaced with USB) that didn't fit your explanation "removing a common failure point". Even Apple didn't try to claim that slowing down old phones was a well-designed compromise; instead, they apologized. And there are many examples of Apple removing apps for reasons other than "app quality/safety", for one such example, see my response to sibling reply. These are not "other different issues", these are counterexamples. They may not be the issues you thought of when you read my first post but they were some of the issues I was thinking of.
        • harywilke 8y ago
          "About a year ago in iOS 10.2.1, we delivered a software update that improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, and iPhone SE. With the update, iOS dynamically manages the maximum performance of some system components when needed to prevent a shutdown. While these changes may go unnoticed, in some cases users may experience longer launch times for apps and other reductions in performance." https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ Unexpected shutdowns vs. longer app launch times and other reductions in performance. a compromise.
    • briandear 8y ago
      They didn’t apologize for doing it; they apologized for not explaining it.
      • leereeves 8y ago
        Keeping it secret was part of the design. Who knows what other hidden "compromises" are waiting to be discovered?
    • jamamp 8y ago
      The reason Apple moved to the USB-C charging on the MacBook is because it no longer served the purpose it was originally for. Older MacBooks and MacBook pros were a bit bulky and heavy. Tripping on a MagSafe charger cord connected to one of these would disconnect because the friction of the laptop on its its surface was stronger than that of the magnetic pull of the MagSafe connector. With the new Macook, however, I believe it was much lighter to the point that it would have pulled the laptop down with it upon someone tripping on the cord. It wasn't doing anything to benefit the user at that point. Because of this, they probably opted for a slimmer charging port (USB-C), and it went well with the growing use of USB-C in the industry. I do wish they included more USB-C ports, however. I do not know exactly the reason they opted for USB-C in the new MacBook Pro, however. I believe it would still be heavy enough for MagSafe to be effective. However at this point, USB-C is saturating the market and consolidation in their products may be a more important issue for Apple at this point.
  • strictnein 8y ago
    Apple was never a player in the ad market, so which of these "well-designed compromises" went against their bottom line?
    • Mononokay 8y ago
      Worth noting that they do have an ad platform, actually, and that all apps on the App Store are mandated to use it if wanting to monetize.
      • eric_h 8y ago
        > they do have an ad platform, actually, and that all apps on the App Store are mandated to use it if wanting to monetize. What? This is not true at all. Source: I released an iOS app that used a non-apple third party to serve ads.
  • maxxxxx 8y ago
    " Each of your complaints is because of a well-designed compromise (app quality/safety; preventing abrupt phone shutdown; removing a common failure point). You may disagree with the compromises, sure." You should add "making more money" to the factors that went into this "well designed" approach. For example I don't see how not adding a MicroSD slot is nothing other than a method of forcing people into buying phones with larger internal storage (and making more money for Apple).
    • bitcurious 8y ago
      A microSD slot would have slower read/write access, would take up much more room per GB, and would compromise waterproofing. Your point about money would be better made if you just complained about the cost of larger internal storage, except then it would be obvious - Apple is profit motivated.
      • deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
    • robocat 8y ago
      Supporting MicroSD is most definitely a compromise. 1. I've lost photos on an Android because I used one (I bought the most reliable brand of card I could, from my most trusted store, with quite a low capacity). 2. Also the UX is crap - I know the Android universe well, and managing the options, the files, and the apps is not something I would recommend to my mum. 3. Finally any hardware interface is a point of failure (e.g. recently I had to reseat a SIM in my friend's iPhone that couldn't connect to it). I can see your argument re profit in the past, but it is becoming less valid as the minimum flash memory size is increasing. I have just bought an ZTE with 32GB because that is all I need (32GB is the minimum you can get in a new iPhone.) All these arguments that Apple is trying to "nickel and dime" their users is just tiring. Sure, they charge a lot, and they love profits, but that doesn't mean they are shitting on their users (like say cellular network providers do!) Edit: ironically it is probably because they charge so much for the device and it is so profitable that they don't need to chase every cent they could e.g. they don't provide payday loans to buy their phones!
• kayaknutrient 8y ago
  Yes. There are different degrees of bad. I'll take the hardware walled garden and data protection over the other bads.
• bootlooped 8y ago
  Being in a walled garden is not a concern of most users, and it often works to their benefit. If dear old grandma can barely tell the difference between the internet browser and Facebook, I don't think I care if she doesn't have root access to her phone. To roughly quote another HN user who I don't recall, "Not everybody wants to sysadmin their phone".
• kapad 8y ago
  Then use open source. if there's a hardware manufacturer that you trust, then that's all you need. you can install a version of android i.e. open source and without play services (eg. LineageOS) and then download apps from a store like f-droid. (all these apps as well as the f-droid app are all open source). Your functionality though, will be severely compromised. So the choices are: 1. Apple - hurts your wallet and your choice of apps (only the walled garden and nothing else). 2. Google - you're the product. not the phone. 3. Something else like the open source solution. You'll spend a lot of time here and will be restricted to the limited choice of apps on the the f-droid store. So take your pic. I'm mostly in #2, with a billion or so others. I'm fully aware that me and my data are the product here, and whenever I start feeling that I made a deal with the devil, I simply tell myself that they can't know what's happening in my head. I then quickly shift focus and start thinking about something else. :P