9 ms·

Why oh why should I drop a cool ~$2000 for Apple to take away some fundamental computing freedoms? How long before the public starts seeing through the "Apple k

Why oh why should I drop a cool ~$2000 for Apple to take away some fundamental computing freedoms? How long before the public starts seeing through the "Apple knows best" philosophy of taking away your computing freedom? Anyone who's owned a general purpose computing device prior to the iPhone should be complaining about these freedoms, or lack thereof: 1. Full lockdown on app install - only app store blessed apps can run 2. Purposeful crippling of the browser's W3C compliance to retain control over apps on iDevices (long, long list of web APIs that don't work on iDevices) 3. Further on #2, devs are forbidden from running their own browser engines on iDevices. Puts to shame the anti-trust suit against Microsoft regarding IE on Windows. Imagine if MSFT policy were to disallow non IE/Edge/Chakra browser engines 4. All Apple accessories need to go through the Made For Ipod (MFI) certification process, which is why off the shelf storage devices won't work on the iPad. Apple ends up imposing a $7 surcharge on every lightning accessory, because they very fucking well can, to bless your accessory as Apple certified. 5. Blatant, retroactive policy modifications to stifle competition (Steam was pulled from app store, Android watches aren't allowed the same deep notifications access, ....) Apple might be the most evil corp. to ever succeed at scale in computing.

vondur 8y ago
If those are your concerns, then this device is not for you.
- dTal 8y ago
  Well, yeah. I think the point was they ought to be your concerns.
  - dpkonofa 8y ago
    Don't you tell me my business, devil woman!
gumby 8y ago
I believe they have a majority in tablets but they certainly are far from a majority in phones or computers, so I don't feel like they are any risk to your computing freedoms in practice. Some people consider the restriction on running arbitrary code a benefit (BTW I agree with you on this) and complaining about that is like complaining that it's terrible that people who buy a Mercedes or Tesla have exorbitant repair costs. If you think they are the thin edge of a wedge that others will follow you might have a point. But I think Android and Windows (much less BSD and linux!) specifically are not following this approach. BTW things are better on the Mac side -- most well defined (i.e. supported by a standard) devices work without additional drivers which is a huge improvement over the old Windows approach. And until the T2 machines you could boot whatever you want on their hardware (and I believe, though with little evidence, that this restriction will go away).
- ericlewis 8y ago
  You can disable secure boot on T2 machines which will allow booting whatever you want.
  - gumby 8y ago
    Very good point, sorry I forgot it!
  - miles 8y ago
    Apple's T2 chip is blocking Linux from booting on new Mac hardware https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3065755/apples-t2-chip-is-blocking-linux-from-booting-on-new-mac-hardware https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3065755/apples-t2-...
    - dpkonofa 8y ago
      He already addressed this. You can disable secure boot to allow Linux installs.
      - miles 8y ago
        "Even when the Secure Boot functionality has been disabled, the T2 chip is reportedly still blocking operating systems aside from macOS and Windows 10, the report adds."
        dpkonofa 8y ago
        Is that new to these devices? We have an iMac Pro running Linux just fine.
  - gumby 8y ago
    Looks like there aren't any drivers (yet?) for the new storage system though I would hardly characterise that as "blocking"
Wowfunhappy 8y ago
Does #4 actually apply to the new, USB-C iPad? Your other points notwithstanding at all, I was very pleasantly surprised by the shift to USB-C. I was sure Apple would never move away from Lightning due to their lucrative MFI program. That they did anyway is a win for consumers, even if there's still a lot wrong with Apple's approach.
- writepub 8y ago
  That's the sad part - their move towards USB-c reduces their costs, increases supply chain diversity, etc. But, they're likely locking down non MFI certified accessories, at least in storage, for profit, because they can. Imagine the next iteration of the Mac - USB-C ports where storage manufacturers need to pay an MFI tax to function on a commodity, industry spec interface, just for an Apple blessing Where are the FTC, EU regulatory authorities?
  - matthewmacleod 8y ago
    You are basing this view on absolutely no information.
    - writepub 8y ago
      It's not a view, it's a fact. Please feel free to browse publicly available MFI policy. [1] Cheers! [1]: https://mfi.apple.com/MFiWeb/getFAQ.action#1-1 https://mfi.apple.com/MFiWeb/getFAQ.action#1-1
      - eridius 8y ago
        "they're likely locking down non MFI certified accessories" is not a fact. It's speculation. And the list of MFi licensed technologies does not include USB. So unless you're tunneling one of the existing MFi licensed technologies over USB (if that's even possible), then MFi does not seem to apply.
        writepub 8y ago
tinus_hn 8y ago
> Why oh why should I drop a cool ~$2000 for Apple to take away some fundamental computing freedoms? Because you want to. If you don’t want to, don’t. No one is twisting your arm.
9935c101ab17a66 8y ago
RE: #3, how exactly is this an anti-trust case? Here's a refutation of that notion I found elsewhere (part of the conversation around Google being find by the EU): > Anti-competitive practices aren’t illegal - it’s called “business”. For that matter, monopolies aren’t illegal (not that Apple even comes close to being considered one). You can even use monopoly power in an anti-competive way and be on solid legal footing. It’s not an anti-trust issue until you either collude or use monopoly power to leverage other company products or services in an anti-competive way (as Google did). That’s 3 criteria that must all be present and Apple is nowhere close on 2 of them. http://disq.us/p/1uelmvq http://disq.us/p/1uelmvq Also, do you really truly believe Apple is the most evil corp to ever succeed at scale in computing? Really?
- writepub 8y ago
  Yes - the most evil companies go for after well established freedoms. Apple has gone after the freedom of it's users to run apps of their choosing, or use industry standard computer accessories of their choosing, just to inflate their bottom line. And all along, their PR messaging is about how their totalitarian control is in the user's best interest.
  - 9935c101ab17a66 8y ago
    You didn't address the anti-trust claim. Regarding the rest of your comment, apple are NOT going after your freedom to run apps of your choosing (sidetone: kind of an oblique and overly dramatic way of phrasing it, don't you think?). They do instead offer a different model for the design of their mobile operating system that relies on stringent access control to both improve simplicity and security. Listen, I'm fine with you not agreeing with how iOS is designed and how Apple acts a gatekeeper for distributing applications. It's not a perfect system, and it definitely has it's downsides. But you DO have the freedom to buy any tablet/smartphone you wish (or to not own one at all), and apple isn't doing anything to restrict said freedom. Do you also not recognize the benefits of the way iOS works? I'm not even asking you to concede that the design has a net-positive. But you have to admit, there are SOME benefits of iOS' design. As a personal anecdote, I can tell you that my mom absolutely disliked personal computers (and digital cameras) and refused to use them for years. She started using an iPad maybe five years ago and she absolutely loves it, and I've never once had to remove malware from her computer, help her try to recover corrupted or lost photos, or any of the other mundane and often complicated tasks a 'regular' computer user would have to deal with. (This applies to macOS / windows / linux, etc). I encourage to reconsider your position. I'm not saying that Apple doesn't have faults, and their implementations/decisions are perfect. But your statements are histrionic and you come across as a bit hysterical.
snowwrestler 8y ago
Can't you side-load your own apps onto your device, including apps that would not normally pass App Store review?
dpkonofa 8y ago
This is a pretty ignorant take on the whole thing. Most people pay the premium for this specifically because only "blessed" apps and accessories work and they don't have to mess with things. They're paying extra for the interconnectivity and the guarantee that the apps and accessories will work. You, and others like you, need to realize that you're not the market for this product. If you don't like it, don't buy it. For the majority of people, though, they look at these devices as something simple that they don't have to fuss with to get working. Do you honestly believe that the majority of iPad owners care about sideloading apps or what browser engine is running while they look at Facebook? These are not fundamental computer freedoms (how overly dramatic). These are trade-offs that are important to some and not important to others.
- writepub 8y ago
  > If you don't like it, don't buy it. No one on HN needs a crash course in market economics, choice, and free will. Un-substantive comments are strongly discouraged. > Do you honestly believe that the majority of iPad owners care about sideloading apps or what browser engine is running while they look at Facebook? No - but app devs like Facebook, who end up serving the end user, definitely care. At some point, it won't be worth the hassle of submitting to anal-cavity searches by Apple, just to list on the app store. I personally think the time has already arrived, as ZERO new apps [1] get installed. Netflix & co have already started to disallow subscription purchases via the store, the time to bypass it completely is nigh - except for the chronic stymieing of the browser engine on iDevices by Apple to protect it's app store hegemony. [1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/25/majority-of-u-s-consumers-still-download-zero-apps-per-month-says-comscore/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/25/majority-of-u-s-consumers-...
kup0 8y ago
Because 0% of this has affected by day-to-day life and use of the device, which just works for what I need it for? I'll concede the fact that this is personal preference which is really the whole point of my response. (I like Apples, you like Oranges, stop telling me to change my taste buds, etc). I have tried both Android and iOS, and actually like things about both of them. At the end of the day, my preference just happens to fall on the iOS side of the line 1 - Haven't run into an issue where this is a problem. I do not feel I am missing out on any unallowed apps. 2, 3 - Yes I do not like this and think it's dumb, BUT it's not important or significant enough for me to care or get a different device. Safari + content blockers is a completely reasonable, fast, good-enough experience. 4 - Very rarely has this been an issue for me, other than Lightning costs being inflated (I guess) but most of the accessories I use are bluetooth 5 - Sure, like 2 and 3, I don't appreciate their way of approaching this either, but I bought the phone because it's my preference of device/OS overall, not to maintain philosophical purity - in other words, I am willing to sacrifice some things for others and I still prefer iOS devices to the alternatives Newer iPhones (and even non-Apple phones) missing headphone jacks is WAY more offensive to me than anything you outlined.

vondur 8y ago

If those are your concerns, then this device is not for you.

dTal 8y ago
Well, yeah. I think the point was they ought to be your concerns.
- dpkonofa 8y ago
  Don't you tell me my business, devil woman!

gumby 8y ago

I believe they have a majority in tablets but they certainly are far from a majority in phones or computers, so I don't feel like they are any risk to your computing freedoms in practice. Some people consider the restriction on running arbitrary code a benefit (BTW I agree with you on this) and complaining about that is like complaining that it's terrible that people who buy a Mercedes or Tesla have exorbitant repair costs. If you think they are the thin edge of a wedge that others will follow you might have a point. But I think Android and Windows (much less BSD and linux!) specifically are not following this approach. BTW things are better on the Mac side -- most well defined (i.e. supported by a standard) devices work without additional drivers which is a huge improvement over the old Windows approach. And until the T2 machines you could boot whatever you want on their hardware (and I believe, though with little evidence, that this restriction will go away).

ericlewis 8y ago
You can disable secure boot on T2 machines which will allow booting whatever you want.
- gumby 8y ago
  Very good point, sorry I forgot it!
- miles 8y ago
  Apple's T2 chip is blocking Linux from booting on new Mac hardware https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3065755/apples-t2-chip-is-blocking-linux-from-booting-on-new-mac-hardware https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3065755/apples-t2-...
  - dpkonofa 8y ago
    He already addressed this. You can disable secure boot to allow Linux installs.
    - miles 8y ago
      "Even when the Secure Boot functionality has been disabled, the T2 chip is reportedly still blocking operating systems aside from macOS and Windows 10, the report adds."
      - dpkonofa 8y ago
        Is that new to these devices? We have an iMac Pro running Linux just fine.
- gumby 8y ago
  Looks like there aren't any drivers (yet?) for the new storage system though I would hardly characterise that as "blocking"

Wowfunhappy 8y ago

Does #4 actually apply to the new, USB-C iPad? Your other points notwithstanding at all, I was very pleasantly surprised by the shift to USB-C. I was sure Apple would never move away from Lightning due to their lucrative MFI program. That they did anyway is a win for consumers, even if there's still a lot wrong with Apple's approach.

writepub 8y ago
That's the sad part - their move towards USB-c reduces their costs, increases supply chain diversity, etc. But, they're likely locking down non MFI certified accessories, at least in storage, for profit, because they can. Imagine the next iteration of the Mac - USB-C ports where storage manufacturers need to pay an MFI tax to function on a commodity, industry spec interface, just for an Apple blessing Where are the FTC, EU regulatory authorities?
- matthewmacleod 8y ago
  You are basing this view on absolutely no information.
  - writepub 8y ago
    It's not a view, it's a fact. Please feel free to browse publicly available MFI policy. [1] Cheers! [1]: https://mfi.apple.com/MFiWeb/getFAQ.action#1-1 https://mfi.apple.com/MFiWeb/getFAQ.action#1-1
    - eridius 8y ago
      "they're likely locking down non MFI certified accessories" is not a fact. It's speculation. And the list of MFi licensed technologies does not include USB. So unless you're tunneling one of the existing MFi licensed technologies over USB (if that's even possible), then MFi does not seem to apply.
      - writepub 8y ago

tinus_hn 8y ago

> Why oh why should I drop a cool ~$2000 for Apple to take away some fundamental computing freedoms? Because you want to. If you don’t want to, don’t. No one is twisting your arm.

9935c101ab17a66 8y ago

RE: #3, how exactly is this an anti-trust case? Here's a refutation of that notion I found elsewhere (part of the conversation around Google being find by the EU): > Anti-competitive practices aren’t illegal - it’s called “business”. For that matter, monopolies aren’t illegal (not that Apple even comes close to being considered one). You can even use monopoly power in an anti-competive way and be on solid legal footing. It’s not an anti-trust issue until you either collude or use monopoly power to leverage other company products or services in an anti-competive way (as Google did). That’s 3 criteria that must all be present and Apple is nowhere close on 2 of them. http://disq.us/p/1uelmvq http://disq.us/p/1uelmvq Also, do you really truly believe Apple is the most evil corp to ever succeed at scale in computing? Really?

writepub 8y ago
Yes - the most evil companies go for after well established freedoms. Apple has gone after the freedom of it's users to run apps of their choosing, or use industry standard computer accessories of their choosing, just to inflate their bottom line. And all along, their PR messaging is about how their totalitarian control is in the user's best interest.
- 9935c101ab17a66 8y ago
  You didn't address the anti-trust claim. Regarding the rest of your comment, apple are NOT going after your freedom to run apps of your choosing (sidetone: kind of an oblique and overly dramatic way of phrasing it, don't you think?). They do instead offer a different model for the design of their mobile operating system that relies on stringent access control to both improve simplicity and security. Listen, I'm fine with you not agreeing with how iOS is designed and how Apple acts a gatekeeper for distributing applications. It's not a perfect system, and it definitely has it's downsides. But you DO have the freedom to buy any tablet/smartphone you wish (or to not own one at all), and apple isn't doing anything to restrict said freedom. Do you also not recognize the benefits of the way iOS works? I'm not even asking you to concede that the design has a net-positive. But you have to admit, there are SOME benefits of iOS' design. As a personal anecdote, I can tell you that my mom absolutely disliked personal computers (and digital cameras) and refused to use them for years. She started using an iPad maybe five years ago and she absolutely loves it, and I've never once had to remove malware from her computer, help her try to recover corrupted or lost photos, or any of the other mundane and often complicated tasks a 'regular' computer user would have to deal with. (This applies to macOS / windows / linux, etc). I encourage to reconsider your position. I'm not saying that Apple doesn't have faults, and their implementations/decisions are perfect. But your statements are histrionic and you come across as a bit hysterical.

snowwrestler 8y ago

Can't you side-load your own apps onto your device, including apps that would not normally pass App Store review?

dpkonofa 8y ago

This is a pretty ignorant take on the whole thing. Most people pay the premium for this specifically because only "blessed" apps and accessories work and they don't have to mess with things. They're paying extra for the interconnectivity and the guarantee that the apps and accessories will work. You, and others like you, need to realize that you're not the market for this product. If you don't like it, don't buy it. For the majority of people, though, they look at these devices as something simple that they don't have to fuss with to get working. Do you honestly believe that the majority of iPad owners care about sideloading apps or what browser engine is running while they look at Facebook? These are not fundamental computer freedoms (how overly dramatic). These are trade-offs that are important to some and not important to others.

writepub 8y ago
> If you don't like it, don't buy it. No one on HN needs a crash course in market economics, choice, and free will. Un-substantive comments are strongly discouraged. > Do you honestly believe that the majority of iPad owners care about sideloading apps or what browser engine is running while they look at Facebook? No - but app devs like Facebook, who end up serving the end user, definitely care. At some point, it won't be worth the hassle of submitting to anal-cavity searches by Apple, just to list on the app store. I personally think the time has already arrived, as ZERO new apps [1] get installed. Netflix & co have already started to disallow subscription purchases via the store, the time to bypass it completely is nigh - except for the chronic stymieing of the browser engine on iDevices by Apple to protect it's app store hegemony. [1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/25/majority-of-u-s-consumers-still-download-zero-apps-per-month-says-comscore/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/25/majority-of-u-s-consumers-...

kup0 8y ago

Because 0% of this has affected by day-to-day life and use of the device, which just works for what I need it for? I'll concede the fact that this is personal preference which is really the whole point of my response. (I like Apples, you like Oranges, stop telling me to change my taste buds, etc). I have tried both Android and iOS, and actually like things about both of them. At the end of the day, my preference just happens to fall on the iOS side of the line 1 - Haven't run into an issue where this is a problem. I do not feel I am missing out on any unallowed apps. 2, 3 - Yes I do not like this and think it's dumb, BUT it's not important or significant enough for me to care or get a different device. Safari + content blockers is a completely reasonable, fast, good-enough experience. 4 - Very rarely has this been an issue for me, other than Lightning costs being inflated (I guess) but most of the accessories I use are bluetooth 5 - Sure, like 2 and 3, I don't appreciate their way of approaching this either, but I bought the phone because it's my preference of device/OS overall, not to maintain philosophical purity - in other words, I am willing to sacrifice some things for others and I still prefer iOS devices to the alternatives Newer iPhones (and even non-Apple phones) missing headphone jacks is WAY more offensive to me than anything you outlined.