4 ms·

Apple has stated a lot of things they changed later. Companies have many reasons to lie, especially if they have a long term plan that they want the public/cust

by Crinus 7y ago

Apple has stated a lot of things they changed later. Companies have many reasons to lie, especially if they have a long term plan that they want the public/customers to follow. Just because a company stated something, it doesn't make it fact. Also i never said that laptops will be made into appliances, i said that they'll be locked down like iOS. You can still do a lot of things on iOS but all of them need to things pre-approved by Apple and a lot of the things you cannot do on iOS is because of its form factor - something that can be addressed with the form factor of a laptop. If anything i think you may have already fallen victim to the artificial separation that Apple has introduced between laptops and tablets: why doesn't it make sense for laptops to be limited whereas it makes perfect sense for tablets and phones to be limited? It doesn't. There is no reason why iOS has to be limited just like there is no reason for laptops (and desktops) to be limited, it is just that this is how phones and tablets were introduced to the mainstream audience and how the mainstream audience has come to accept and expect them.

gigatexal 7y ago
Apple’s “pre-approval” is what makes the iOS platform secure. I get the impression that you’re airing this angst out in a field with your fist to the sky... what you’re complaining about is a feature not a bug. If you want side-loading and a relatively wild-west approach to freedom and access try Android. Regarding the MacOS platform though: I don’t think they’ll get rid of the ability to add binaries to a user’s home directory much like it is now. It’s a development and productivity platform that doesn’t abstract its Unix underpinnings like iOS does. But I'm not so much of a zealot to think that if they do do something underhanded like lock down MacOS to a completely unusable outside of Apple ways to not go to a different platform. Until then I will stick with them for sure.
- Crinus 7y ago
  It is also what gives Apple the power to lock older iOS devices from getting new apps - regardless if those devices would be able to run those apps or not and many of those devices would be able to run a large number of applications they have not access to - and force users to upgrade their devices to newer models. Also Android is not wild-west freedom, the entire idea behind "side-loading" (which is not available everywhere) is a sign to that - or even worse, the inability to gain root access to your own device. If you want an example of such freedom, it would be something like what you see on desktop systems such as Windows or Linux (though Windows 8 and later did piss in the pool with their Metro/UWP efforts). macOS can become a development and productivity platform while at the same time being locked down. For example you'd be able to install Xcode and even a (user-only) Unix command line environment that will autosign any executable you create for use only on your own machine and a few preapproved others. AFAIK this is how it is already done with iOS devices, except Xcode doesn't run there (but that is mainly an issue with API availability, not it requiring anything that couldn't be provided on a locked down macOS). Since this would require an annual developers' fee, it'd make any source-based releases impractical outside of developers and even that only for as long as you pay that fee (again see iOS: it isn't like you cannot download some iOS program in source code form and install it on your own device, but to do that you need to pay Apple for the privilege).
  - gigatexal 7y ago
    I think I understand where you're coming from but I think a lot of your concerns are overblown. But to each their own, let's just see where they take things.

by Crinus 7y ago

gigatexal 7y ago

Apple’s “pre-approval” is what makes the iOS platform secure. I get the impression that you’re airing this angst out in a field with your fist to the sky... what you’re complaining about is a feature not a bug. If you want side-loading and a relatively wild-west approach to freedom and access try Android. Regarding the MacOS platform though: I don’t think they’ll get rid of the ability to add binaries to a user’s home directory much like it is now. It’s a development and productivity platform that doesn’t abstract its Unix underpinnings like iOS does. But I'm not so much of a zealot to think that if they do do something underhanded like lock down MacOS to a completely unusable outside of Apple ways to not go to a different platform. Until then I will stick with them for sure.

Crinus 7y ago
It is also what gives Apple the power to lock older iOS devices from getting new apps - regardless if those devices would be able to run those apps or not and many of those devices would be able to run a large number of applications they have not access to - and force users to upgrade their devices to newer models. Also Android is not wild-west freedom, the entire idea behind "side-loading" (which is not available everywhere) is a sign to that - or even worse, the inability to gain root access to your own device. If you want an example of such freedom, it would be something like what you see on desktop systems such as Windows or Linux (though Windows 8 and later did piss in the pool with their Metro/UWP efforts). macOS can become a development and productivity platform while at the same time being locked down. For example you'd be able to install Xcode and even a (user-only) Unix command line environment that will autosign any executable you create for use only on your own machine and a few preapproved others. AFAIK this is how it is already done with iOS devices, except Xcode doesn't run there (but that is mainly an issue with API availability, not it requiring anything that couldn't be provided on a locked down macOS). Since this would require an annual developers' fee, it'd make any source-based releases impractical outside of developers and even that only for as long as you pay that fee (again see iOS: it isn't like you cannot download some iOS program in source code form and install it on your own device, but to do that you need to pay Apple for the privilege).
- gigatexal 7y ago
  I think I understand where you're coming from but I think a lot of your concerns are overblown. But to each their own, let's just see where they take things.