4 ms·

One of the best examples of Apple draconian measures benefiting us users.

loewenskind 16y ago
I don't think there are many (if any) "draconian measures" from Apple that don't actually benefit users. Nearly all complaints about Apple's behavior can be split into two groups: Idealogical (e.g. "Everything must be free! Even if that means there are 1,000 app stores to choose from, everyone one of them consisting of almost exclusively malware and viruses, it all has to be open!") and "slippery slope" concerns (e.g. "but if they make it so convenient, what will stop them from controlling the world!?" as if new competition wouldn't instantly spring up to replace them).
- jokermatt999 16y ago
  How does not allowing users to sideload apps benefit users? How does not having apps in the App Store that "duplicate functionality" but offer more choice benefit users?
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    If you don't allow users to load apps you haven't vetted you can do a better job of making sure they never have a bad experience on your device. Personally I would go for offering some kind of "opt in" that says you know what you're doing and willing to worry about it yourself for people who feel constrained (personally, despite being a developer myself, I would never "opt in". I don't have time to worry about if an app is going to cause trouble or not). Similar answer with duplicate stores. The thing is, when people have a bad experience because of some stupid app they installed they often aren't technical enough to say "darn that mypic.exe! It screwed my computer". Instead they say "why did my iphone break! What a peace of crap". If you don't believe me, go look up what the actual source for most blue screens were on windows. Who got the bad rap for it? Bill Gates didn't seem to be bothered by it too much but I think being the richest man in the world but having that rep would be the same thing as utter failure to Steve Jobs.

I don't think there are many (if any) "draconian measures" from Apple that don't actually benefit users. Nearly all complaints about Apple's behavior can be split into two groups: Idealogical (e.g. "Everything must be free! Even if that means there are 1,000 app stores to choose from, everyone one of them consisting of almost exclusively malware and viruses, it all has to be open!") and "slippery slope" concerns (e.g. "but if they make it so convenient, what will stop them from controlling the world!?" as if new competition wouldn't instantly spring up to replace them).

jokermatt999 16y ago
How does not allowing users to sideload apps benefit users? How does not having apps in the App Store that "duplicate functionality" but offer more choice benefit users?
- loewenskind 16y ago
  If you don't allow users to load apps you haven't vetted you can do a better job of making sure they never have a bad experience on your device. Personally I would go for offering some kind of "opt in" that says you know what you're doing and willing to worry about it yourself for people who feel constrained (personally, despite being a developer myself, I would never "opt in". I don't have time to worry about if an app is going to cause trouble or not). Similar answer with duplicate stores. The thing is, when people have a bad experience because of some stupid app they installed they often aren't technical enough to say "darn that mypic.exe! It screwed my computer". Instead they say "why did my iphone break! What a peace of crap". If you don't believe me, go look up what the actual source for most blue screens were on windows. Who got the bad rap for it? Bill Gates didn't seem to be bothered by it too much but I think being the richest man in the world but having that rep would be the same thing as utter failure to Steve Jobs.