4 ms·

The difference is you're choosing your curators (e.g. Hacker News) independent of other choices you've made i.e. your hardware provider. Would you just go alon

The difference is you're choosing your curators (e.g. Hacker News) independent of other choices you've made i.e. your hardware provider. Would you just go along with it happily if Apple (or any other company for that matter) blocked access to Hacker News because it didn't meet their standards? Or vice versa, if Hacker News refused to serve you simply because you're using an Apple device?

intopieces 7y ago
Apples standards are my standards. If that stops being the case, I’ll stop being a customer. Sure. I’m smart enough to dig through the bargain bin of Google Play apps to find the ones that work with my device, don’t have ads, and have the appropriate level of functionality and polish. I just don’t want to. I’d rather pay a premium for a company to do it for me. Same goes for the Internet.
- Benjamin_Dobell 7y ago
  > Apples standards are my standards. Indeed. If you want to use their hardware, then you've no choice in the matter. To be clear, I have absolutely zero issue with you choosing to be their customer. They make fantastic hardware, there are an enormous amount of pros to being an Apple customer. It's perfectly reasonable to look at these pros and cons and choose to be an Apple customer. However, taking one of those cons and trying to sell it as a pro requires a fair bit of doublethink. You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature.
  - intopieces 7y ago
    >You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature. Some people want to make as few choices as possible. That’s me. I don’t want to look at two or more app stores to find what I want. The lack of choice, for me, is a feature. I understand that I’m a special type of narrow minded on this point. And I’m glad Android exists — I have a few Android devices myself, for hobbies and such - they’re just not what I would use for my daily driver.
    - Silhouette 7y ago
      I think the point is that Apple could still run their own App Store, which meets all of your requirements, without excluding all alternatives, which others might find valuable even if you choose not to use them yourself.
      - intopieces 7y ago
        I do not agree that Apple can maintain the same high quality App Store while not excluding alternatives. Alternative App Store will invite developers to put in less effort to reach the same audience. I do not want this.
        Silhouette 7y ago
        Surely that would just mean that application developers unwilling to comply with Apple's standards and pay its price of admission would be excluded from its App Store? Isn't that what you want, by your own arguments?
  - austhrow743 7y ago
    >You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature. It absolutely is. Choice is happiness poison.

intopieces 7y ago

Apples standards are my standards. If that stops being the case, I’ll stop being a customer. Sure. I’m smart enough to dig through the bargain bin of Google Play apps to find the ones that work with my device, don’t have ads, and have the appropriate level of functionality and polish. I just don’t want to. I’d rather pay a premium for a company to do it for me. Same goes for the Internet.

Benjamin_Dobell 7y ago
> Apples standards are my standards. Indeed. If you want to use their hardware, then you've no choice in the matter. To be clear, I have absolutely zero issue with you choosing to be their customer. They make fantastic hardware, there are an enormous amount of pros to being an Apple customer. It's perfectly reasonable to look at these pros and cons and choose to be an Apple customer. However, taking one of those cons and trying to sell it as a pro requires a fair bit of doublethink. You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature.
- intopieces 7y ago
  >You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature. Some people want to make as few choices as possible. That’s me. I don’t want to look at two or more app stores to find what I want. The lack of choice, for me, is a feature. I understand that I’m a special type of narrow minded on this point. And I’m glad Android exists — I have a few Android devices myself, for hobbies and such - they’re just not what I would use for my daily driver.
  - Silhouette 7y ago
    I think the point is that Apple could still run their own App Store, which meets all of your requirements, without excluding all alternatives, which others might find valuable even if you choose not to use them yourself.
    - intopieces 7y ago
      I do not agree that Apple can maintain the same high quality App Store while not excluding alternatives. Alternative App Store will invite developers to put in less effort to reach the same audience. I do not want this.
      - Silhouette 7y ago
        Surely that would just mean that application developers unwilling to comply with Apple's standards and pay its price of admission would be excluded from its App Store? Isn't that what you want, by your own arguments?
- austhrow743 7y ago
  >You could be using an Apple device and choosing Apple as your app curator. Lack of choice is not a feature. It absolutely is. Choice is happiness poison.