8 ms·

How is having control over what you can install on your own PC and being in a position to actually choose from where to install it a nightmare? Is being in con

How is having control over what you can install on your own PC and being in a position to actually choose from where to install it a nightmare? Is being in control and having choice a nightmare?

ericmay 6y ago
Well, you just look at the PC ecosystem and you can see the nightmare. Like others,I prefer Apple to have a tightly controlled App Store and believe that the benefits far outweigh the ability to install software from a 3rd party App Store. For example, Apple requiring Sign In with Apple (when signin with Google/Facebook are implemented) where you can hide your email address. That’s not possible with multiple app stores. Apple helps lead the way with privacy. If you want multiple app stores and all that, just buy an Android phone. iPhone is for people like me who want a tightly controlled experience. That’s the way it’s designed. You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you?
- swiley 6y ago
  Here are just some reasons why android isn’t an alternative: Most ship with maleware that can’t be removed (or can’t be removed without giving up on updating the OS.) Android still doesn’t let you run a lot of 3rd party software (the latest version breaks Termux for example.) Apple’s anticompetitive behavior also ties people to the platform (iMessage is a great example of this. My family won’t use any other IM app so even if I buy another phone (which I have, it’s supposed to arrive in September) I’ll have to keep my iPhone just to talk to them.) Finally the hardware is just bad. Qualcomm does not make nice SOCs (IMO) but it could be just because the software they provide with them is complete garbage. There’s no alternative in the US either.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Ok. So the trade off here is that you have to use the App Store to avoid those things. It’s not a big deal.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      It's not a big deal to you.
  - PascLeRasc 6y ago
    Heads up, this is what iPhones will be like with an open app store. You'll be waiting on Verizon to get their ads into the latest version of iOS before you can install it.
    - swiley 6y ago
      Just because there’s an open App Store doesn’t mean apple has to give root to random organizations (I’m not even sure what confusion caused you to link the two ideas.) That would happen if apple allowed other organizations to customize the OS which is a different discussion.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  I do not see a nightmare, that is the thing - why do you see one? What you describe is possible with multiple app stores and allowing 3rd party apps - you just do not use those other stores and apps. Nobody is forcing you to use a 3rd party app store, but Apple is forcing everyone to go through their store. You can keep your tightly controlled experience by not using anything else than Apple - but that doesn't mean everyone has to be forced to do the same thing. > You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? 99.9% of the time such comparisons ignore details and derail discussion, so they aren't very helpful.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone either. There are plenty of options with different trade offs. Allowing 3rd-party app stores has predictable negative externalities (privacy, security, etc.). Which is why I and others are not interested in that development. Apple is able to make developers engage in less shitty business practices precisely because they can control the distribution of software through the App Store . It’s no surprise that as Apple has increasingly focused on privacy and removing tracking capabilities and other dark patterns that developers are trying to find a way around Apple’s restrictions. It’s not like they all of a sudden implemented a new fee. It’s been there for years. > 99.9%.... I guess this is the .1%? You don’t buy something expecting it to do something completely different. You don’t buy an iPhone expecting to install whatever you want. You don’t buy a Corolla expecting to off-road with it.
    - badsectoracula 6y ago
      > I guess this is the .1%? No. > You don’t buy something expecting it to do something completely different. You don’t buy an iPhone expecting to install whatever you want. You don’t buy a Corolla expecting to off-road with it. Apple's current behavior isn't written in stone and dictated by God, it can change.
      - ayyy 6y ago
        It is sad they don't have rooted developer phones available. I'd switch platforms in a second if they started allowing me root on my own device.
- protomyth 6y ago
  You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? No, but I would get mad if the manufacturer told me what brand of gas I could buy and what roads I could drive on.
  - delfinom 6y ago
    Hahahah. Don't get a German car. My god, they would force you to refuel at a fucking dealer if they could. BMW already makes the car go into limp mode if they detect you changed the battery and didn't use an CAN dongle to reset the computer.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Then you’d buy a different car. I’m happy to use the specific gas and roads. I buy it knowing that I’m getting the benefits of that specific gas and road with the trade off that I can’t use whatever gas and roads I want.
    - klmadfejno 6y ago
      Even in this contrived example, you're still allowed to exclusively use your specific gas and roads if the car manufacturer is forbidden from demanding you do so.
  - msh 6y ago
    Depends on what advantages it gave me. If it was impossible for the car to get into a accident where I hurt myself or others I would certainly consider it.
- anoncake 6y ago
  > You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? That is not an artificial restriction. If you take it off road, it will perform as car not designed to be taking off road does. It won't refuse to leave the road to protect Toyota's brand.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 6y ago
  How's this not possible? You can _choose_ which appstore to use, if there are multiple, and stick to the original Apple one and preserve what you currently have. For apps not released on the Apple Store, you can choose not to use them, exactly like you are asking others to do by not allowing to have multiple appstores.
  - derwiki 6y ago
    I don’t think they said it wasn’t possible. I think the point was that Apple/iPhone users don’t care. Maybe folks who would want an iPhone if they could do what you’re proposing—but those aren’t the folks currently giving Apple any money.
- wayneftw 6y ago
  I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Most of my problems have been with restrictions that Apple has put on me in their Mac and iOS product lines. > Apple requiring Sign In with Apple (when signin with Google/Facebook are implemented) where you can hide your email address. That’s not possible with multiple app stores. Yes it is. You, as a consumer can choose to stay in the Apple app store where developers have to follow that rule. If a particular developer is only publishing in the non-Apple app store, you can simply use a competing app that is in Apple’s app store. This is the same advice you’d give to someone who doesn’t like Apple products at all... you’d say “Go buy an Android”. In the future though, you’ll only have to say “Go use a non-Apple app store”.
  - wcarey 6y ago
    Would you support compelling developers who have a monopoly on a particular app to support all available app stores? It seems like a developer who held a monopoly in a particular app would be the in the same position Apple is in with the app store writ large? For example, if the only way to fill out my employer's timecard is via an iOS app, should they be compelled to offer the app in all the available app stores?
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      If that particular app was essential to modern day life for a huge portion of the general population then yes, absolutely.
      - wcarey 6y ago
        What it it's essential to the life of a relatively small group of users? It seems like the rights of smaller groups like that are the ones that most need collectively bargained, as they'll be in a relatively poor position to negotiate with the organization compelling them to use the app?
        wayneftw 6y ago
- tomatotomato37 6y ago
  Corollas won't actively resist you going offroad, or being modified until it can drive offroad and win the manufacturer title in the WRC[0]. In contrast Apple resists modification of both their software & hardware so much that's it's spawned a whole right-to-repair movement around it. I like the fact the PC ecosystem allows so much freedom. I have a countless amount of mods for my games that aren't nor will be developer sanctioned, downloaded from an open-source browser running multiple aggressive privacy plugins that I know for a fact won't run on whatever engine Safari uses, all on a PC I built myself with an overclock that has voided most of my warranties. In the mobile space I use a Google pixel from which I theoretically could run anything I want on if Verizon wasn't a complete asshole with the bootloader. None of those things would be possible with anything Apple produces. Now normally I would say that as a company you have the right to legally abuse your userbase however you want, but when you get this big that your profit margin exceeds that of several democratic countries and your particular flavor of abuse is inspiration for product development in general, than I'm going to support you losing that particular privilege. [0]https://www.snaplap.net/toyota-corolla-wrc/ https://www.snaplap.net/toyota-corolla-wrc/
- freeflight 6y ago
  > Well, you just look at the PC ecosystem and you can see the nightmare. As somebody who's been looking and working in it for decades, I don't see it? To me the actual nightmare are closed walled gardens giving users a false sense of security about the software they offer on their services as supposedly all being "vetted". And because by now the mobile space is the biggest target there is, malicious actors have shifted their attack vectors accordingly [0]. Even with these walled gardens in place, we've reached a point where the mobile app ecosystem is going trough its own phase of "You need this Norton/McAfee/blah product to keep your device secure/optimized!" just like the PC ecosystem did and still does. As such the "gatekeepers" have effectively failed at gatekeeping anything that ain't explicit sexual content. [0] https://www.zdnet.com/article/warning-over-hidden-apps-as-mobile-malware-attacks-increase-and-get-sneakier/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/warning-over-hidden-apps-as-mo...
msh 6y ago
Its a security nightmare.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  Ah oh, the "security" power word has been brought up, time to turn off our brains and accept everything i guess :-(
  - msh 6y ago
    No, seriously, how would you build a computer platform that everybody, even computer iliterate people can use and install programs without constantly ending up with malware, scams and other nasty stuff that steals their money or information? The apple iOS model seems to be the most promising here. It comes with huge tradeoffs in user control but for a large part of the worlds population I think its the right choice.
    - badsectoracula 6y ago
      I think what you describe is really overblown - i know many computer illiterate people and 99% of the issues they have with their PCs is about what will happen if they Like something on Facebook or Microsoft forcing some update that takes ages to finish in their $250 laptop. The same people also run Android (which allows 3rd party installations) and they never had any issues with malware - largely because they never install anything outside the Play Store (something that explicitly requires turning on an option in settings that they have no idea about anyway). That would work with iOS perfectly fine. As for the PC, i think what Apple was doing with macOS until recently (allowing you to run unsigned software you downloaded from the Internet by doing the "right click dance") was a perfectly fine compromise between security for computer illiterate people and still being in control for people who know what they are doing. Nothing about Apple's model requires Apple to be the only one who can say what you can do with your own device - you can still have Apple be in control by default but also provide a way to take control yourself if you know what you are doing.
    - ksk 6y ago
hellisothers 6y ago
Some people choose to live in the country, off the grid, and wonder why people would want the live in a city (under closer scrutiny of others and the government). For this “freedom” to work they run all their own infrastructure, need to manage their own defense (against fire and wild animals), and have little or no support if things go really wrong but they prefer it this way, it suits them. Meanwhile the city dweller chooses the opposite for many reasons and makes different concessions, but it suits them. Neither is these are strictly wrong but to claim one is better than the other _for everyone_ is misguided and is essentially what this argument is here. Pick your own path but don’t presume it’s the right one for everybody and don’t destroy the other’s ecosystem such that they can no longer choose it.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  As i wrote in another comment, those comparisons 99.9% of the time lose a ton of details so they are not helpful at all. The choice for others to have no choice is not really much of a choice - not only i want to have a choice in what i install on iOS devices but i also want the ability to have a choice available in all of the devices i paid for, especially in an environment where other companies see Apple's success and become too thirsty for it and try to copy them (see Microsoft as an example).
  - PascLeRasc 6y ago
    All analogies will have that problem, it's unconstructive to dismiss them like this. Understanding this is part of how arguing and exchanging ideas takes place. I don't think it's Apple's fault if other companies try to copy them poorly. I'm very familiar with what you mean and it bothers me too, but I don't think that means Apple needs to change.
  - hellisothers 6y ago
    You’re framing your preference for openness as a choice and another’s preference for regulation as “having no choice” which is exactly the problem I was trying to highlight. You see your option as the only option so all others are a mistake, and so are dictating what options are available (is only yours). Do you not see this is removing people’s choice? Especially if already today there are other ecosystems that cater to your desire?

How is having control over what you can install on your own PC and being in a position to actually choose from where to install it a nightmare? Is being in control and having choice a nightmare?

ericmay 6y ago

Well, you just look at the PC ecosystem and you can see the nightmare. Like others,I prefer Apple to have a tightly controlled App Store and believe that the benefits far outweigh the ability to install software from a 3rd party App Store. For example, Apple requiring Sign In with Apple (when signin with Google/Facebook are implemented) where you can hide your email address. That’s not possible with multiple app stores. Apple helps lead the way with privacy. If you want multiple app stores and all that, just buy an Android phone. iPhone is for people like me who want a tightly controlled experience. That’s the way it’s designed. You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you?

swiley 6y ago
Here are just some reasons why android isn’t an alternative: Most ship with maleware that can’t be removed (or can’t be removed without giving up on updating the OS.) Android still doesn’t let you run a lot of 3rd party software (the latest version breaks Termux for example.) Apple’s anticompetitive behavior also ties people to the platform (iMessage is a great example of this. My family won’t use any other IM app so even if I buy another phone (which I have, it’s supposed to arrive in September) I’ll have to keep my iPhone just to talk to them.) Finally the hardware is just bad. Qualcomm does not make nice SOCs (IMO) but it could be just because the software they provide with them is complete garbage. There’s no alternative in the US either.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Ok. So the trade off here is that you have to use the App Store to avoid those things. It’s not a big deal.
  - anoncake 6y ago
    It's not a big deal to you.
- PascLeRasc 6y ago
  Heads up, this is what iPhones will be like with an open app store. You'll be waiting on Verizon to get their ads into the latest version of iOS before you can install it.
  - swiley 6y ago
    Just because there’s an open App Store doesn’t mean apple has to give root to random organizations (I’m not even sure what confusion caused you to link the two ideas.) That would happen if apple allowed other organizations to customize the OS which is a different discussion.
badsectoracula 6y ago
I do not see a nightmare, that is the thing - why do you see one? What you describe is possible with multiple app stores and allowing 3rd party apps - you just do not use those other stores and apps. Nobody is forcing you to use a 3rd party app store, but Apple is forcing everyone to go through their store. You can keep your tightly controlled experience by not using anything else than Apple - but that doesn't mean everyone has to be forced to do the same thing. > You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? 99.9% of the time such comparisons ignore details and derail discussion, so they aren't very helpful.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone either. There are plenty of options with different trade offs. Allowing 3rd-party app stores has predictable negative externalities (privacy, security, etc.). Which is why I and others are not interested in that development. Apple is able to make developers engage in less shitty business practices precisely because they can control the distribution of software through the App Store . It’s no surprise that as Apple has increasingly focused on privacy and removing tracking capabilities and other dark patterns that developers are trying to find a way around Apple’s restrictions. It’s not like they all of a sudden implemented a new fee. It’s been there for years. > 99.9%.... I guess this is the .1%? You don’t buy something expecting it to do something completely different. You don’t buy an iPhone expecting to install whatever you want. You don’t buy a Corolla expecting to off-road with it.
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    > I guess this is the .1%? No. > You don’t buy something expecting it to do something completely different. You don’t buy an iPhone expecting to install whatever you want. You don’t buy a Corolla expecting to off-road with it. Apple's current behavior isn't written in stone and dictated by God, it can change.
    - ayyy 6y ago
      It is sad they don't have rooted developer phones available. I'd switch platforms in a second if they started allowing me root on my own device.
protomyth 6y ago
You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? No, but I would get mad if the manufacturer told me what brand of gas I could buy and what roads I could drive on.
- delfinom 6y ago
  Hahahah. Don't get a German car. My god, they would force you to refuel at a fucking dealer if they could. BMW already makes the car go into limp mode if they detect you changed the battery and didn't use an CAN dongle to reset the computer.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Then you’d buy a different car. I’m happy to use the specific gas and roads. I buy it knowing that I’m getting the benefits of that specific gas and road with the trade off that I can’t use whatever gas and roads I want.
  - klmadfejno 6y ago
    Even in this contrived example, you're still allowed to exclusively use your specific gas and roads if the car manufacturer is forbidden from demanding you do so.
- msh 6y ago
  Depends on what advantages it gave me. If it was impossible for the car to get into a accident where I hurt myself or others I would certainly consider it.
anoncake 6y ago
> You don’t buy a Corolla and get mad that you can’t off road with it, do you? That is not an artificial restriction. If you take it off road, it will perform as car not designed to be taking off road does. It won't refuse to leave the road to protect Toyota's brand.
Fire-Dragon-DoL 6y ago
How's this not possible? You can _choose_ which appstore to use, if there are multiple, and stick to the original Apple one and preserve what you currently have. For apps not released on the Apple Store, you can choose not to use them, exactly like you are asking others to do by not allowing to have multiple appstores.
- derwiki 6y ago
  I don’t think they said it wasn’t possible. I think the point was that Apple/iPhone users don’t care. Maybe folks who would want an iPhone if they could do what you’re proposing—but those aren’t the folks currently giving Apple any money.
wayneftw 6y ago
I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Most of my problems have been with restrictions that Apple has put on me in their Mac and iOS product lines. > Apple requiring Sign In with Apple (when signin with Google/Facebook are implemented) where you can hide your email address. That’s not possible with multiple app stores. Yes it is. You, as a consumer can choose to stay in the Apple app store where developers have to follow that rule. If a particular developer is only publishing in the non-Apple app store, you can simply use a competing app that is in Apple’s app store. This is the same advice you’d give to someone who doesn’t like Apple products at all... you’d say “Go buy an Android”. In the future though, you’ll only have to say “Go use a non-Apple app store”.
- wcarey 6y ago
  Would you support compelling developers who have a monopoly on a particular app to support all available app stores? It seems like a developer who held a monopoly in a particular app would be the in the same position Apple is in with the app store writ large? For example, if the only way to fill out my employer's timecard is via an iOS app, should they be compelled to offer the app in all the available app stores?
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    If that particular app was essential to modern day life for a huge portion of the general population then yes, absolutely.
    - wcarey 6y ago
      What it it's essential to the life of a relatively small group of users? It seems like the rights of smaller groups like that are the ones that most need collectively bargained, as they'll be in a relatively poor position to negotiate with the organization compelling them to use the app?
      - wayneftw 6y ago
tomatotomato37 6y ago
Corollas won't actively resist you going offroad, or being modified until it can drive offroad and win the manufacturer title in the WRC[0]. In contrast Apple resists modification of both their software & hardware so much that's it's spawned a whole right-to-repair movement around it. I like the fact the PC ecosystem allows so much freedom. I have a countless amount of mods for my games that aren't nor will be developer sanctioned, downloaded from an open-source browser running multiple aggressive privacy plugins that I know for a fact won't run on whatever engine Safari uses, all on a PC I built myself with an overclock that has voided most of my warranties. In the mobile space I use a Google pixel from which I theoretically could run anything I want on if Verizon wasn't a complete asshole with the bootloader. None of those things would be possible with anything Apple produces. Now normally I would say that as a company you have the right to legally abuse your userbase however you want, but when you get this big that your profit margin exceeds that of several democratic countries and your particular flavor of abuse is inspiration for product development in general, than I'm going to support you losing that particular privilege. [0]https://www.snaplap.net/toyota-corolla-wrc/ https://www.snaplap.net/toyota-corolla-wrc/
freeflight 6y ago
> Well, you just look at the PC ecosystem and you can see the nightmare. As somebody who's been looking and working in it for decades, I don't see it? To me the actual nightmare are closed walled gardens giving users a false sense of security about the software they offer on their services as supposedly all being "vetted". And because by now the mobile space is the biggest target there is, malicious actors have shifted their attack vectors accordingly [0]. Even with these walled gardens in place, we've reached a point where the mobile app ecosystem is going trough its own phase of "You need this Norton/McAfee/blah product to keep your device secure/optimized!" just like the PC ecosystem did and still does. As such the "gatekeepers" have effectively failed at gatekeeping anything that ain't explicit sexual content. [0] https://www.zdnet.com/article/warning-over-hidden-apps-as-mobile-malware-attacks-increase-and-get-sneakier/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/warning-over-hidden-apps-as-mo...

msh 6y ago

Its a security nightmare.

badsectoracula 6y ago
Ah oh, the "security" power word has been brought up, time to turn off our brains and accept everything i guess :-(
- msh 6y ago
  No, seriously, how would you build a computer platform that everybody, even computer iliterate people can use and install programs without constantly ending up with malware, scams and other nasty stuff that steals their money or information? The apple iOS model seems to be the most promising here. It comes with huge tradeoffs in user control but for a large part of the worlds population I think its the right choice.
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    I think what you describe is really overblown - i know many computer illiterate people and 99% of the issues they have with their PCs is about what will happen if they Like something on Facebook or Microsoft forcing some update that takes ages to finish in their $250 laptop. The same people also run Android (which allows 3rd party installations) and they never had any issues with malware - largely because they never install anything outside the Play Store (something that explicitly requires turning on an option in settings that they have no idea about anyway). That would work with iOS perfectly fine. As for the PC, i think what Apple was doing with macOS until recently (allowing you to run unsigned software you downloaded from the Internet by doing the "right click dance") was a perfectly fine compromise between security for computer illiterate people and still being in control for people who know what they are doing. Nothing about Apple's model requires Apple to be the only one who can say what you can do with your own device - you can still have Apple be in control by default but also provide a way to take control yourself if you know what you are doing.
  - ksk 6y ago

hellisothers 6y ago

Some people choose to live in the country, off the grid, and wonder why people would want the live in a city (under closer scrutiny of others and the government). For this “freedom” to work they run all their own infrastructure, need to manage their own defense (against fire and wild animals), and have little or no support if things go really wrong but they prefer it this way, it suits them. Meanwhile the city dweller chooses the opposite for many reasons and makes different concessions, but it suits them. Neither is these are strictly wrong but to claim one is better than the other _for everyone_ is misguided and is essentially what this argument is here. Pick your own path but don’t presume it’s the right one for everybody and don’t destroy the other’s ecosystem such that they can no longer choose it.

badsectoracula 6y ago
As i wrote in another comment, those comparisons 99.9% of the time lose a ton of details so they are not helpful at all. The choice for others to have no choice is not really much of a choice - not only i want to have a choice in what i install on iOS devices but i also want the ability to have a choice available in all of the devices i paid for, especially in an environment where other companies see Apple's success and become too thirsty for it and try to copy them (see Microsoft as an example).
- PascLeRasc 6y ago
  All analogies will have that problem, it's unconstructive to dismiss them like this. Understanding this is part of how arguing and exchanging ideas takes place. I don't think it's Apple's fault if other companies try to copy them poorly. I'm very familiar with what you mean and it bothers me too, but I don't think that means Apple needs to change.
- hellisothers 6y ago
  You’re framing your preference for openness as a choice and another’s preference for regulation as “having no choice” which is exactly the problem I was trying to highlight. You see your option as the only option so all others are a mistake, and so are dictating what options are available (is only yours). Do you not see this is removing people’s choice? Especially if already today there are other ecosystems that cater to your desire?