3 ms·
> Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems. This i
by yepthatsreality 6y ago
> Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems.
This is pure FUD reasoning though. You can’t say “no you can’t have that because it could possibly be bad trust me” without any evidence that it would be a major issue. The more locked down a phone is the more people need Apple/Google.
- freehunter 6y agoIt’s not FUD and it’s not without evidence. What you’re describing was the actual reality in handheld computing before iOS. Look at early Android or Windows Mobile or Palm or heck even your own modern-day laptop. Battery-draining background applications aren’t FUD and don’t require any additional evidence because that’s the reality on basically every platform except iOS and modern Android.
- yepthatsreality 6y agoBut at the same time there would still be review processes that could detect such apps. This is just assurance on Apples part they don’t have to babysit devices, not some huge benefit to the consumer. There is a consumer benefit but a small one.
- judge2020 6y agoIn the past you could run any push service you wanted, and battery life was worse with many apps. There's also another current (/recent) example on this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028.
- yepthatsreality 6y agoSo because early on there was bad software we have to take away the ability to make such software?