4 ms·
That's an interesting perspective. In particular, "I don’t think it’s hard to vote with our wallets at all. We just can’t expect to get what Apple built", align
by wezm 6y ago
That's an interesting perspective. In particular, "I don’t think it’s hard to vote with our wallets at all. We just can’t expect to get what Apple built", aligns well with my experience switching to Linux. I included this part in the post:
> Something I learnt from my move to Linux though, was to embrace the platform's conventions as opposed to trying to reproduce the system you're moving from as much as possible.
Which is kind of along the same lines. I think my experience so far was that it felt like giving up too much to go the more/completely open option at the moment. With projects like postmarketOS though, I feel there is some progress being made on this. I will continue to keep an eye on it.
- zepto 6y agoFor what it’s worth, I’m on the same page about this. I think we need an open, community owned, phone OS. I don’t see any of the actors who are impugning Apple as having any intention whatsoever to support the development of that - there is literally zero evidence of it. They only want to capture a part of the revenue stream for themselves. It’s simply all they have talked about. I believe that there are serious technical challenges to overcome to create a true open alternative to iOS that provides the same safety benefits that their controlled ecosystem provides. It took years for Apple to build their walled garden and it would take years to build an alternative. It would be pretty easy for these billion dollar corporations who are attacking Apple to fund such an initiative though a foundation of some kind, but it’s much cheaper for them to just try to use the courts to capture some of Apple’s revenue stream instead. In this case, the enemy of my enemy is just another bully.