5 ms·
Personally, it's a bit like if I purchased a Mercedes but found that I could only drive it on certain pre-approved roads, subject to varying partnerships and li
by ultrarunner 6y ago
Personally, it's a bit like if I purchased a Mercedes but found that I could only drive it on certain pre-approved roads, subject to varying partnerships and licensing agreements. Someone telling me, "you can just buy a scooter" seems predicated on the assertion that they both belong in the same category of "means of transportation," but ignores the fact that they operate very differently in several ways. It also ignores the fact that I've paid for the Mercedes (and possibly invested time and money into skills and tools to repair it), and can't necessarily recoup those costs.
Fundamentally, it ignores whether freedom of movement should be infringed in such a way. One can currently sideload an APK on Android, but what's stopping Google from taking the same hard line as Apple?
Note: I am using the hyperbolic analogy above for rhetorical reasons; I don't think Android phones are perfectly analogous to a scooter. We use Android at work precisely because of Apple's lockdowns, and while I actually like the OS well enough I think I would find it frustrating on a personal phone.
- Udik 6y agoThe message you're replying to argues that a car that refuses to go on certain roads is exactly equivalent to a car that does, because its owners are free to buy the other car. This is a complete non-sequitur, and I am surprised someone is debating it seriously.
- underwater 6y agoCars have less built in switching costs than phones. You can only have one phone at a time and there is an entire ecosystem of services and apps are carried forward when you buy a new one. A better metaphor might be renting a home. Imagine if you could only fill it with furniture and appliances that have been approved, and you can only park certain types of cars in the garage. You could always move, but then you have to buy new everything.