5 ms·

This comment is 100% true. But for a user, especially a non technical one, a walled garden is a superior ux. Updates automatically, single stop to find anythin

This comment is 100% true. But for a user, especially a non technical one, a walled garden is a superior ux. Updates automatically, single stop to find anything and easy discovery, no worry of viruses/malware except in extreme circumstances, cheap apps (never seen a .99 app in the wild) etc.

ben-schaaf 6y ago
Automatic updates, single stop and little worry for malware are all perfectly achievable without a walled garden. It's been a thing on Linux for ages. It even gives you the choice of how high you want your walls, whether you only trust the debian developers or a user-made aur package or anything in-between.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  And yet the only way it was successful on the mainstream was via ChromeOS and Android, which hide from userspace that they are even using the Linux kernel.
  - throwaway2048 6y ago
    You are confusing "because of" with "in spite of" Where is the evidence that any of that was required?
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Apparently yes, given the amount of "Linux" developers that rather pay Apple for a UNIX desktop experience instead of making "Year of Desktop Linux" actually turn into a reality beyond the usual 2% from Steam surveys.
- nemothekid 6y ago
  Perfectly achievable, at the expense of being an end user nightmare. The reason I'm buying an iPhone is I don't have the time to care about how high the walls should be and to ensure every app I use isn't abusing the SDK to suck up data. The reason I'm paying a premium for Apple is I'm choosing to trust them rather than trust every developer.
  - boudin 6y ago
    The day apple, microsoft or google would manage updates of a whole system as well as some linux distribution would actually be the end of many user nightmares. Unless you don't install any app, you still trust all the developers of the apps you install. Walled garden is just a nice way to name Authoritarianism applied to a platform. It might make you feel safe to have apple deciding every bits of what you can do with your phone but it does mean that: - it's secure - the apps you are using are - you still have very low control over your data. You just pay to close your eyes and feel safe.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      That’s true of all closed source software, not just walled gardens. Any time you don’t have the source, you’re trusting that the developer isn’t screwing you over. I’d rather trust Apple than the cumulative two dozen developers that have their software running on my phone.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    Or to put it another way, Apple provides systems administrator services with every phone. Most medium and large businesses pay a LOT of money for systems administration to ensure that their desktops and laptops work reliably.

ben-schaaf 6y ago

Automatic updates, single stop and little worry for malware are all perfectly achievable without a walled garden. It's been a thing on Linux for ages. It even gives you the choice of how high you want your walls, whether you only trust the debian developers or a user-made aur package or anything in-between.

pjmlp 6y ago
And yet the only way it was successful on the mainstream was via ChromeOS and Android, which hide from userspace that they are even using the Linux kernel.
- throwaway2048 6y ago
  You are confusing "because of" with "in spite of" Where is the evidence that any of that was required?
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Apparently yes, given the amount of "Linux" developers that rather pay Apple for a UNIX desktop experience instead of making "Year of Desktop Linux" actually turn into a reality beyond the usual 2% from Steam surveys.
nemothekid 6y ago
Perfectly achievable, at the expense of being an end user nightmare. The reason I'm buying an iPhone is I don't have the time to care about how high the walls should be and to ensure every app I use isn't abusing the SDK to suck up data. The reason I'm paying a premium for Apple is I'm choosing to trust them rather than trust every developer.
- boudin 6y ago
  The day apple, microsoft or google would manage updates of a whole system as well as some linux distribution would actually be the end of many user nightmares. Unless you don't install any app, you still trust all the developers of the apps you install. Walled garden is just a nice way to name Authoritarianism applied to a platform. It might make you feel safe to have apple deciding every bits of what you can do with your phone but it does mean that: - it's secure - the apps you are using are - you still have very low control over your data. You just pay to close your eyes and feel safe.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    That’s true of all closed source software, not just walled gardens. Any time you don’t have the source, you’re trusting that the developer isn’t screwing you over. I’d rather trust Apple than the cumulative two dozen developers that have their software running on my phone.
- sjwright 6y ago
  Or to put it another way, Apple provides systems administrator services with every phone. Most medium and large businesses pay a LOT of money for systems administration to ensure that their desktops and laptops work reliably.