8 ms·

You guys are fighting the good fight for everything that owning hardware and being a user used to mean. Thank you.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
curiousgal 6y ago
I never understood this sentiment, if people choose to pay their way into a walled garden, why should they still care about hardware ownership/repairabilty, etc.?
- CraigJPerry 6y ago
  Probably comes down to definition of choice. Up thread someone else is describing how a particular macbook is the only hardware meeting their criteria but the OS is hobbling them.
- toyg 6y ago
  It's a trade-off. I buy MBPs for the great form-factor and OS, not for the walled-garden shenanigans. If those shenanigans can be somewhat reduced, the trade-off balance looks better.
  - Ductapemaster 6y ago
    I don't mean to me facetious, but I am genuinely curious: why should you get to have it your way? You are attempting to buy a product they do not sell.
    - Karunamon 6y ago
      Because a hardware vendor telling you what you can and can't do with the stuff you own is immoral.
      - EricE 6y ago
        Then don’t buy it? It’s not like Apple is the only vendor. Kind of hard to have diversity/options if everyone keeps insisting all vendors do everything the same way.
        Karunamon 6y ago
        I can buy what I want and also do what I want to what I purcwhased.
        wltprgm 6y ago
        People can use their mouths to say at least the fact of flaws the product and services you purchased which acts as an advice to not purchase them The downvote button on Hacker News doesn't work like a dislike button by the way
        stale2002 6y ago
        Or instead of that, people can engage in the entirely legal act of both purchasing it, and the entirely legal act of hacking it. Customers have a legal right to do basically anything they want with something that they own.
        sangnoir 6y ago
        First sale doctrine says if I buy something, I now completely own it and I can do as I please with it, even if it goes against any of the former owner's wishes or intent.
        anoncake 6y ago
        Apple bossing around its users doesn't increase diversity for anyone, it only artificially reduces its users' options.
    - toyg 6y ago
      Why would I not? Why should I accept everything companies do without ever complaining? Am I not allowed to tell the fishmonger that his fish doesn’t look that fresh to me? In the same way, I’m free to tell Apple their fish would taste better with some adjustments.
    - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
      Then perhaps they should sell it, and stop ignoring people who want it? Benign neglect (not creating limitations) is not the same as active interference (actively preventing) and Apple is much more on the side of active interference. They could simply do nothing (which is cheaper). They choose not to, at which point we get to question their motives. In the end your question reduces to "why do you want anything at all that someone doesn't already make?" and that doesn't make alot of sense given that new products come out on the market all the time.
    - stjohnswarts 6y ago
      After you buy your hardware it's yours to do with as you will. If these hacks result in the ability to load whatever you like on the T2 and intel proper then why not? Hackers like to hack. A lot of programmers are also hackers (in the traditional sense, not the negative sentiments that the press gives it)
- ahiknsr 6y ago
  "if people choose to pay their way into a walled garden, why should they still care about hardware ownership/repairabilty, etc.?" I don't like the walled garden but i still brought a iPhone because iPhones get updates for really long time(3 years minimum). Iphone SE(1st gen) released in 2016 got the iOS14 update.
  - stjohnswarts 6y ago
    I'm in the same boat as well :) . I keep a mac laptop for work/consulting stuff and otherwise have a linux box and several rpi's for my linux hacking hobbies :)
- baq 6y ago
  because they want a macbook, just disagree with apple on who should be able to fix it. the choice you mention doesn't exist, it's an illusion. you can't buy a macbook that apple allows you to fix yourself.
- Maursault 6y ago
  Mac hardware traditionally holds resale value. The T2 chip threatens to turn that hardware into a brick once resold. So beyond that jailbreaking ultimately makes the user's data more secure once Apple repairs and releases a fix (likely only going forward with new hardware) the jailbreak will cure the problem with aftermarket bricks for hardware with this T2 chip.
  - rswail 6y ago
    Where and how do you see the T2 chip being the mechanism that Apple stops reselling of hardware? Yes it could be used that way. But they have never even indicated that they've been thinking of using the secure enclave for that purpose.
    - kmeisthax 6y ago
      It's not an intentional anti-resale feature, but it does make repair a lot harder, because it locks (or at least, can lock) specific hardware components to the motherboard. This means if something on the laptop breaks, you can't repair it without the T2 chip knowing about it and potentially refusing to work. Apple has at least told their authorized repair partners that failing to register the repair with Apple may brick the device should Apple choose to further lock down unauthorized repairs in future firmware updates. The T2 also has a particularly wonky approach to disk encryption. It uses a key management approach where neither you nor Apple control the actual key material. This means that a dead T2 takes your data with it and there is no recovery. In pre-T2 MacBooks, Apple had a lifeboat connector which could be used for data recovery from the soldered-on SSD. They got rid of this with the T2, because there's no point - only that specific T2 in that specific motherboard is ever able to decrypt the data.
      - EricE 6y ago
        Data recovery - in an era where you have to go out of your way to keep your data out of the cloud, backups are easier than ever and can be done wirelessly - this is going to be your major objection? Please. As for matching parts to the motherboard, they have a point when it comes to I/O devices. It’s probably way more cloak and dagger than most people will ever have to worry about but it’s not unheard of. Again, if you don’t want to think about such things and want a device that trades ease of repair for improved base security why isn’t that something that shouldn’t be a choice? I’m generally pretty pro right to repair, but as with anything there are pro’s and con’s to all choices and I’m not fond of several of the right to repair arguments for government regulation being made. Apple is far from the only maker of computers out there. It is the only maker of macOS, but that still doesn’t justify people trying to dictate their business model - especially when many aspects of their business models are major reasons why I prefer their platforms.
- rurp 6y ago
  We don't live in a world with a robust operating system market where people can pick and choose the perfect option for them. You have three choices and they are each going to be a mixed bad of good and bad features for almost everyone.
- simonh 6y ago
  I'm a happy iPhone, iPad and Mac user but have also jailbroken some of my old iPhones before so they could be used by family in China. In the arguments about opening up the iPhone and forcing Apple to allow third party app stores and allow side loading I'm on Apple's side. I think Apple should decide what products they design, how they design them and what features they should have. If I like the feature set, I'll buy the. I do not think it's reasonable for other people to dictate to Apple what code they should write and how it should work, health and safety or deceptive marketing aside. The ability to side load apps would be a software feature that needs to be designed, coded, QA tested, secured etc. Who gets to make all those decisions? I don't think it makes sense to force Apple into doing these things if it doesn't want to do them. You don't like the inability to side load? Buy another phone. On the other hand once I own a device, it's mine. If I have the ability to jailbreak it, or hack it, or do whatever to it that's my business, not Apple's.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    > The ability to side load apps would be a software feature that needs to be designed, coded, QA tested, secured etc. Apple of course has an internal version of iOS that lets you do this.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      The public version lets you do this. Just a week at a time.
    - simonh 6y ago
      Would the current side loading capability, requiring a hard link to a Mac and an install of XCode, satisfy those calling for a side loading capability for consumers? I doubt it, but that's my point. Who gets to decide what satisfies any such requirement? Building in the features to support third party app stores is even more of a can of worms.
      - anoncake 6y ago
        The state decides obviously, the entity in charge of making the rules.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  For the same reason some people will buy a BMW and swap out the exhaust or add a turbo with their own two hands. Because it gives them the combination of customization, challenge, and capabilities they want.
- RonanTheGrey 6y ago
  I'd be interested in a real study that actually measured how often people are explicitly choosing the walled garden, and how often they're choosing something else that the walled garden "happens to come with". My money is on the second option but AFAIK there's no study like this.
  - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
    My guess is most people have no idea what a walled garden is.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

I never understood this sentiment, if people choose to pay their way into a walled garden, why should they still care about hardware ownership/repairabilty, etc.?

CraigJPerry 6y ago
Probably comes down to definition of choice. Up thread someone else is describing how a particular macbook is the only hardware meeting their criteria but the OS is hobbling them.
toyg 6y ago
It's a trade-off. I buy MBPs for the great form-factor and OS, not for the walled-garden shenanigans. If those shenanigans can be somewhat reduced, the trade-off balance looks better.
- Ductapemaster 6y ago
  I don't mean to me facetious, but I am genuinely curious: why should you get to have it your way? You are attempting to buy a product they do not sell.
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    Because a hardware vendor telling you what you can and can't do with the stuff you own is immoral.
    - EricE 6y ago
      Then don’t buy it? It’s not like Apple is the only vendor. Kind of hard to have diversity/options if everyone keeps insisting all vendors do everything the same way.
      - Karunamon 6y ago
        I can buy what I want and also do what I want to what I purcwhased.
        wltprgm 6y ago
        People can use their mouths to say at least the fact of flaws the product and services you purchased which acts as an advice to not purchase them The downvote button on Hacker News doesn't work like a dislike button by the way
      - stale2002 6y ago
        Or instead of that, people can engage in the entirely legal act of both purchasing it, and the entirely legal act of hacking it. Customers have a legal right to do basically anything they want with something that they own.
      - sangnoir 6y ago
        First sale doctrine says if I buy something, I now completely own it and I can do as I please with it, even if it goes against any of the former owner's wishes or intent.
      - anoncake 6y ago
        Apple bossing around its users doesn't increase diversity for anyone, it only artificially reduces its users' options.
  - toyg 6y ago
    Why would I not? Why should I accept everything companies do without ever complaining? Am I not allowed to tell the fishmonger that his fish doesn’t look that fresh to me? In the same way, I’m free to tell Apple their fish would taste better with some adjustments.
  - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
    Then perhaps they should sell it, and stop ignoring people who want it? Benign neglect (not creating limitations) is not the same as active interference (actively preventing) and Apple is much more on the side of active interference. They could simply do nothing (which is cheaper). They choose not to, at which point we get to question their motives. In the end your question reduces to "why do you want anything at all that someone doesn't already make?" and that doesn't make alot of sense given that new products come out on the market all the time.
  - stjohnswarts 6y ago
    After you buy your hardware it's yours to do with as you will. If these hacks result in the ability to load whatever you like on the T2 and intel proper then why not? Hackers like to hack. A lot of programmers are also hackers (in the traditional sense, not the negative sentiments that the press gives it)
ahiknsr 6y ago
"if people choose to pay their way into a walled garden, why should they still care about hardware ownership/repairabilty, etc.?" I don't like the walled garden but i still brought a iPhone because iPhones get updates for really long time(3 years minimum). Iphone SE(1st gen) released in 2016 got the iOS14 update.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  I'm in the same boat as well :) . I keep a mac laptop for work/consulting stuff and otherwise have a linux box and several rpi's for my linux hacking hobbies :)
baq 6y ago
because they want a macbook, just disagree with apple on who should be able to fix it. the choice you mention doesn't exist, it's an illusion. you can't buy a macbook that apple allows you to fix yourself.
Maursault 6y ago
Mac hardware traditionally holds resale value. The T2 chip threatens to turn that hardware into a brick once resold. So beyond that jailbreaking ultimately makes the user's data more secure once Apple repairs and releases a fix (likely only going forward with new hardware) the jailbreak will cure the problem with aftermarket bricks for hardware with this T2 chip.
- rswail 6y ago
  Where and how do you see the T2 chip being the mechanism that Apple stops reselling of hardware? Yes it could be used that way. But they have never even indicated that they've been thinking of using the secure enclave for that purpose.
  - kmeisthax 6y ago
    It's not an intentional anti-resale feature, but it does make repair a lot harder, because it locks (or at least, can lock) specific hardware components to the motherboard. This means if something on the laptop breaks, you can't repair it without the T2 chip knowing about it and potentially refusing to work. Apple has at least told their authorized repair partners that failing to register the repair with Apple may brick the device should Apple choose to further lock down unauthorized repairs in future firmware updates. The T2 also has a particularly wonky approach to disk encryption. It uses a key management approach where neither you nor Apple control the actual key material. This means that a dead T2 takes your data with it and there is no recovery. In pre-T2 MacBooks, Apple had a lifeboat connector which could be used for data recovery from the soldered-on SSD. They got rid of this with the T2, because there's no point - only that specific T2 in that specific motherboard is ever able to decrypt the data.
    - EricE 6y ago
      Data recovery - in an era where you have to go out of your way to keep your data out of the cloud, backups are easier than ever and can be done wirelessly - this is going to be your major objection? Please. As for matching parts to the motherboard, they have a point when it comes to I/O devices. It’s probably way more cloak and dagger than most people will ever have to worry about but it’s not unheard of. Again, if you don’t want to think about such things and want a device that trades ease of repair for improved base security why isn’t that something that shouldn’t be a choice? I’m generally pretty pro right to repair, but as with anything there are pro’s and con’s to all choices and I’m not fond of several of the right to repair arguments for government regulation being made. Apple is far from the only maker of computers out there. It is the only maker of macOS, but that still doesn’t justify people trying to dictate their business model - especially when many aspects of their business models are major reasons why I prefer their platforms.
rurp 6y ago
We don't live in a world with a robust operating system market where people can pick and choose the perfect option for them. You have three choices and they are each going to be a mixed bad of good and bad features for almost everyone.
simonh 6y ago
I'm a happy iPhone, iPad and Mac user but have also jailbroken some of my old iPhones before so they could be used by family in China. In the arguments about opening up the iPhone and forcing Apple to allow third party app stores and allow side loading I'm on Apple's side. I think Apple should decide what products they design, how they design them and what features they should have. If I like the feature set, I'll buy the. I do not think it's reasonable for other people to dictate to Apple what code they should write and how it should work, health and safety or deceptive marketing aside. The ability to side load apps would be a software feature that needs to be designed, coded, QA tested, secured etc. Who gets to make all those decisions? I don't think it makes sense to force Apple into doing these things if it doesn't want to do them. You don't like the inability to side load? Buy another phone. On the other hand once I own a device, it's mine. If I have the ability to jailbreak it, or hack it, or do whatever to it that's my business, not Apple's.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  > The ability to side load apps would be a software feature that needs to be designed, coded, QA tested, secured etc. Apple of course has an internal version of iOS that lets you do this.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    The public version lets you do this. Just a week at a time.
  - simonh 6y ago
    Would the current side loading capability, requiring a hard link to a Mac and an install of XCode, satisfy those calling for a side loading capability for consumers? I doubt it, but that's my point. Who gets to decide what satisfies any such requirement? Building in the features to support third party app stores is even more of a can of worms.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      The state decides obviously, the entity in charge of making the rules.
nitrogen 6y ago
For the same reason some people will buy a BMW and swap out the exhaust or add a turbo with their own two hands. Because it gives them the combination of customization, challenge, and capabilities they want.
RonanTheGrey 6y ago
I'd be interested in a real study that actually measured how often people are explicitly choosing the walled garden, and how often they're choosing something else that the walled garden "happens to come with". My money is on the second option but AFAIK there's no study like this.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  My guess is most people have no idea what a walled garden is.