9 ms·

> I don’t want my non-technical family members being persuaded to install other stores. Frankly, that's not your decision to make. If they own the device, the

by hda2 6y ago

> I don’t want my non-technical family members being persuaded to install other stores. Frankly, that's not your decision to make. If they own the device, they get to decide. If they don't or are too young, then you can use various controls (i.e parental controls) to lock your devices down the way you want. This is a straw man.

zepto 6y ago
It’s absolutely my decision by to make if they ask me to recommend something to them. Especially if they have been having problems with malware and that’s why they are asking. If they own the device they get to use it as it was designed to be used. They also have the legal right to change it themselves (at least in the US). What you don’t have is any basis for forcing Apple to design software the way you want, or to force my family members not to be able to follow my recommendation to choose iOS as Apple wants to offer it to them. That’s between them and Apple and me. What right do have to dictate how any of these three parties choose to interact? There is no straw man.
- echelon 6y ago
  You can't make that decision for me and millions of others. You're voting to make our industry inequitable and running software some Orwellian dystopia. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple one day mandated that we hand them the copyright to the code we write. We're one step away from that now: we already have to write against a strict spec, fit all the rules, and are subject to arbitrary dismissal. They take 30% and leave us the crumbs. The appeals process is unfair. If Apple likes what you've got, they can just clone your app. One step away. We're in prison and you're rationalizing about your parents.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Are you an iOS developer? Do you own an iPhone?
    - thiht 6y ago
      Irrelevant.
      - zepto 6y ago
        Not at all. The commenter claims to be imprisoned by Apple. If that’s true, I want to understand how they got that way. If it’s not true, then their entire argument is questionable.
- ksec 6y ago
  2020, the new battle ground is now on how to define the term Straw man. I am sorry this is completely off topic. But it is quite funny I notice the word suddenly gained usage, ( especially in any political debate ) and it is now sort of misused and misapplied all over the place. ( Not suggesting your or your GP are right or wrong in using the term )
- strken 6y ago
  There's a pretty clear reason for passing legislation to force Apple to allow third party stores, and I think it has been explained well in the parent comments: some people believe users should control their devices. There are also pretty clear reasons for not doing so: other people believe Apple should control its devices. Politicians can legislate things. They already get to dictate how parties interact. I'm not sure how rights come into it, since they wouldn't be breaching any of your rights that I can think of.
  - zepto 6y ago
    This is not an accurate representation of reality. Users simply cannot control their devices. No individual can no matter how skilled. Software complexity moved past that point decades ago. All we can actually do is choose who to trust when we acquire software. Nobody is forced to choose or trust Apple, but many do. Since choices exist for people who want to decide for themselves who they trust to provide software, the argument cannot be about that. The people who argue that Apple should be forced to allow third party stores are only interested in the potential commercial gain they could make if they had access to Apple’s customers. They just want access to the customers so they can make money out of them. That is all this argument is about and all it has ever been about.
    - _ph_ 6y ago
      Of course users can control their device. Control doesn't mean assembly programming, control means to decide how they want to use it. I am not a car mechanic, I won't approach my car with a tool. Still I control my car as I can drive it to any workshop of my choice to have changes done. The car manufacturer has no say in this.
      - zepto 6y ago
        You can take your phone to anyone you like and have them make whatever changes you pay for. That is currently your right. It’s not clear what your complaint is.
nemothekid 6y ago
This isn't straw man. It's been used twice in this thread incorrectly. Frankly, it's also my families decision to use Facebook, and they have the freedom to use it, but that doesn't mean I won't continue to discourage them from using the platform. Just because that's their decision doesn't mean they are properly informed about their technical decisions or understand the impact. If absolute distribution freedom was a major concern for them I'd tell them to buy Androids.

by hda2 6y ago

zepto 6y ago

It’s absolutely my decision by to make if they ask me to recommend something to them. Especially if they have been having problems with malware and that’s why they are asking. If they own the device they get to use it as it was designed to be used. They also have the legal right to change it themselves (at least in the US). What you don’t have is any basis for forcing Apple to design software the way you want, or to force my family members not to be able to follow my recommendation to choose iOS as Apple wants to offer it to them. That’s between them and Apple and me. What right do have to dictate how any of these three parties choose to interact? There is no straw man.

echelon 6y ago
You can't make that decision for me and millions of others. You're voting to make our industry inequitable and running software some Orwellian dystopia. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple one day mandated that we hand them the copyright to the code we write. We're one step away from that now: we already have to write against a strict spec, fit all the rules, and are subject to arbitrary dismissal. They take 30% and leave us the crumbs. The appeals process is unfair. If Apple likes what you've got, they can just clone your app. One step away. We're in prison and you're rationalizing about your parents.
- zepto 6y ago
  Are you an iOS developer? Do you own an iPhone?
  - thiht 6y ago
    Irrelevant.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Not at all. The commenter claims to be imprisoned by Apple. If that’s true, I want to understand how they got that way. If it’s not true, then their entire argument is questionable.
ksec 6y ago
2020, the new battle ground is now on how to define the term Straw man. I am sorry this is completely off topic. But it is quite funny I notice the word suddenly gained usage, ( especially in any political debate ) and it is now sort of misused and misapplied all over the place. ( Not suggesting your or your GP are right or wrong in using the term )
strken 6y ago
There's a pretty clear reason for passing legislation to force Apple to allow third party stores, and I think it has been explained well in the parent comments: some people believe users should control their devices. There are also pretty clear reasons for not doing so: other people believe Apple should control its devices. Politicians can legislate things. They already get to dictate how parties interact. I'm not sure how rights come into it, since they wouldn't be breaching any of your rights that I can think of.
- zepto 6y ago
  This is not an accurate representation of reality. Users simply cannot control their devices. No individual can no matter how skilled. Software complexity moved past that point decades ago. All we can actually do is choose who to trust when we acquire software. Nobody is forced to choose or trust Apple, but many do. Since choices exist for people who want to decide for themselves who they trust to provide software, the argument cannot be about that. The people who argue that Apple should be forced to allow third party stores are only interested in the potential commercial gain they could make if they had access to Apple’s customers. They just want access to the customers so they can make money out of them. That is all this argument is about and all it has ever been about.
  - _ph_ 6y ago
    Of course users can control their device. Control doesn't mean assembly programming, control means to decide how they want to use it. I am not a car mechanic, I won't approach my car with a tool. Still I control my car as I can drive it to any workshop of my choice to have changes done. The car manufacturer has no say in this.
    - zepto 6y ago
      You can take your phone to anyone you like and have them make whatever changes you pay for. That is currently your right. It’s not clear what your complaint is.

nemothekid 6y ago

This isn't straw man. It's been used twice in this thread incorrectly. Frankly, it's also my families decision to use Facebook, and they have the freedom to use it, but that doesn't mean I won't continue to discourage them from using the platform. Just because that's their decision doesn't mean they are properly informed about their technical decisions or understand the impact. If absolute distribution freedom was a major concern for them I'd tell them to buy Androids.