4 ms·

You are the one not understanding. I understand that you feel allowing people to load their own software is important. You ignore the fact that allowing side lo

You are the one not understanding. I understand that you feel allowing people to load their own software is important. You ignore the fact that allowing side loading is a feature that has to be developed, tested and supported. It forces the company to spend money and resources at the direction of a government body to add a product feature where no moral, health, safety or environmental hazard exists in not doing so. There is however a huge moral hazard in allowing the government to legislative a products feature set because they like it. You can choose to vote your view buy not buying Apple because of this. If enough people agree with you and it hurts Apples market share then they as a company can choose to add the feature. The government does not have the right to mandate side loading as a feature anymore then they have the right to tell you what color your background screen must be. I understand that you feel Apple should support the installation of 3rd party software because you feel it’s the right way to do things. The point is your feeling about this has no impact on what you can legally force a company to do and it is that simple. You just do not agree because it is something you want. You are welcome to start a public campaign to change Apples mind. You are welcome to achieve enough wealth that you can take a board seat and force change. What you should not be allowed to do is pass some stupid law tell me or anyone what features to build in my product when there is no associated hazard in not doing so.

naikrovek 6y ago
No, you're not understanding me. Why doesn't apple WANT to do it? Why don't they WANT to do the right thing by their users? Why do they demand the right to lock-in everyone to the app store? Why must everyone who does business "in their neighborhood" have to bribe the local gangs to be allowed to continue to do business? They want to do the wrong thing, and enforce a tax on everyone who chooses their platform. They need to be forced into doing the absolute bare minimum portion of the right thing. I don't even care if zero users ever take advantage of it. The option to avoid paying the mafia while selling stuff in that neighborhood needs to be there. Also, the ability to install software on the device exists. There are layers on top of that which enforce how it is done, such as requiring that the software is signed by apple and delivered by the app store. Those additional layers are not required, and can be made optional. It won't require a huge development effort to enable what is being asked. Everyone else managed to do it easily.
- myrandomcomment 6y ago
  It is the right thing in your mind because you want it. If the consumer agreed with you they could vote with the pockets not to buy Apple, but they don’t. The install base of Android users that root their device is also low. People do not want it. You and a small group of people want it. The market makes the rules here. Also once again it is not a small effort to do what you want. Do you know what the current dev-test env looks like at Apple? Do you know what the code path is to turn on and off security? What do you do here? Implement a feature to allow the user to install unsigned software? Okay so you turn off the protections, does that disable the wall between apps? Is that okay? Is it okay to say well if you disable this the way the system is written all protections come down, so anything you install can read your keychain and all your passwords? How long will the EULA be when you want to press that button? What happens when someone does this scream to the media and the courts? Who is going to pay to write the code for this and the lawyers and the test team? You want to force a company to write code because it is something you want yet you are unwilling to admit that it is not free. Where does it stop, I mean I really want an iPhone that matches my car color. I guess I should get a law passed to force phone makers to support custom colors? I can get a phone that is not Apple to match my car color as everyone else has seem to do it, so why not force Apple? It’s easy right? The truth is that it is not simple, it never is. It is never just a matter of a little software. The fact is there is no legal or moral reason for the government to be involved in this market based decision. The market here is not a monopoly, there are other players and the consumer has a choice. Just because you have an issue with it does not make it meet the legal requirement for the government to become involved. Your outrage on this issue is a false premise that fails the test of harm to the consumer. You are welcome to use another companies product that supports the feature that you want.

naikrovek 6y ago

No, you're not understanding me. Why doesn't apple WANT to do it? Why don't they WANT to do the right thing by their users? Why do they demand the right to lock-in everyone to the app store? Why must everyone who does business "in their neighborhood" have to bribe the local gangs to be allowed to continue to do business? They want to do the wrong thing, and enforce a tax on everyone who chooses their platform. They need to be forced into doing the absolute bare minimum portion of the right thing. I don't even care if zero users ever take advantage of it. The option to avoid paying the mafia while selling stuff in that neighborhood needs to be there. Also, the ability to install software on the device exists. There are layers on top of that which enforce how it is done, such as requiring that the software is signed by apple and delivered by the app store. Those additional layers are not required, and can be made optional. It won't require a huge development effort to enable what is being asked. Everyone else managed to do it easily.

myrandomcomment 6y ago
It is the right thing in your mind because you want it. If the consumer agreed with you they could vote with the pockets not to buy Apple, but they don’t. The install base of Android users that root their device is also low. People do not want it. You and a small group of people want it. The market makes the rules here. Also once again it is not a small effort to do what you want. Do you know what the current dev-test env looks like at Apple? Do you know what the code path is to turn on and off security? What do you do here? Implement a feature to allow the user to install unsigned software? Okay so you turn off the protections, does that disable the wall between apps? Is that okay? Is it okay to say well if you disable this the way the system is written all protections come down, so anything you install can read your keychain and all your passwords? How long will the EULA be when you want to press that button? What happens when someone does this scream to the media and the courts? Who is going to pay to write the code for this and the lawyers and the test team? You want to force a company to write code because it is something you want yet you are unwilling to admit that it is not free. Where does it stop, I mean I really want an iPhone that matches my car color. I guess I should get a law passed to force phone makers to support custom colors? I can get a phone that is not Apple to match my car color as everyone else has seem to do it, so why not force Apple? It’s easy right? The truth is that it is not simple, it never is. It is never just a matter of a little software. The fact is there is no legal or moral reason for the government to be involved in this market based decision. The market here is not a monopoly, there are other players and the consumer has a choice. Just because you have an issue with it does not make it meet the legal requirement for the government to become involved. Your outrage on this issue is a false premise that fails the test of harm to the consumer. You are welcome to use another companies product that supports the feature that you want.