4 ms·

It would be no problem if Apple were just doing their best to deliver the best experience to their users as you are implying they are doing here. The problem h

It would be no problem if Apple were just doing their best to deliver the best experience to their users as you are implying they are doing here. The problem here is that they are deliberately crippling and limiting what the hardware can do in a way that avoid any possibility of competition. Limiting JIT's and external web engines are an example of not allowing the devs to have an option to develop for web SDK forcing them to stick with the apple SDK. So, there's no problem in Apple trying to do things better. The real problem is the limitations imposed to curb competition and freedom for the developers to use the hardware the best way they can. Apple is ur-facism encoded in a private company. Google or Microsoft dont get away with half of what Apple do, so people should look more carefully to what is beneath.

briandear 5y ago
> The problem here is that they are deliberately crippling and limiting what the hardware can do in a way that avoid any possibility of competition. Do you know that as a fact? Any documentation to that effect? Or is it just speculation? There is a lot of stuff that is the way it is not because of the reasons you think. Adobe Flash on iPad was argued about the same way. But the answer wasn’t because of an attempt to stifle competition. > and freedom for the developers to use the hardware the best way they can iPad is a consumer device. They don’t make it for “developers.” You aren’t their target audience.
- oscargrouch 5y ago
  Won't comment on your first point because i think its pretty well documented by now, specially for the HN crowd. But if you really want to to go down into this rabbit hole.. > iPad is a consumer device. They don’t make it for “developers.” You aren’t their target audience. Sure, but the consumer is, a consumer who would want the best experience and the best applications on his device. Crippling and curbing the developer forcing the hand where he cannot use certain technologies or certain paths only to suit Apple monopolistic, control freak neurosis, will in the end damage the users, as he would not have access to goodies he would like and want to. This is basically the reason why Apple is getting away with it. The user doesn't even know he is being damage in certain ways so Apple can resort its control, because the application that should reach him, apps he would want if the option was given to him, never will reach him. Because even if the developer miraculously circumvented an obstacle (that is not there for the final users sake) and published its app, the control over app store publishing would take care of censoring the application through the evaluation process. Just a sample of where the final user is being damaged, the fact that he cannot really run other browsers that are basically UI shims over Safari, because Apple is afraid of web based applications multi-platform applications to work on your device.
  - CharlesW 5y ago
    > Won't comment on your first point because i think its pretty well documented by now, specially for the HN crowd. But if you really want to to go down into this rabbit hole.. I would. Where is this documentation of how Apple is deliberately (and arbitrarily) crippling and limiting what the hardware can do? > Crippling and curbing the developer forcing the hand where he cannot use certain technologies or certain paths only to suit Apple monopolistic, control freak neurosis, will in the end damage the users, as he would not have access to goodies he would like and want to. All you're doing here is illustrating that you do not understand consumer products, the iOS ecosystem, or the tradeoffs involved. You're thinking of Apple like PC vendors. In reality, iOS products are consumer experiences where the hardware and software are implementation details. 99.99% of iOS users don't know or care how much RAM their device has. Most can't tell you what version of iOS they're running. As a concrete example, Safari Web Extensions for iOS must be able to be unloaded at will. As a developer who doesn't understand "why", this obviously complicates their development for no apparent reason. For the developer who does understand, the need is obvious.

briandear 5y ago

> The problem here is that they are deliberately crippling and limiting what the hardware can do in a way that avoid any possibility of competition. Do you know that as a fact? Any documentation to that effect? Or is it just speculation? There is a lot of stuff that is the way it is not because of the reasons you think. Adobe Flash on iPad was argued about the same way. But the answer wasn’t because of an attempt to stifle competition. > and freedom for the developers to use the hardware the best way they can iPad is a consumer device. They don’t make it for “developers.” You aren’t their target audience.

oscargrouch 5y ago
Won't comment on your first point because i think its pretty well documented by now, specially for the HN crowd. But if you really want to to go down into this rabbit hole.. > iPad is a consumer device. They don’t make it for “developers.” You aren’t their target audience. Sure, but the consumer is, a consumer who would want the best experience and the best applications on his device. Crippling and curbing the developer forcing the hand where he cannot use certain technologies or certain paths only to suit Apple monopolistic, control freak neurosis, will in the end damage the users, as he would not have access to goodies he would like and want to. This is basically the reason why Apple is getting away with it. The user doesn't even know he is being damage in certain ways so Apple can resort its control, because the application that should reach him, apps he would want if the option was given to him, never will reach him. Because even if the developer miraculously circumvented an obstacle (that is not there for the final users sake) and published its app, the control over app store publishing would take care of censoring the application through the evaluation process. Just a sample of where the final user is being damaged, the fact that he cannot really run other browsers that are basically UI shims over Safari, because Apple is afraid of web based applications multi-platform applications to work on your device.
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > Won't comment on your first point because i think its pretty well documented by now, specially for the HN crowd. But if you really want to to go down into this rabbit hole.. I would. Where is this documentation of how Apple is deliberately (and arbitrarily) crippling and limiting what the hardware can do? > Crippling and curbing the developer forcing the hand where he cannot use certain technologies or certain paths only to suit Apple monopolistic, control freak neurosis, will in the end damage the users, as he would not have access to goodies he would like and want to. All you're doing here is illustrating that you do not understand consumer products, the iOS ecosystem, or the tradeoffs involved. You're thinking of Apple like PC vendors. In reality, iOS products are consumer experiences where the hardware and software are implementation details. 99.99% of iOS users don't know or care how much RAM their device has. Most can't tell you what version of iOS they're running. As a concrete example, Safari Web Extensions for iOS must be able to be unloaded at will. As a developer who doesn't understand "why", this obviously complicates their development for no apparent reason. For the developer who does understand, the need is obvious.