5 ms·

This particular part of your argument is overwrought IMHO: "Imagine someone was kidnapped against their will, and once we were to discuss the rights of the per

This particular part of your argument is overwrought IMHO: "Imagine someone was kidnapped against their will, and once we were to discuss the rights of the person being kidnapped the person kidnapped with stockholm syndrome have argued in favor of the kidnapper, as if it was within his rights to break its own rights." 1. Apple did not kidnap anyone here. Their customers _voluntarily_ buy Apple products. Don't like Apple's products? Do not buy them. Pretty simple stuff. 2. The government forcing Apple to do certain things is closer to your kidnapping argument. Apple doesn't want to relinquish software control on the devices they make. That is their right. They invented it, created it, and marketed it. Just because they are popular doesn't give anyone the right to control them. 3. You have the right to not buy Apple products.

can16358p 5y ago
This. I really don't understand why people both buy their products knowing what iOS allows them to do and what not, then still complain. Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android. Simple as that.
- Fnoord 5y ago
  > Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android Two choices is not enough. And, there are more choices than these 2. AltStore being an example.
  - dragonsky67 5y ago
    You are correct, two choices are not enough. The problem is that both of those choices are significantly influenced by big business. Google has a "free/open" version you can use if you like and also on their more restricted version allows you a fair amount of freedom. Apple takes a more constrained approach and assumes that if you are purchasing the product you want to live within the ecosystem it supplies. No effort is made to allow you to move out of that ecosystem even though this may be possible through the exploitation of software/system bugs. Once those bugs have been identified, Apple feels it has a responsibility to lock down those loopholes in the name of creating a more secure system. This can (and maybe should) be interpreted as Apple restricting your rights to jail break the system. Others interpret this as a responsible company maintaining a secure system. The question is if Apple allowed side loading of software would that, as per their current claim, reduce the security of the entire system? I don't think that there should be any debate on this. Assuming Apple software has bugs, then allowing side loading of potentially compromised software inevitably increases the attack service available to a malicious actor. The OS now has to defend against untrusted loaded software, not only external network based attacks. Not only that, I would assume people would still want random software to be able to access their iCloud drive and other apple shared infrastructure, even more attack surface. My feeling is that for most people with Apple devices, the devices are pretty much working as they desire and in a way that is easier (and potentially more secure) the alternative. Are there things that people don't like, sure, but the pain is lower than the pain of the alternative. I don't think most people care a toss about the ability to side load apps, there are millions of apps on the ios store, more than can be found. The only people who don't like it are the ones who are having to comply with Apples rules and are missing out of $$$ because of it.
    - Fnoord 5y ago
      > No effort is made to allow you to move out of that ecosystem That's an understatement. They actively deny you the possibility of moving out of their ecosystem. They disallow mentioning alternative payment systems in applications, FFS. If that isn't anti-competitive, I don't know what is. I got Apple devices, and I've been worried the past 10+ years that macOS (or Mac OS X as it was called) is moving towards the closed down iOS platform. Slowly but surely, its getting done. But remember: go sloooowwwww. They won't notice it then, less resistance.
- ThatPlayer 5y ago
  >Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android. Simple as that. That's a completely disingenuous response to any criticism. I'm allowed to dislike and like features of both iOS and Android. Anything I don't like shouldn't just be disregarded with 'Just get an Android'. iOS isn't perfect, and wanting it to improve is not wrong.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - macinjosh 5y ago
    It’s fine to not like things but that doesn’t mean we need to use government force to make people do what we want.
    - ThatPlayer 5y ago
      That's exactly what governments and politicians are for isn't it? Making laws (governing) based on what people want.

can16358p 5y ago

This. I really don't understand why people both buy their products knowing what iOS allows them to do and what not, then still complain. Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android. Simple as that.

Fnoord 5y ago
> Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android Two choices is not enough. And, there are more choices than these 2. AltStore being an example.
- dragonsky67 5y ago
  You are correct, two choices are not enough. The problem is that both of those choices are significantly influenced by big business. Google has a "free/open" version you can use if you like and also on their more restricted version allows you a fair amount of freedom. Apple takes a more constrained approach and assumes that if you are purchasing the product you want to live within the ecosystem it supplies. No effort is made to allow you to move out of that ecosystem even though this may be possible through the exploitation of software/system bugs. Once those bugs have been identified, Apple feels it has a responsibility to lock down those loopholes in the name of creating a more secure system. This can (and maybe should) be interpreted as Apple restricting your rights to jail break the system. Others interpret this as a responsible company maintaining a secure system. The question is if Apple allowed side loading of software would that, as per their current claim, reduce the security of the entire system? I don't think that there should be any debate on this. Assuming Apple software has bugs, then allowing side loading of potentially compromised software inevitably increases the attack service available to a malicious actor. The OS now has to defend against untrusted loaded software, not only external network based attacks. Not only that, I would assume people would still want random software to be able to access their iCloud drive and other apple shared infrastructure, even more attack surface. My feeling is that for most people with Apple devices, the devices are pretty much working as they desire and in a way that is easier (and potentially more secure) the alternative. Are there things that people don't like, sure, but the pain is lower than the pain of the alternative. I don't think most people care a toss about the ability to side load apps, there are millions of apps on the ios store, more than can be found. The only people who don't like it are the ones who are having to comply with Apples rules and are missing out of $$$ because of it.
  - Fnoord 5y ago
    > No effort is made to allow you to move out of that ecosystem That's an understatement. They actively deny you the possibility of moving out of their ecosystem. They disallow mentioning alternative payment systems in applications, FFS. If that isn't anti-competitive, I don't know what is. I got Apple devices, and I've been worried the past 10+ years that macOS (or Mac OS X as it was called) is moving towards the closed down iOS platform. Slowly but surely, its getting done. But remember: go sloooowwwww. They won't notice it then, less resistance.
ThatPlayer 5y ago
>Don't like iPhone/iOS? Don't buy it, go and buy Android. Simple as that. That's a completely disingenuous response to any criticism. I'm allowed to dislike and like features of both iOS and Android. Anything I don't like shouldn't just be disregarded with 'Just get an Android'. iOS isn't perfect, and wanting it to improve is not wrong.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- macinjosh 5y ago
  It’s fine to not like things but that doesn’t mean we need to use government force to make people do what we want.
  - ThatPlayer 5y ago
    That's exactly what governments and politicians are for isn't it? Making laws (governing) based on what people want.