4 ms·

I think you have a very particular point of view. The vast majority of iPhone buyers haven't given this issue more than 2 seconds of thought. The vast majority

by clpm4j 5y ago

I think you have a very particular point of view. The vast majority of iPhone buyers haven't given this issue more than 2 seconds of thought. The vast majority will buy the next iPhone (or the one after that). And they'll buy another iPad for their kids. And they'll keep using MacBooks.

stephc_int13 5y ago
Maybe. But from my experience, our crowd tend to underestimate its predictive power. We tend to see ourselves as living in a niche, remote area. I remember in 2002-2005, when talking about the possible emergence of Smartphones, most of my friends and co-workers had the opinion that this kind of nerdy devices would never have any appeal to the general public. "People want simple phones" "People don't care" I am not so sure about that, but it takes time.
injvstice 5y ago
Our family was like that. We had every single device version up to iPhone 11. Then Apple bent to the will of the Chinese government and removed apps used by HK protesters. I don't live in Hong Kong, and I'm not affected, but it was a red flag (no pun intended). Then they bent to the will of the new US administration, removed Parler, and threatened Telegram. I use neither, but again, red flag. Now this. Textbook definition of hypocrisy, maybe? We were in a holding pattern on Apple upgrades since the HK decision, and now we are two generations behind on iPhones, and (I think) four generations behind on iPads. The thought of upgrading and giving Apple more money is not appealing to any of us, so we'll keep our current devices for as long as they work, while searching for an exit from the Apple ecosystem. It's just anecdotal, and I'm sure Tim Cook won't lose sleep over losing three iPhone and three iPad sales. Law, order, morality.. those are things defined by a democratically elected legislative branch, and enforced by the judiciary branch, not by rich suits in closed off board rooms. In my mind, this is just a cooperation between law enforcement and big tech to get around the 4th amendment protection.
- taylodl 5y ago
  We're going through a period of history of where we're asking the question who controls whom: do governments control corporations or do corporations control governments? A lot of people want governments to be able to control corporations since many governments are beholden to their citizens, whereas corporations are not. > Law, order, morality.. those are things defined by a democratically elected legislative branch, and enforced by the judiciary branch, not by rich suits in closed off board rooms I'm confused - you complain about "rich suits in closed off board rooms" making decisions (corporations control governments), yet you also complain about Apple "bent to the will of the Chinese government"? Well, which way do you want it? Who do you want to control whom? You can't have it both ways.

by clpm4j 5y ago

stephc_int13 5y ago

Maybe. But from my experience, our crowd tend to underestimate its predictive power. We tend to see ourselves as living in a niche, remote area. I remember in 2002-2005, when talking about the possible emergence of Smartphones, most of my friends and co-workers had the opinion that this kind of nerdy devices would never have any appeal to the general public. "People want simple phones" "People don't care" I am not so sure about that, but it takes time.

injvstice 5y ago

Our family was like that. We had every single device version up to iPhone 11. Then Apple bent to the will of the Chinese government and removed apps used by HK protesters. I don't live in Hong Kong, and I'm not affected, but it was a red flag (no pun intended). Then they bent to the will of the new US administration, removed Parler, and threatened Telegram. I use neither, but again, red flag. Now this. Textbook definition of hypocrisy, maybe? We were in a holding pattern on Apple upgrades since the HK decision, and now we are two generations behind on iPhones, and (I think) four generations behind on iPads. The thought of upgrading and giving Apple more money is not appealing to any of us, so we'll keep our current devices for as long as they work, while searching for an exit from the Apple ecosystem. It's just anecdotal, and I'm sure Tim Cook won't lose sleep over losing three iPhone and three iPad sales. Law, order, morality.. those are things defined by a democratically elected legislative branch, and enforced by the judiciary branch, not by rich suits in closed off board rooms. In my mind, this is just a cooperation between law enforcement and big tech to get around the 4th amendment protection.

taylodl 5y ago
We're going through a period of history of where we're asking the question who controls whom: do governments control corporations or do corporations control governments? A lot of people want governments to be able to control corporations since many governments are beholden to their citizens, whereas corporations are not. > Law, order, morality.. those are things defined by a democratically elected legislative branch, and enforced by the judiciary branch, not by rich suits in closed off board rooms I'm confused - you complain about "rich suits in closed off board rooms" making decisions (corporations control governments), yet you also complain about Apple "bent to the will of the Chinese government"? Well, which way do you want it? Who do you want to control whom? You can't have it both ways.