8 ms·

Yep, all consumers have perfect knowledge, whenever they purchase something they know exactly what they are getting into. The nearly $500 billion dollars projec

by jhuni 15y ago

Yep, all consumers have perfect knowledge, whenever they purchase something they know exactly what they are getting into. The nearly $500 billion dollars projected to be spent on advertisements by the end of this year has nothing to do with it, nor did any other forms of manipulation.

ugh 15y ago
Have you considered the alternative, namely that people really don’t care about owning (as you define it) their phone?
- cryptoz 15y ago
  To me, it doesn't really matter whether or not most people care about that in their phone. The definition stands. Nobody but Apple owns iPhones. Maybe no iPhone users care about that, and that's fine. But that doesn't change the fact that they own a license to use it and not the product itself.
  - xsmasher 15y ago
    Would you say the same about your TV, your wristwatch, or your car? If not, why not? They all run software that you don't have the source to, and in some cases can't modify at all (burned into ROMs.)
- jhuni 15y ago
  People do care which is why there is an entire free software movement that shares my concerns.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Yeah, some people do care but they don’t buy an iPhone. I’m talking about those people who actually do buy one.
atonse 15y ago
As someone who generally loves the idea of tinkering with my phone, I simply can't buy the logic that not being able to, actually hinders the ownership experience. I don't have any interest in "hacking" into my car, dishwasher, or fridge. I want them to _just work_, and I want to know who to call when they break. So then, it is entirely reasonable that most people simply want their electronics to work, rather than to somehow feel that just because they can't tinker and mod their device, their ownership is somehow hindered. Although I do feel that media DRM (movies, music, DVD region codes) can often hinder the ownership experience, I simply don't see how these devices being locked down actually hurt MOST consumers who aren't even interested in such details.
- cryptoz 15y ago
  There's a trend in this whole thread that I don't understand. After pointing out that the users are licensing the ability to use the proprietary operating system rather than "owning" it, the main rebuttal is: nobody cares, so it doesn't matter. I don't understand that. For example, few people care about taxes, war, or clean energy policies (less than 50% vote in much of North America). Does that mean the work done in these areas doesn't matter? The fact that most people don't care has little to do with the truth of the matter. Only Apple owns iPhones. It doesn't matter that nobody cares about this, they still don't own their phone.
  - ugh 15y ago
    But – so what? That’s the point. So you don’t own the phone. Is that a bad thing? Why? That’s the point of disagreement. I don’t understand what’s so bad about it.
    - cryptoz 15y ago
      Ah. I see. I only came in here to correct the statements about ownership. It matters to me that HN is not the kind of place where people think they own their iPhones - after all the news about software patents, free software, mobile platforms, etc, I think it's an important distinction to make on this site. The people here care (obviously, hence this debate) about this issue and I just wanted the definitions to be set right: jailbreaking != ownership. As to why it's good or bad, that's entirely personal preference. For me, I want to own it because I want the option to change it. That's all. Therefore, for me, it's terrible to buy a device I don't own. That should answer your question about why it's bad. Maybe it's not bad for you. Maybe it's good for you to not own the device. That's fine; I'm only here to remind you that you don't own it (after it was erroneously suggested up top that you do own it)
jmj4 15y ago
> The nearly $500 billion dollars projected to be spent on advertisements by the end of this year has nothing to do with it, nor did any other forms of manipulation. Fundamentally, people will not purchase something unless they think (however fleetingly) that it will be of benefit to them. Your right; they might not know exactly what they are getting into. But companies can't lie about it. And in this day and age, the information is usually obtainable without too much work.
- jhuni 15y ago
  Corporations cannot lie, they can just exaggerate ;)

by jhuni 15y ago

ugh 15y ago

Have you considered the alternative, namely that people really don’t care about owning (as you define it) their phone?

cryptoz 15y ago
To me, it doesn't really matter whether or not most people care about that in their phone. The definition stands. Nobody but Apple owns iPhones. Maybe no iPhone users care about that, and that's fine. But that doesn't change the fact that they own a license to use it and not the product itself.
- xsmasher 15y ago
  Would you say the same about your TV, your wristwatch, or your car? If not, why not? They all run software that you don't have the source to, and in some cases can't modify at all (burned into ROMs.)
jhuni 15y ago
People do care which is why there is an entire free software movement that shares my concerns.
- ugh 15y ago
  Yeah, some people do care but they don’t buy an iPhone. I’m talking about those people who actually do buy one.

atonse 15y ago

As someone who generally loves the idea of tinkering with my phone, I simply can't buy the logic that not being able to, actually hinders the ownership experience. I don't have any interest in "hacking" into my car, dishwasher, or fridge. I want them to _just work_, and I want to know who to call when they break. So then, it is entirely reasonable that most people simply want their electronics to work, rather than to somehow feel that just because they can't tinker and mod their device, their ownership is somehow hindered. Although I do feel that media DRM (movies, music, DVD region codes) can often hinder the ownership experience, I simply don't see how these devices being locked down actually hurt MOST consumers who aren't even interested in such details.

cryptoz 15y ago
There's a trend in this whole thread that I don't understand. After pointing out that the users are licensing the ability to use the proprietary operating system rather than "owning" it, the main rebuttal is: nobody cares, so it doesn't matter. I don't understand that. For example, few people care about taxes, war, or clean energy policies (less than 50% vote in much of North America). Does that mean the work done in these areas doesn't matter? The fact that most people don't care has little to do with the truth of the matter. Only Apple owns iPhones. It doesn't matter that nobody cares about this, they still don't own their phone.
- ugh 15y ago
  But – so what? That’s the point. So you don’t own the phone. Is that a bad thing? Why? That’s the point of disagreement. I don’t understand what’s so bad about it.
  - cryptoz 15y ago
    Ah. I see. I only came in here to correct the statements about ownership. It matters to me that HN is not the kind of place where people think they own their iPhones - after all the news about software patents, free software, mobile platforms, etc, I think it's an important distinction to make on this site. The people here care (obviously, hence this debate) about this issue and I just wanted the definitions to be set right: jailbreaking != ownership. As to why it's good or bad, that's entirely personal preference. For me, I want to own it because I want the option to change it. That's all. Therefore, for me, it's terrible to buy a device I don't own. That should answer your question about why it's bad. Maybe it's not bad for you. Maybe it's good for you to not own the device. That's fine; I'm only here to remind you that you don't own it (after it was erroneously suggested up top that you do own it)

jmj4 15y ago

> The nearly $500 billion dollars projected to be spent on advertisements by the end of this year has nothing to do with it, nor did any other forms of manipulation. Fundamentally, people will not purchase something unless they think (however fleetingly) that it will be of benefit to them. Your right; they might not know exactly what they are getting into. But companies can't lie about it. And in this day and age, the information is usually obtainable without too much work.

jhuni 15y ago
Corporations cannot lie, they can just exaggerate ;)