4 ms·

That’s not what people are saying though. Whether or not apple cares about its users is completely irrelevant. The question is whether apples incentives align w

That’s not what people are saying though. Whether or not apple cares about its users is completely irrelevant. The question is whether apples incentives align with its users better than other tech companies. The answer pretty clearly seems to be yes, apple makes most of its money by selling hardware, their incentive is to make a product people enjoy. Competitors make most of their money selling ads, their incentive is to lock users in while maximizing the number and effectiveness of ads served.

saiya-jin 4y ago
> their incentive is to lock users All good apart from this. Apple does this magnificently, ie closed hardware protocols. For example there are significantly better earphones than airpads pro (and some cost +-same), but good luck getting same level of integration over apple's proprietary protocols. While rest of whole universe at least tries to adhere to open things so we users have freedom in how we design & evolve our electronic setup, they have basic support for stuff like bluetooth and superb for their proprietary protocol. If some random chinese company can make seamless aptx hd integration with their buds, so can apple. But it won't. Thunderbolt vs USB. Again whole world vs Apple. It required... who else than our sluggish EU to come up with way to end this cable madness that would otherwise continue forever. Seen enough 40 euro frayed cables for one lifetime. For me this was a one of few breaking points between Iphone 13 pro max and Samsung S22 ultra. I am currently very happy user of the latter. That's hardware lock-in like hell.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > Thunderbolt vs USB. Again whole world vs Apple. WAT. Maybe you mean Lightning vs. USB? Well, it turns out that while a whole committee was designing 15 different and confusing standards over the past 20 years, Apple designed two, and they work. Now it's suddenly "Apple vs. the world" because the USB committee managed to spit out a semi-functional spec that ... Apple was the first to actually go full in with their desktop offerings, pissing so many people off.
  - kergonath 4y ago
    Apple was involved in Thunderbolt from the beginning (and from all accounts was a major driving force for Thunderbolt in the first place) and is part of the USB-IF. The only time it lagged in adopting a new USB version was because Intel was dragging their feet for USB 3. Some people just cannot understand that they have different strategies for desktops/laptops and mobile phones and go with “Apple walled garden bad”. > Apple was the first to actually go full in with their desktop offerings, pissing so many people off And also more or less designed the connector, apparently.
- greedo 4y ago
  Umm, Thunderbolt was developed by Intel, in cooperation with Apple. And IIRC, Apple is a member of the USB consortium. Too bad design by committee sucks and has led to the disaster that is USB-C.
  - omegabravo 4y ago
    USB Type C is the connector and isn't a disaster. You could argue lightning is a better connector, but it's not _that_ much better. Thunderbolt 3 and 4 use the USB-C connector. The USB naming of the protocols: USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.1 Gen 2 -> USB 3.1 Gen 2 x 1, USB 3.2 Gen 1x2, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, USB4 Gen 2x2, USB4 Gen 3x2 is ridiculous without even getting into the complexity of the protocol
    - account42 4y ago
      I think USB 3.0 being renamed into USB 3.1 Gen 1 and then into USB 3.2 Gen 1 into just so that manufacturers can market their devices with the latest USB numbers should really count as false advertising.
  - account42 4y ago
    > Apple is a member of the USB consortium Apple is also a member of Khronos (and so is Microsoft btw) yet decided to push their proprietary API instead of working with open standards. Membership in a standards organization makes just as much sense for a company competing with the standard as it does for one embracing it.
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      > member of Khronos (and so is Microsoft btw) yet decided to push their proprietary API instead of working with open standards Which open standards? If you mean Vulkan, then it appeared in any viable form three years after Apple released the first version if Metal. And Vulkan itself was donated by AMD because they couldn't figure out what to do with otherwise proprietary Mantle.

saiya-jin 4y ago

> their incentive is to lock users All good apart from this. Apple does this magnificently, ie closed hardware protocols. For example there are significantly better earphones than airpads pro (and some cost +-same), but good luck getting same level of integration over apple's proprietary protocols. While rest of whole universe at least tries to adhere to open things so we users have freedom in how we design & evolve our electronic setup, they have basic support for stuff like bluetooth and superb for their proprietary protocol. If some random chinese company can make seamless aptx hd integration with their buds, so can apple. But it won't. Thunderbolt vs USB. Again whole world vs Apple. It required... who else than our sluggish EU to come up with way to end this cable madness that would otherwise continue forever. Seen enough 40 euro frayed cables for one lifetime. For me this was a one of few breaking points between Iphone 13 pro max and Samsung S22 ultra. I am currently very happy user of the latter. That's hardware lock-in like hell.

dmitriid 4y ago
> Thunderbolt vs USB. Again whole world vs Apple. WAT. Maybe you mean Lightning vs. USB? Well, it turns out that while a whole committee was designing 15 different and confusing standards over the past 20 years, Apple designed two, and they work. Now it's suddenly "Apple vs. the world" because the USB committee managed to spit out a semi-functional spec that ... Apple was the first to actually go full in with their desktop offerings, pissing so many people off.
- kergonath 4y ago
  Apple was involved in Thunderbolt from the beginning (and from all accounts was a major driving force for Thunderbolt in the first place) and is part of the USB-IF. The only time it lagged in adopting a new USB version was because Intel was dragging their feet for USB 3. Some people just cannot understand that they have different strategies for desktops/laptops and mobile phones and go with “Apple walled garden bad”. > Apple was the first to actually go full in with their desktop offerings, pissing so many people off And also more or less designed the connector, apparently.
greedo 4y ago
Umm, Thunderbolt was developed by Intel, in cooperation with Apple. And IIRC, Apple is a member of the USB consortium. Too bad design by committee sucks and has led to the disaster that is USB-C.
- omegabravo 4y ago
  USB Type C is the connector and isn't a disaster. You could argue lightning is a better connector, but it's not _that_ much better. Thunderbolt 3 and 4 use the USB-C connector. The USB naming of the protocols: USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.1 Gen 2 -> USB 3.1 Gen 2 x 1, USB 3.2 Gen 1x2, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, USB4 Gen 2x2, USB4 Gen 3x2 is ridiculous without even getting into the complexity of the protocol
  - account42 4y ago
    I think USB 3.0 being renamed into USB 3.1 Gen 1 and then into USB 3.2 Gen 1 into just so that manufacturers can market their devices with the latest USB numbers should really count as false advertising.
- account42 4y ago
  > Apple is a member of the USB consortium Apple is also a member of Khronos (and so is Microsoft btw) yet decided to push their proprietary API instead of working with open standards. Membership in a standards organization makes just as much sense for a company competing with the standard as it does for one embracing it.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    > member of Khronos (and so is Microsoft btw) yet decided to push their proprietary API instead of working with open standards Which open standards? If you mean Vulkan, then it appeared in any viable form three years after Apple released the first version if Metal. And Vulkan itself was donated by AMD because they couldn't figure out what to do with otherwise proprietary Mantle.