31 ms·

I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it c

I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have cars with a half dozen subscriptions forced on us and the apologists will still be here telling us how 10 companies all doing the exact same thing to deprive us of true ownership is a healthy, competitive market.

Spooky23 4y ago
98% of people don’t care. But they will be scammed by bad actors who push them to install bespoke AppStores. This is just like Elon “free speech” - astroturf from companies who want to usher in the equivalent of scammy browser bars.
bamboozled 4y ago
Yet I guarantee you in ten years there will be a market for the exact thing you're asking for, there will be a car maker who makes, "cars". Not subscriptions. Some people will buy those and some people won't. Wouldn't it be only be a problem if you were forced against your will to drive a subscription model based car?
isitmadeofglass 4y ago
> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Thats literally what we have. What are you complaining about? For obvious reasons Apple is t going to support you if you jailbreak it, but that is absolutely reasonable of them.
greedo 4y ago
The car industry already has subscription services; Volvo, Porsche, Jaguar/Land Rover, Genesis, Nissan, all have subscription plans. Don't like those? Go down to most car dealers and you can get a short term subscription called a lease... Funny how the world hasn't ended because of this. Just go buy an Android phone if you don't like Apple's walled garden.
- yucky 4y ago
  The issue is when you buy an apple phone you're not leasing it.
- donmcronald 4y ago
  The car industry is going to change drastically in the next decade and it's going to result in much higher ownership costs, especially for used car buyers. The schemes that are going to ruin ownership for a lot of people are just starting. The manufacturers are all going to start locking features behind subscriptions. Things like heated seats, navigation, phone integration, performance, etc. will be premium features with a monthly fee. You may even pay extra for better audio or things like that. If enough people tolerate it, you may even end up with subscriptions for things like the sunroof. Once all of that is in place, they'll include X years of subscriptions in a new vehicle, so the first owner doesn't really notice the increased cost if they get another new vehicle after X years. As a secondhand buyer, I have to pay a non-discounted subscription for (ex) heated seats if I want that feature. The value of the heated seats won't depreciate alongside the car like it does now. If anything, the cost will go up. That means the resale value of the car for the original owner is lower. They're selling something closer to a base model, even if they had all the premium features unlocked while they owned the car. On the dealer side, they'll make it attractive for the original owner to trade in for a new car and it'll likely be by adding some incentives that revolve around the subscriptions because they don't really cost anything to activate, but they have a lot of value to the vehicle owner. That will have the effect of consolidating used car sales to major dealers who can offer better value with less cost than 3rd party or private (used) sellers because they can add value via subscription incentives with (near) $0 cost. The total cost of owning a vehicle is going to increase significantly in the next decade and a huge part of that is going to be done by leveraging post-sales subscriptions to damage / monopolize the secondhand market.
  - kmbfjr 4y ago
    You are absolutely correct, and I have no intention of abiding by this new way of vehicle ownership.
dmitrygr 4y ago
> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!
- m-p-3 4y ago
  And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse. The core idea is choice.
  - dmitrygr 4y ago
    - donmcronald 4y ago
      The PC is an open platform and that's allowed for things like Firefox with UBlock Origin and Facebook Container. That's much better than what Apple's doing isn't it? Apple isn't some altruist protecting you from Facebook. The most likely scenario is that Apple wants to be the sole owner of your data so they can sell it instead of Facebook selling it. I bet Apple's ad business grows substantially over the next 5 years.
    - lern_too_spel 4y ago
      Despite Android allowing Facebook to create its own store, you can use Facebook on Android and not give them all your data. Even better, you can install apps that aren't allowed in the Play Store or the App Store (like ReVanced, Instander, and Blokada) that change the behavior of the Facebook app to collect less data.
      - Sunspark 4y ago
        My solution for the FB problem is to not use any FB app at all, and just use FB in the mobile browser. Why do I need an app?
bamboozled 4y ago
No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? I'm an avid Linux user and an avid Apple user, and I think both systems have their merits. If I had to have only one it would be Linux.
- ouid 4y ago
  >No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? What is this supposed to be an argument for? Do you think this is an own? Is this statement made in good faith? Did you really let your 10th grade economics teacher tell you what a "monopoly" was and then never question either the usefulness or the validity of the definition?
  - threeseed 4y ago
    You can't argue for a particular feature then when someone offers you a device that has that feature argue that they are acting in bad faith.
  - chung8123 4y ago
    There is a difference between an monopoly and a moat. I think the previous statement is saying that if you want to own your phone you can choose a different path and apple probably isn't the phone you should choose.
    - bamboozled 4y ago
      Yes, quite simple isn't it?
  - darkwizard42 4y ago
    What the parent is likely trying to point out is that Apple has no obligation to give you the feature the way you want it (in fact, Apple seems to view not providing flexibility as the feature). If you feel this strongly about the feature, then using a different phone (which there are many) is available.
    - 4y ago
howaboutnope 4y ago
What really gets me is that even those few people who are in high enough positions in big enough companies to have material benefits from "capturing" customers and making everything "sticky" and as pushy as possible... all of them in turn are customers of dozens, hundreds, thousands of other companies that make their life more complicated than it would need to be, with the same motivation. I would say people, all of us, are having a way worse time than we even know, because we don't have a somewhat sane world to compare to.
threatofrain 4y ago
IMO there should be a way to allow power users such as yourself to customize your phone, such as how Google allows side-loading. But we can see that based on how niche side loading is that mass-users oriented businesses like Spotify and Twitter would not be happy. As for users like myself, I'm very happy that Apple intermediates my relationship with big businesses, because in the sphere of negotiation and leverage, big businesses like Walmart or Amazon would win every time for people in my family. They will auto-accept all terms.
- amelius 4y ago
  Any user should be able to walk away from the original hardware vendor, never contacting them again, and still be able to use the product in a normal way. Otherwise you bought a service, not a product.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - lttlrck 4y ago
    Sure, if that's what you actually paid for.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Sure you can walk away from Apple completely like 80% of the world does.
marricks 4y ago
The way I see it the users have two crappy options based on business model: 1) Apple's freedom from inspection: they control your device and their ecosystem because they make money off the ecosystem. The take a cut of the phone/computer/watch you buy then anything you buy in their ecosystem because the ecosystem is their product. Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business. 2) Google's device freedom: you can do whatever you want with your device because your are the product. Sure you can load a complete separate system of mail and chat clients and not sign into google, but really, will you? Of course there's option 3, linux. Neither the ecosystem or you is the product, but where's the money in that. No one is going to spend billions of dollars to get you to buy Linux. Whether Apple or Google (or MS or w/e) is the arch villain is really just a matter of perspective. Is two or three options a great place for consumers? No, of course not, it all sucks. I think a system built around who-gets-the-most-money-wins is the real problem.
- rosnd 4y ago
  Android is Linux.
  - ogsalmanxx 4y ago
    Android is Linux w/ Malware … omegalol
  - adamwk 4y ago
    Android is linux as much as iOS is BSD
    - surajrmal 4y ago
      What you are referring to isn't Linux. It's Linux + a free desktop compliant userspace. Linux is just a kernel which is in fact shared between both. I'm not sure why the community hasn't come up with a better name to help disambiguate the two.
      - bigfudge 4y ago
1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago
Back in the PC days I posed the question: What if Apple sold its computers with options for the OS, e.g., [ ] Apple-provided [ ] User-provided. In other words, what if one could buy just the Apple hardware, without a pre-installed OS. I used to run NetBSD on the Mac. I did not care about getting 100% support for every feature of the hardware, I just wanted a working computer. It is funny because today iOS is the mandatory Apple-installed OS and it borrows heavily from BSD. The old AirPort Extreme even ran a NetBSD 6.1 kernel. If there is line somewhere between "convenience", e.g., supply of a pre-installed OS, and "loss of meaningful ownership", e.g., ceding control to a seller even after purchase, it seems to me that Apple is way over that line on the side of denying meaningful ownership. If iOS is truly valuable, and I have no reason to believe otherwise, then sell it separately and let purchasers decide if and when to purchase, install or uninstall it. If the buyer does not want to use iOS then why should they have to pay for it. This question, as boring as it is, still triggers HN commenters, so there is obviously something coveted about the obligatory bundling of consumer hardware with proprietary OS, in spite of all the non-proprietary options.
- woah 4y ago
  Don't some people run Linux on Mac hardware? How would your proposal change anything?
  - askvictor 4y ago
    They do (and Windows on the older x86 based devices), but since the move to Apple Silicon, combined with a lack of availability of the specs, it becomes harder and harder. But OP is talking primarily about iOS, where it is impossible to run Linux (or any other OS)
    - llukas 4y ago
      What becomes harder and harder? Asahi seems to do just fine and has good pace with adding feature support. https://asahilinux.org/ https://asahilinux.org/ M2 is similar to M1 so it is easier as there is less HW combinations in the wild.
aroma_mic 4y ago
Same should be said for Nintendo or Sony, who assert the same control. Most of the money made is on games. Not saying you’re wrong or anything, if anything I agree, and think it should apply to all my hardware I buy.
- m4rtink 4y ago
  Indeed - a Nintendo Switch would be a perfect remote controller for robots if only Nintendo let you actually write code for the device you own!
  - _v7gu 4y ago
    Well, Nvidia just went ahead and gave everyone permission to do just that :^)
- musicale 4y ago
  In principle I like the idea of non-locked down game systems, regardless of whether they're made by Apple or Nintendo. I find it appealing that the Steam Deck isn't locked down and can run non-Steam games as well as Steam games. However, the killer app for jailbreaking locked down game systems does seem to be running unlicensed copies of commercial games.
- wraptile 4y ago
  Comparing a niche entertainment gaming device to a general computing device isn't very fair, is it?
- weberer 4y ago
  Well they did ship out official Linux discs for the PS2 and PS3.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    Linux for the PS4 and PS5 is just a normal x64 Linux binary. The 2 and 3 had very exotic architectures. For a while, you could get the most FLOPS/$ by networking PS3s together instead of buying commercial computing hardware.
pkulak 4y ago
Apple is still on the hook for support if you disable that option, either because that's what you wanted, or because someone from Microsoft Support called you and told you that you needed to disable it so he could remove the virus.
pchristensen 4y ago
I want Apple to maintain a consistent set of rules that app developers need to follow. I have no power to dictate my desirable terms to Facebook, Twitter, etc, but Apple does. I'm willing to give up some flexibility with my device for that. No matter what, I'm a tiny player with no power against globally powerful tech companies, but I'll take Apple's conditions vs 1) conditions set out by other companies that I trust less, and 2) having different conditions for every company I deal with.
- PHGamer 4y ago
  or apple could just develop an os such that if an app doesnt respect your settings it just flat out doesnt work. this would force facebook to at least make concessions on their app. There is no reason for walled garden. people can control the system themselves if setup.
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    Why do Spotify, facebook, and Twitter need anything beyond a web app these days? What does a native app get that helps them monetize? Access to contacts maybe?
    - xenospn 4y ago
      The twitter web app is what I use on a daily basis and it’s absolutely terrible. The app experience is vastly superior.
    - NekkoDroid 4y ago
      Probably for stuff they shouldn't be accessing. But also IIRC iOS doesn't support PWAs so installing any webapp they would provide in any meaningful way isn't possible there
- isatty 4y ago
  That and I want to give my not so technologically literate parents an iPhone and I want it to just work. I want a consistent experience that’ll let me debug their problems from around the world or just feel confident sending them to the Apple store. Even for a power user like me, I’d rather have an ultra reliable device with amazing manufacturer warranty than something I can hack on.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fishcrackers 4y ago
I like being able to trust my device and my kids device, if you wan't something to hack on get a pinephone or something the reality is that billions of people need to trust their phones with their most personal information, fininaces and lives and apple's policies while sometimes annoying do a lot to build that trust they aren't a big secret and if you don't like it you're free to not buy their products
- sergiotapia 4y ago
  How does the option of openness interrupt your curated lifecycle?
  - fishcrackers 4y ago
    for me personally I don't care about it on my phone either way, I do on my laptop/desktop
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      If you have no personal objection to Apple making their products more open, why defend their 'privacy' facade? Have you missed the last major iPhone exploits?
    - sergiotapia 4y ago
      So again, how does an option to open the device affect you in any way?
      - TylerE 4y ago
        A big part of what makes the Apple ecosystem so compelling is the consistency and coherence.
        root_axis 4y ago
        Nothing would change for you though, if someone wanted to sideload something they would just have the option to do so.
cafed00d 4y ago
> I want the option to control my devices. Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_? Doesn't Linux and the plethora of devices it supports give you this already? I ask as a willful customer who prefers the complete control Apple provides. I never have to think about "porn" or "bitcoin scam" or "upsells from parent's bank" or any other crap from being easily accessible on my kids' or elderly parent's devices. Even Steam has some arcane filters that eventually allow porn content to be visible in the store. Honestly, outsourcing the basic policing of content to a company like Apple is a feature; not a bug. Besides, there's so many competing devices that give you all the freedom + control you want out there already. Right? What am I missing? Now, I admit, this means I'm under the mercy of what _Apple_ thinks is "right" or "wrong". As an extreme example, I'd also like to disable _all_ non-vegetarian content from my kids' or parent's phones; to appeal to their "religious"/"moral" beliefs. But obviously that's a not a PoV upheld by the App Store. Similarly, I can empathize there are many other viewpoints people hold that may or may not be aligned with App Store guidelines. But despite all that, why can't Linux devices serve the "control my devices" need.
- tshaddox 4y ago
  > Now, I admit, this means I'm under the mercy of what _Apple_ thinks is "right" or "wrong". Only to the extent that you're "locked in" to the Apple ecosystem. I'm entirely in the Apple ecosystem as well (at least for smartphone/tablet/PC hardware, and lesser so for online services) but it wouldn't be a threat to my identity to switch if I was sufficiently upset of Apple's choices (and there were viable alternatives). Personally I don't feel like there's much lock in. It would be a bit of a hassle to move some things over, sure, and a bit of a learning curve, but I really don't think it would be a big deal.
  - hacym 4y ago
    Google, by virtue of owning my email for nearly 15 years, has me much more locked in and I don’t own a single Android or Google device.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Here's a quick breakdown: Linux is not an iPhone. One is hardware, and another is software. Apple has every right to build a hardware product with a software platform, but controlling the distribution of software is an immediate red flag. Conflating security and limitation is meaningless since iOS already has the means to isolate software a-la MacOS. Worst-case scenario, Apple can add a "Christian helicopter parent" toggle for you in the Settings app and let you opt-in to whatever you're enjoying now. > Even Steam has some arcane filters that eventually allow porn content to be visible in the store. Porn doesn't violate Steam's TOS. As long as your account is registered as under-18, it won't even be possible to see it. > But despite all that, why can't Linux devices serve the "control my devices" need. It can. On the newest Apple Silicon machines, I even hear it's excellent. That being said, Apple needs to unlock the bootloader of the iPhone/iPad to give us that option, so as-is our only choice is paying them 30% every time we make a transaction. It's so nefarious that I won't let anyone say it's 'serendipitous with moderation' or whatever you're trying to argue here. It's bad-faith and disregards the reason why we're talking about locked-down platforms in the first place.
thefounder 4y ago
Stop being silly! It's not your device! You don't own stuff anymore. You've just got a license to use it. Soon you will pay a monthly subscription for using it (like it or not)
brailsafe 4y ago
I really hope that in 10 years we don't all have cars, that'll be a mega failing
bawolff 4y ago
> I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it Then dont buy an iphone. Apple's market is not people who want to "own" a phone. It is people who want a phone that works no fuss. You're basically asking - why did apple take the option to make money hand over fist? The answer should be pretty self-obvious.
ljm 4y ago
Back in the day we laughed about software inevitably including a poor implementation of lisp, or an email client. What we are seeing now is the inevitable convergence of tech into advertising and engineering is giving way to marketing, and we’re not building product anymore, we’re building analytics.
scarface74 4y ago
Then why buy Apple devices? Do you also buy Teslas and wonder why you can’t use gas?
- dlubarov 4y ago
  Why would that be relevant? Buying a product doesn't mean I like everything about it, just that overall, it was the least bad option available to me at the time.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    If the most important thing I care about is sideloading, why would I buy an iPhone?
sgustard 4y ago
I'll contrast this with my TV. I want a TV that works and displays pictures & sound. Instead my TV is an Android hub with dozens of random apps installed. What it doesn't do half the time is work. Sure, I have "control" but I'd rather have "functional devices!"
- girvo 4y ago
  I'm dreading the day my 4K "dumb" LCD TV dies. It's now basically impossible to replace.
  - rtsil 4y ago
    You can replace it with a monitor + a pair of stereo speakers.
    - musicale 4y ago
      I like this option, though I have noticed that monitors seem to be more expensive and are not always available in the TV size you might want.
      - devmunchies 4y ago
        I recommend this as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33813255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33813255 You’re right though. My 44” monitor for my living room was $550, but that only seems expensive compared to the ad-subsidized smart TVs.
  - SkyPuncher 4y ago
    Eh. Get an Apple TV. HDMI CEC means you never have to interact with the default UI.
    - girvo 4y ago
      I have one! That’s the plan currently. But you can’t avoid it entirely, it’s why TVs are so slow to turn on, they still try to collect data and so on.
chrisseaton 4y ago
> I want the option to control my devices. So don’t buy an iPhone. You know that’s not the offer.
- newZWhoDis 4y ago
  Better: We (the people) ban you from selling phones in our rich and prosperous land if you don’t comply. Signed: Everyone
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    Why do you need to ban other people from buying them? You can already just opt to not buy them yourself. Why do you care if others still want to? Clearly not signed everyone - I don’t sign it.
    - newZWhoDis 4y ago
      Lol we’re well past that. If you’re willing to ban the NFA/legalize probate nuclear weapons we might be able to talk. In the mean time I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction, and that means banning companies from selling locked hardware is fair game.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        > I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction Locked mobile phones don’t hurt people other than the people who choose to use them. That’s different to for example a gun. The only reason to ban iPhones is because you know other people like them as they are and you’re in a minority! You want to enforce a minority opinion on others. That’s morally wrong.
      - kaashif 4y ago
        Your comment still doesn't answer the question "Why do you need to ban other people from buying them?" I think it's a good question that deserves an answer.
compiskey 4y ago
Apple employees have the freedom to create without coercion. You would need to lobby to change law, not preach to the choir here. That’s what Spotify and Musk are doing; trying to manipulate public perception to influence politicians. The problem they have is Apple is the crown jewel of US tech corps. Spotify is not and politicians are well aware Musk is a poser with money. Epic, Spotify, like Jobs once said, sell features not products. Gabe Newell has called generative content “an extinction level event” for traditional media producers and distributors. Epic and Spotify are an AI breakthrough away from irrelevance. Why listen to them except as anything but an appeal to rapidly outdated economic traditions? They can join the protest rotary phone makers, and horse and buggy businesses are pulling together.
- pietro72ohboy 4y ago
datalopers 4y ago
Don’t buy Apple products. You can safely self-curate on Android.
teeray 4y ago
I think the iron fist is partly about Apple protecting the iPhone’s image. If you allow users to sideload garbage onto their phone, some of their phones will work like crap. When they’re out on the town with friends and their phone’s battery dies after an hour, the perception (shared with those friends / potential future iPhone customers) is that the iPhone has terrible battery life—not that they loaded free apps that mined cryptocurrency in the background.
SamuelAdams 4y ago
You (and anyone reading this comment) are a rare exception. Users of this site are interested in how tech works. You spend time to understand what it’s doing and make things work for you. And that’s awesome! Personally I’m the same way. But an overwhelming majority of people do not want to fight with or customize their tech. Opening the tech actually tricks them into causing more problems by clicking random pop up’s on websites that look like system updates or other malware / advert tricks. A recent discussion on this problem is here [1]. I’m not sure how to solve this. Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers, while also having a locked down iPhone for the less tech literate? Maybe Apple can introduce a less locked down version of iOS for power users? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33314291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33314291
- nordsieck 4y ago
  > Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers, while also having a locked down iPhone for the less tech literate? Maybe Apple can introduce a less locked down version of iOS for power users? A key problem with this is volume. Most people fall into the "less tech literate" group, which means that the devices made for that market will be better (more capable and/or less expensive). Maybe there's a solution (I'm think about "developer mode" and "linux development environment" in Chrome OS); but I think it'll always be not so great in the best of cases.
- rosnd 4y ago
  > Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers Like this https://store.google.com/product/pixel_7_pro https://store.google.com/product/pixel_7_pro?
  - slenk 4y ago
    You can do almost anything with the unlocked phones from Google. They are great!
  - fsflover 4y ago
    No, like Pinephone and Librem 5.
stevofolife 4y ago
Dude then build your own phone lol.
lazzlazzlazz 4y ago
Apple wants to control your device because if you have too much control, you could create a situation that makes you, a government, Apple as a business, application developers, or other users feel that Apple did something wrong. Whenever there is a centralized entity with the power to change things, people will eventually treat it as though it is responsible to change them. This is why we need decentralized systems. Freedom, choice, and efficiency for users comes from using decentralized systems — like the web + browsers. I don't think the argument is good enough to justify their behavior. But it is why they do it.
windex 4y ago
Subscription fatigue. I am tired of having to pay every month for everything. I actively avoid buying subscription based services and products now. Even simple programs and services want me to pay every month. Nope. Not doing that.
rib3ye 4y ago
What does this have to do with the topic of the 30%  tax?
xenospn 4y ago
Your iDevice being jailbroken makes my iDevice less secure.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- EvanAnderson 4y ago
  The vulnerabilities in Apple’s code that jailbreaks exploit make your iOS device less secure.
lowbloodsugar 4y ago
Then don’t buy Apple. I want what Apple offers. I want a walled garden. And I am willing to pay for it. You use your propaganda about freedom of choice to demand that I not be allowed to choose. You demand that no device can function the way I want it to because ALL of them must function the way YOU want them to.
bayindirh 4y ago
I understand where you are coming from, and support you on that. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with the default state of an iPhone. It just manages itself, and all that hard problems (backups, updates, ease of use, experience homogenity, etc.) are solved. I manage more than enough servers at work, and I don't want to manage another server in my pocket, do nitty-gritty settings, allow selected apps background access, try to find what changed and what broke every update. I'm using Linux for 20 years, and I'm not going to change that, however Android is not Linux and settings persistence on Android is just not present. My parents use Samsung A9s, and I help them configure theirs from time to time, and seems like every important setting is either buried six levels deep or is not guaranteed to stick after an arbitrary time. While iPhone's (or Apple's) ecosystem lacks control, it promises dependability, and this is huge in removing obstacles from your productivity. I can just get things done in my iPhone and never touch settings app ever, except the occasional "is my battery doing good" checks.
- bamboozled 4y ago
  Exactly the same sentiment for me. I use both devices and I couldn't be more happy with the freedom this allows me. I own everything about the critical devices I work on, Linux. I have a magical device which "just works" in my Apple products. If someone breaks this, I'll be sad.
  - shever73 4y ago
    The "it just works" argument is what keeps me using an iPhone, even though my computers and servers all run Linux. Years ago, I replaced my trusty Nokia 6310 with an O2 XDA phone. It ran Windows CE, routinely crashed or froze and would be unable to make or receive calls. Since then, I've always wanted a phone that just works. The iPhone is the nearest thing to that for me.
    - bamboozled 4y ago
      I "rooted" my Android once, it was a nightmare. Never doing that again...on my primary phone at least.
alkonaut 4y ago
I want to own nowthihg. And while that obviously doesn’t preclude anyone else owning something, I’m pretty sure the Apple ecosystem for non-owner users could shrink in case there is an option to leave it. That said, I’m completely with the service/content companies when it comes to subscriptions for content. And I won’t buy a car needing a “subscription” to use physical features.
interpol_p 4y ago
I think this is less about control, and more about avoiding the 15-30% fee charged for selling through the App Store As a user, I have always been able to run what I want on Apple devices. Most recently I found my kids were seeing bad recommendations on the YouTube app on Apple TV. I did not like the recommendations, or the adverts. I was able to clone Yattee[1] from Github and build it to the Apple TV from my laptop on the couch Not as easy as side-loading, but also not difficult. Now when you want to _sell_ something like this, you can't. I'm fine with that. Freedom to run code is different from the freedom to package it up and sell it on a platform you don't own Google makes side-loading hard[2] on Android for exactly the same reasons. They give preferential treatment[3] to big apps to prevent them from starting competing stores I have the level of control that I like over my devices. I can't install my own OS on an iPhone, but there's great developments on Mac[4]. Given the hardware is now basically identical, this seems OK [1] https://github.com/yattee/yattee https://github.com/yattee/yattee [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-android-sideloading-google-2730588/ https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-android-sideloadin... [3] https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/08/30/google-allegedly-offered-netflix-a-sweetheart-deal-to-keep-using-the-play-stores-payment-system/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/08/30/google-allegedly-of... [4] https://asahilinux.org https://asahilinux.org
steve1977 4y ago
If you want to own stuff and are not a fan of subscriptions, Spotify is probably not the company to root for.
sunshinerag 4y ago
I do not want to control or micromanage my devices. I like someone to take care of all the little details that I am not an expert in but would like to be served with good taste. I would pay good money for such a device/service. Apple fits the bill. I believe there are other phones for perennial tinkerers. (I once was)
mschuster91 4y ago
> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Apple is like Disney in that regard: they want absolute control over their brand and the associated experience. They don't want to get caught in shitstorms or legal trouble over stuff they cannot control such as covid misinformation, Nazi violence or pedophiles, so they require content moderation from apps that allow UGC. They don't want to deal with people complaining that they don't get their money back, so they require using their payment gateway where they can control the payment flow. They don't want applications to send marketing email spam to users' email addresses, so they require "Sign in with Apple", where they can supply a virtual email address. It's not my world, but I do understand that this demand is a core part of their user experience they sell to their customers.
piyush_soni 4y ago
It was never about you (the customer), if you were thinking that. It was always about they keeping the control so that they can monetize every possible part of the ecosystem. Giving you the freedom takes that opportunity away. You see how they kept chanting "privacy" and slowly started tracking every move of yours in the app store and started showing you the ads, and you kept on believing "you're not a product when you buy an Apple device". No one stops to think how they removed the headphone jack because "courage" and chargers from the box because "environment", and customers still have the illusion of choice while they've been milked constantly.
Altho00 4y ago
The steam deck has really been a breath of fresh air to me. To have a company release a device in 2022 with a full linux distro with root access telling you that it's yours and that you can do anything you want with it and also releasing all the parts you might need alongside guides and stuff is really amazing. Of course it's too big to whipe it out like a phone and too small to comfortably replace a laptop but their philosophy is great.
celticninja 4y ago
There should be an option for users to opt out of the walled garden.
isolli 4y ago
For the record: - "Mercedes-Benz to introduce acceleration subscription fee" [0] - "BMW starts selling heated seat subscriptions for $18 a month" [1] [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63743597 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63743597 [1] https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscriptions-microtransactions-heated-seats-feature https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscription...
hurril 4y ago
While I completely agree with your sentiment, the problem is that of normalisation otherwise. If it's not such a big ask to require of you, that you accept side loading of apps for instance, then my efforts to keep making a stand on privacy grounds will increase exponentially. I.e.: if it's normal to do side loading, then I become the odd man out for not wanting that on my device. I'll have to tell my boss that, no, it's to do with security concerns in general that I don't accept HR:s fine app.
HellDunkel 4y ago
The car industry still will have some competition going on so there is a good chance you will be able to avoid subscription (traditional aftersales excluded). Big tech? not so much.
VoodooJuJu 4y ago
We're sorry, but you don't have a choice. You will own nothing, and you will be happy.
gadders 4y ago
You'll own nothing and be happy.
tejohnso 4y ago
> I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. Yes. And it's easy to think that for a single issue like this it's a minor problem. Just don't buy Apple products. But there's a larger issue. > in 10 years we’ll all have cars with a half dozen subscriptions forced on us Right. I want to opt out of that. I also want to opt out of the corporate oversight of my property or tools in general. And while we're at it, I want to opt out of the inflationary debt driven monetary policy. And I want to opt out of vehicle-centric neighbourhood planning. Also proxy wars propagated by my government. The list goes on. And there's a burden to all of this that I'm not sure how to deal with. Happily embrace the illusion of choice, I guess? I don't use Apple products, never have.
- magic123_ 4y ago
  I technically agree with you, and I'm not saying you were currently doing what I'm about to complain about; but I find very annoying the fact that a lot of people seem to use this line of thinking to justify more or less every shitty decision made by these huge corporations.
nonethewiser 4y ago
This topic usually seems to miss some pragmatism. Regardless of whether or not Apple's approach is _good_ (and it most certainly isnt, except for Apple), they can do it. We can stop pontificating on whether their official position makes sense. It doesnt matter - they are doing it. The real questions are whether buying Apple is worth it. And if there are any roadblocks for the competition that could be removed.
geocar 4y ago
> I want the option to control my devices. ... I want complete control over it. Learn! I can install my own software on my iPhone, and I can install software people have shared with me that I can inspect. I can affect the repairs I have the tools to make. You don't need anything but a brain to learn how to do these things, but you'll definitely need a brain to understand why (or when) you shouldn't: > I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist > What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? What people like Elon Musk and Daniel Ek are asking for the ability to install software on my phone that allows them to install more software that I cannot inspect. Now to be clear: I have the ability to do this thing to my device, but I don't think I should do it for the same reason I don't want to give any application on my computer my root password -- I understand one application needs to know it, but as soon as there's two that means there are two single-points-of-failure, and that's worse; a mistake in either program could reveal all of the secrets my phone has, or trick me into giving away ones that are only in my head. I am also glad it is a little difficult because it means my friends and family cannot be easily tricked into doing it.
eternalban 4y ago
> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Apple can legitimately be worried that possible subpar/bad experiences with an Apple device (caused by user choices) will damage their brand and what the name is supposed to stand for in consumer space. It is fair to assume that normal people will not pay attention to details such as 'I disabled the walled garden'. So I'm pretty sure their position is 'Sure, your device but we're certainly not going to help you damage our brand's reputation'. They may have a point since your device at most costs $2k. Their reputation cost Apple billions of dollars to acquire.
roody15 4y ago
Agree completely. Just simply a money issue. Apple likes to retain full control of its device almost like its a console. This enables maximum profit.
boringg 4y ago
I want to point out the cognitive dissonance here. Spotify is a subscription based product that completely removes your ability to own and control your music (I lose songs all the time super frustrating because of whatever deals spotify has in the background with the record labels). Your comment while valid doesn't really work with the example Spotify CEO railing against Apple. That said your frustrating is valid and there are many good points here as to why that model is no longer in vogue and you might be the minority in the public (I sympathize with you).
pwdisswordfish9 4y ago
If you had the option to sideload apps, Facebook might have pressured you to do that (and leave them free from Apple’s oversight) or lose your friends. Because you can’t, Apple was able to have privacy controls imposed upon them kicking and screaming. You may argue this argument is wrong, but it’s not like it is totally incomprehensible.
danaris 4y ago
If Apple did not require all apps to come through the App Store, and enforce some version of the current rules on such apps, it would not be long at all before, for instance, Facebook pulled their app from the App Store and released a new version that required changing those settings in order to sideload it (and had detailed instructions on how to do so)...and made sure that app could gather as much information as possible about your phone and everything you do on it. Up to and including silently recording you with the microphone, depending on just how well Apple has access to that locked down in the OS. Is this a certainty? No. But it's much too high a probability for my comfort. Furthermore, there would be a large number of developers who would just say "screw the App Store, screw Apple's frameworks, screw their rules" and similarly release their apps for sideloading only. Many of these would also have unacceptable levels of malware, spyware, terrible bugs, or just plain godawful design. Yes, the App Store has its problems, but it absolutely has value. When advocating for a change in a major system, it is both foolish and irresponsible not to consider how those changes would be abused by people with bad intentions. Just because you and people like you would only use the extra freedom for good does not mean that no one would use it for evil. That doesn't mean you should never make a change that can be used for evil, or course. It means you need to be aware of the tradeoffs, take them into account, and be open about your willingness to accept the bad along with the good.
martin82 4y ago
Nein, nein, nein! You will own nothing, and you will be happy now. Please be happy now!

Spooky23 4y ago

98% of people don’t care. But they will be scammed by bad actors who push them to install bespoke AppStores. This is just like Elon “free speech” - astroturf from companies who want to usher in the equivalent of scammy browser bars.

bamboozled 4y ago

Yet I guarantee you in ten years there will be a market for the exact thing you're asking for, there will be a car maker who makes, "cars". Not subscriptions. Some people will buy those and some people won't. Wouldn't it be only be a problem if you were forced against your will to drive a subscription model based car?

isitmadeofglass 4y ago

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Thats literally what we have. What are you complaining about? For obvious reasons Apple is t going to support you if you jailbreak it, but that is absolutely reasonable of them.

greedo 4y ago

The car industry already has subscription services; Volvo, Porsche, Jaguar/Land Rover, Genesis, Nissan, all have subscription plans. Don't like those? Go down to most car dealers and you can get a short term subscription called a lease... Funny how the world hasn't ended because of this. Just go buy an Android phone if you don't like Apple's walled garden.

yucky 4y ago
The issue is when you buy an apple phone you're not leasing it.
donmcronald 4y ago
The car industry is going to change drastically in the next decade and it's going to result in much higher ownership costs, especially for used car buyers. The schemes that are going to ruin ownership for a lot of people are just starting. The manufacturers are all going to start locking features behind subscriptions. Things like heated seats, navigation, phone integration, performance, etc. will be premium features with a monthly fee. You may even pay extra for better audio or things like that. If enough people tolerate it, you may even end up with subscriptions for things like the sunroof. Once all of that is in place, they'll include X years of subscriptions in a new vehicle, so the first owner doesn't really notice the increased cost if they get another new vehicle after X years. As a secondhand buyer, I have to pay a non-discounted subscription for (ex) heated seats if I want that feature. The value of the heated seats won't depreciate alongside the car like it does now. If anything, the cost will go up. That means the resale value of the car for the original owner is lower. They're selling something closer to a base model, even if they had all the premium features unlocked while they owned the car. On the dealer side, they'll make it attractive for the original owner to trade in for a new car and it'll likely be by adding some incentives that revolve around the subscriptions because they don't really cost anything to activate, but they have a lot of value to the vehicle owner. That will have the effect of consolidating used car sales to major dealers who can offer better value with less cost than 3rd party or private (used) sellers because they can add value via subscription incentives with (near) $0 cost. The total cost of owning a vehicle is going to increase significantly in the next decade and a huge part of that is going to be done by leveraging post-sales subscriptions to damage / monopolize the secondhand market.
- kmbfjr 4y ago
  You are absolutely correct, and I have no intention of abiding by this new way of vehicle ownership.

dmitrygr 4y ago

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!

m-p-3 4y ago
And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse. The core idea is choice.
- dmitrygr 4y ago
  - donmcronald 4y ago
    The PC is an open platform and that's allowed for things like Firefox with UBlock Origin and Facebook Container. That's much better than what Apple's doing isn't it? Apple isn't some altruist protecting you from Facebook. The most likely scenario is that Apple wants to be the sole owner of your data so they can sell it instead of Facebook selling it. I bet Apple's ad business grows substantially over the next 5 years.
  - lern_too_spel 4y ago
    Despite Android allowing Facebook to create its own store, you can use Facebook on Android and not give them all your data. Even better, you can install apps that aren't allowed in the Play Store or the App Store (like ReVanced, Instander, and Blokada) that change the behavior of the Facebook app to collect less data.
    - Sunspark 4y ago
      My solution for the FB problem is to not use any FB app at all, and just use FB in the mobile browser. Why do I need an app?

bamboozled 4y ago

No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? I'm an avid Linux user and an avid Apple user, and I think both systems have their merits. If I had to have only one it would be Linux.

ouid 4y ago
>No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? What is this supposed to be an argument for? Do you think this is an own? Is this statement made in good faith? Did you really let your 10th grade economics teacher tell you what a "monopoly" was and then never question either the usefulness or the validity of the definition?
- threeseed 4y ago
  You can't argue for a particular feature then when someone offers you a device that has that feature argue that they are acting in bad faith.
- chung8123 4y ago
  There is a difference between an monopoly and a moat. I think the previous statement is saying that if you want to own your phone you can choose a different path and apple probably isn't the phone you should choose.
  - bamboozled 4y ago
    Yes, quite simple isn't it?
- darkwizard42 4y ago
  What the parent is likely trying to point out is that Apple has no obligation to give you the feature the way you want it (in fact, Apple seems to view not providing flexibility as the feature). If you feel this strongly about the feature, then using a different phone (which there are many) is available.
  - 4y ago

howaboutnope 4y ago

What really gets me is that even those few people who are in high enough positions in big enough companies to have material benefits from "capturing" customers and making everything "sticky" and as pushy as possible... all of them in turn are customers of dozens, hundreds, thousands of other companies that make their life more complicated than it would need to be, with the same motivation. I would say people, all of us, are having a way worse time than we even know, because we don't have a somewhat sane world to compare to.

threatofrain 4y ago

IMO there should be a way to allow power users such as yourself to customize your phone, such as how Google allows side-loading. But we can see that based on how niche side loading is that mass-users oriented businesses like Spotify and Twitter would not be happy. As for users like myself, I'm very happy that Apple intermediates my relationship with big businesses, because in the sphere of negotiation and leverage, big businesses like Walmart or Amazon would win every time for people in my family. They will auto-accept all terms.

amelius 4y ago
Any user should be able to walk away from the original hardware vendor, never contacting them again, and still be able to use the product in a normal way. Otherwise you bought a service, not a product.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- lttlrck 4y ago
  Sure, if that's what you actually paid for.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Sure you can walk away from Apple completely like 80% of the world does.

marricks 4y ago

The way I see it the users have two crappy options based on business model: 1) Apple's freedom from inspection: they control your device and their ecosystem because they make money off the ecosystem. The take a cut of the phone/computer/watch you buy then anything you buy in their ecosystem because the ecosystem is their product. Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business. 2) Google's device freedom: you can do whatever you want with your device because your are the product. Sure you can load a complete separate system of mail and chat clients and not sign into google, but really, will you? Of course there's option 3, linux. Neither the ecosystem or you is the product, but where's the money in that. No one is going to spend billions of dollars to get you to buy Linux. Whether Apple or Google (or MS or w/e) is the arch villain is really just a matter of perspective. Is two or three options a great place for consumers? No, of course not, it all sucks. I think a system built around who-gets-the-most-money-wins is the real problem.

rosnd 4y ago
Android is Linux.
- ogsalmanxx 4y ago
  Android is Linux w/ Malware … omegalol
- adamwk 4y ago
  Android is linux as much as iOS is BSD
  - surajrmal 4y ago
    What you are referring to isn't Linux. It's Linux + a free desktop compliant userspace. Linux is just a kernel which is in fact shared between both. I'm not sure why the community hasn't come up with a better name to help disambiguate the two.
    - bigfudge 4y ago

1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago

Back in the PC days I posed the question: What if Apple sold its computers with options for the OS, e.g., [ ] Apple-provided [ ] User-provided. In other words, what if one could buy just the Apple hardware, without a pre-installed OS. I used to run NetBSD on the Mac. I did not care about getting 100% support for every feature of the hardware, I just wanted a working computer. It is funny because today iOS is the mandatory Apple-installed OS and it borrows heavily from BSD. The old AirPort Extreme even ran a NetBSD 6.1 kernel. If there is line somewhere between "convenience", e.g., supply of a pre-installed OS, and "loss of meaningful ownership", e.g., ceding control to a seller even after purchase, it seems to me that Apple is way over that line on the side of denying meaningful ownership. If iOS is truly valuable, and I have no reason to believe otherwise, then sell it separately and let purchasers decide if and when to purchase, install or uninstall it. If the buyer does not want to use iOS then why should they have to pay for it. This question, as boring as it is, still triggers HN commenters, so there is obviously something coveted about the obligatory bundling of consumer hardware with proprietary OS, in spite of all the non-proprietary options.

woah 4y ago
Don't some people run Linux on Mac hardware? How would your proposal change anything?
- askvictor 4y ago
  They do (and Windows on the older x86 based devices), but since the move to Apple Silicon, combined with a lack of availability of the specs, it becomes harder and harder. But OP is talking primarily about iOS, where it is impossible to run Linux (or any other OS)
  - llukas 4y ago
    What becomes harder and harder? Asahi seems to do just fine and has good pace with adding feature support. https://asahilinux.org/ https://asahilinux.org/ M2 is similar to M1 so it is easier as there is less HW combinations in the wild.

aroma_mic 4y ago

Same should be said for Nintendo or Sony, who assert the same control. Most of the money made is on games. Not saying you’re wrong or anything, if anything I agree, and think it should apply to all my hardware I buy.

m4rtink 4y ago
Indeed - a Nintendo Switch would be a perfect remote controller for robots if only Nintendo let you actually write code for the device you own!
- _v7gu 4y ago
  Well, Nvidia just went ahead and gave everyone permission to do just that :^)
musicale 4y ago
In principle I like the idea of non-locked down game systems, regardless of whether they're made by Apple or Nintendo. I find it appealing that the Steam Deck isn't locked down and can run non-Steam games as well as Steam games. However, the killer app for jailbreaking locked down game systems does seem to be running unlicensed copies of commercial games.
wraptile 4y ago
Comparing a niche entertainment gaming device to a general computing device isn't very fair, is it?
weberer 4y ago
Well they did ship out official Linux discs for the PS2 and PS3.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  Linux for the PS4 and PS5 is just a normal x64 Linux binary. The 2 and 3 had very exotic architectures. For a while, you could get the most FLOPS/$ by networking PS3s together instead of buying commercial computing hardware.

pkulak 4y ago

Apple is still on the hook for support if you disable that option, either because that's what you wanted, or because someone from Microsoft Support called you and told you that you needed to disable it so he could remove the virus.

pchristensen 4y ago

I want Apple to maintain a consistent set of rules that app developers need to follow. I have no power to dictate my desirable terms to Facebook, Twitter, etc, but Apple does. I'm willing to give up some flexibility with my device for that. No matter what, I'm a tiny player with no power against globally powerful tech companies, but I'll take Apple's conditions vs 1) conditions set out by other companies that I trust less, and 2) having different conditions for every company I deal with.

PHGamer 4y ago
or apple could just develop an os such that if an app doesnt respect your settings it just flat out doesnt work. this would force facebook to at least make concessions on their app. There is no reason for walled garden. people can control the system themselves if setup.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  Why do Spotify, facebook, and Twitter need anything beyond a web app these days? What does a native app get that helps them monetize? Access to contacts maybe?
  - xenospn 4y ago
    The twitter web app is what I use on a daily basis and it’s absolutely terrible. The app experience is vastly superior.
  - NekkoDroid 4y ago
    Probably for stuff they shouldn't be accessing. But also IIRC iOS doesn't support PWAs so installing any webapp they would provide in any meaningful way isn't possible there
isatty 4y ago
That and I want to give my not so technologically literate parents an iPhone and I want it to just work. I want a consistent experience that’ll let me debug their problems from around the world or just feel confident sending them to the Apple store. Even for a power user like me, I’d rather have an ultra reliable device with amazing manufacturer warranty than something I can hack on.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

fishcrackers 4y ago

I like being able to trust my device and my kids device, if you wan't something to hack on get a pinephone or something the reality is that billions of people need to trust their phones with their most personal information, fininaces and lives and apple's policies while sometimes annoying do a lot to build that trust they aren't a big secret and if you don't like it you're free to not buy their products

sergiotapia 4y ago
How does the option of openness interrupt your curated lifecycle?
- fishcrackers 4y ago
  for me personally I don't care about it on my phone either way, I do on my laptop/desktop
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    If you have no personal objection to Apple making their products more open, why defend their 'privacy' facade? Have you missed the last major iPhone exploits?
  - sergiotapia 4y ago
    So again, how does an option to open the device affect you in any way?
    - TylerE 4y ago
      A big part of what makes the Apple ecosystem so compelling is the consistency and coherence.
      - root_axis 4y ago
        Nothing would change for you though, if someone wanted to sideload something they would just have the option to do so.

cafed00d 4y ago

> I want the option to control my devices. Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_? Doesn't Linux and the plethora of devices it supports give you this already? I ask as a willful customer who prefers the complete control Apple provides. I never have to think about "porn" or "bitcoin scam" or "upsells from parent's bank" or any other crap from being easily accessible on my kids' or elderly parent's devices. Even Steam has some arcane filters that eventually allow porn content to be visible in the store. Honestly, outsourcing the basic policing of content to a company like Apple is a feature; not a bug. Besides, there's so many competing devices that give you all the freedom + control you want out there already. Right? What am I missing? Now, I admit, this means I'm under the mercy of what _Apple_ thinks is "right" or "wrong". As an extreme example, I'd also like to disable _all_ non-vegetarian content from my kids' or parent's phones; to appeal to their "religious"/"moral" beliefs. But obviously that's a not a PoV upheld by the App Store. Similarly, I can empathize there are many other viewpoints people hold that may or may not be aligned with App Store guidelines. But despite all that, why can't Linux devices serve the "control my devices" need.

tshaddox 4y ago
> Now, I admit, this means I'm under the mercy of what _Apple_ thinks is "right" or "wrong". Only to the extent that you're "locked in" to the Apple ecosystem. I'm entirely in the Apple ecosystem as well (at least for smartphone/tablet/PC hardware, and lesser so for online services) but it wouldn't be a threat to my identity to switch if I was sufficiently upset of Apple's choices (and there were viable alternatives). Personally I don't feel like there's much lock in. It would be a bit of a hassle to move some things over, sure, and a bit of a learning curve, but I really don't think it would be a big deal.
- hacym 4y ago
  Google, by virtue of owning my email for nearly 15 years, has me much more locked in and I don’t own a single Android or Google device.
smoldesu 4y ago
Here's a quick breakdown: Linux is not an iPhone. One is hardware, and another is software. Apple has every right to build a hardware product with a software platform, but controlling the distribution of software is an immediate red flag. Conflating security and limitation is meaningless since iOS already has the means to isolate software a-la MacOS. Worst-case scenario, Apple can add a "Christian helicopter parent" toggle for you in the Settings app and let you opt-in to whatever you're enjoying now. > Even Steam has some arcane filters that eventually allow porn content to be visible in the store. Porn doesn't violate Steam's TOS. As long as your account is registered as under-18, it won't even be possible to see it. > But despite all that, why can't Linux devices serve the "control my devices" need. It can. On the newest Apple Silicon machines, I even hear it's excellent. That being said, Apple needs to unlock the bootloader of the iPhone/iPad to give us that option, so as-is our only choice is paying them 30% every time we make a transaction. It's so nefarious that I won't let anyone say it's 'serendipitous with moderation' or whatever you're trying to argue here. It's bad-faith and disregards the reason why we're talking about locked-down platforms in the first place.

thefounder 4y ago

Stop being silly! It's not your device! You don't own stuff anymore. You've just got a license to use it. Soon you will pay a monthly subscription for using it (like it or not)

brailsafe 4y ago

I really hope that in 10 years we don't all have cars, that'll be a mega failing

bawolff 4y ago

> I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it Then dont buy an iphone. Apple's market is not people who want to "own" a phone. It is people who want a phone that works no fuss. You're basically asking - why did apple take the option to make money hand over fist? The answer should be pretty self-obvious.

ljm 4y ago

Back in the day we laughed about software inevitably including a poor implementation of lisp, or an email client. What we are seeing now is the inevitable convergence of tech into advertising and engineering is giving way to marketing, and we’re not building product anymore, we’re building analytics.

scarface74 4y ago

Then why buy Apple devices? Do you also buy Teslas and wonder why you can’t use gas?

dlubarov 4y ago
Why would that be relevant? Buying a product doesn't mean I like everything about it, just that overall, it was the least bad option available to me at the time.
- scarface74 4y ago
  If the most important thing I care about is sideloading, why would I buy an iPhone?

sgustard 4y ago

I'll contrast this with my TV. I want a TV that works and displays pictures & sound. Instead my TV is an Android hub with dozens of random apps installed. What it doesn't do half the time is work. Sure, I have "control" but I'd rather have "functional devices!"

girvo 4y ago
I'm dreading the day my 4K "dumb" LCD TV dies. It's now basically impossible to replace.
- rtsil 4y ago
  You can replace it with a monitor + a pair of stereo speakers.
  - musicale 4y ago
    I like this option, though I have noticed that monitors seem to be more expensive and are not always available in the TV size you might want.
    - devmunchies 4y ago
      I recommend this as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33813255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33813255 You’re right though. My 44” monitor for my living room was $550, but that only seems expensive compared to the ad-subsidized smart TVs.
- SkyPuncher 4y ago
  Eh. Get an Apple TV. HDMI CEC means you never have to interact with the default UI.
  - girvo 4y ago
    I have one! That’s the plan currently. But you can’t avoid it entirely, it’s why TVs are so slow to turn on, they still try to collect data and so on.

chrisseaton 4y ago

> I want the option to control my devices. So don’t buy an iPhone. You know that’s not the offer.

newZWhoDis 4y ago
Better: We (the people) ban you from selling phones in our rich and prosperous land if you don’t comply. Signed: Everyone
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  Why do you need to ban other people from buying them? You can already just opt to not buy them yourself. Why do you care if others still want to? Clearly not signed everyone - I don’t sign it.
  - newZWhoDis 4y ago
    Lol we’re well past that. If you’re willing to ban the NFA/legalize probate nuclear weapons we might be able to talk. In the mean time I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction, and that means banning companies from selling locked hardware is fair game.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      > I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction Locked mobile phones don’t hurt people other than the people who choose to use them. That’s different to for example a gun. The only reason to ban iPhones is because you know other people like them as they are and you’re in a minority! You want to enforce a minority opinion on others. That’s morally wrong.
    - kaashif 4y ago
      Your comment still doesn't answer the question "Why do you need to ban other people from buying them?" I think it's a good question that deserves an answer.

compiskey 4y ago

Apple employees have the freedom to create without coercion. You would need to lobby to change law, not preach to the choir here. That’s what Spotify and Musk are doing; trying to manipulate public perception to influence politicians. The problem they have is Apple is the crown jewel of US tech corps. Spotify is not and politicians are well aware Musk is a poser with money. Epic, Spotify, like Jobs once said, sell features not products. Gabe Newell has called generative content “an extinction level event” for traditional media producers and distributors. Epic and Spotify are an AI breakthrough away from irrelevance. Why listen to them except as anything but an appeal to rapidly outdated economic traditions? They can join the protest rotary phone makers, and horse and buggy businesses are pulling together.

pietro72ohboy 4y ago

datalopers 4y ago

Don’t buy Apple products. You can safely self-curate on Android.

teeray 4y ago

I think the iron fist is partly about Apple protecting the iPhone’s image. If you allow users to sideload garbage onto their phone, some of their phones will work like crap. When they’re out on the town with friends and their phone’s battery dies after an hour, the perception (shared with those friends / potential future iPhone customers) is that the iPhone has terrible battery life—not that they loaded free apps that mined cryptocurrency in the background.

SamuelAdams 4y ago

You (and anyone reading this comment) are a rare exception. Users of this site are interested in how tech works. You spend time to understand what it’s doing and make things work for you. And that’s awesome! Personally I’m the same way. But an overwhelming majority of people do not want to fight with or customize their tech. Opening the tech actually tricks them into causing more problems by clicking random pop up’s on websites that look like system updates or other malware / advert tricks. A recent discussion on this problem is here [1]. I’m not sure how to solve this. Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers, while also having a locked down iPhone for the less tech literate? Maybe Apple can introduce a less locked down version of iOS for power users? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33314291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33314291

nordsieck 4y ago
> Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers, while also having a locked down iPhone for the less tech literate? Maybe Apple can introduce a less locked down version of iOS for power users? A key problem with this is volume. Most people fall into the "less tech literate" group, which means that the devices made for that market will be better (more capable and/or less expensive). Maybe there's a solution (I'm think about "developer mode" and "linux development environment" in Chrome OS); but I think it'll always be not so great in the best of cases.
rosnd 4y ago
> Maybe we need an actually viable Linux phone for tinkerers Like this https://store.google.com/product/pixel_7_pro https://store.google.com/product/pixel_7_pro?
- slenk 4y ago
  You can do almost anything with the unlocked phones from Google. They are great!
- fsflover 4y ago
  No, like Pinephone and Librem 5.

stevofolife 4y ago

Dude then build your own phone lol.

lazzlazzlazz 4y ago

Apple wants to control your device because if you have too much control, you could create a situation that makes you, a government, Apple as a business, application developers, or other users feel that Apple did something wrong. Whenever there is a centralized entity with the power to change things, people will eventually treat it as though it is responsible to change them. This is why we need decentralized systems. Freedom, choice, and efficiency for users comes from using decentralized systems — like the web + browsers. I don't think the argument is good enough to justify their behavior. But it is why they do it.

windex 4y ago

Subscription fatigue. I am tired of having to pay every month for everything. I actively avoid buying subscription based services and products now. Even simple programs and services want me to pay every month. Nope. Not doing that.

rib3ye 4y ago

What does this have to do with the topic of the 30%  tax?

xenospn 4y ago

Your iDevice being jailbroken makes my iDevice less secure.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
EvanAnderson 4y ago
The vulnerabilities in Apple’s code that jailbreaks exploit make your iOS device less secure.

lowbloodsugar 4y ago

Then don’t buy Apple. I want what Apple offers. I want a walled garden. And I am willing to pay for it. You use your propaganda about freedom of choice to demand that I not be allowed to choose. You demand that no device can function the way I want it to because ALL of them must function the way YOU want them to.

bayindirh 4y ago

I understand where you are coming from, and support you on that. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with the default state of an iPhone. It just manages itself, and all that hard problems (backups, updates, ease of use, experience homogenity, etc.) are solved. I manage more than enough servers at work, and I don't want to manage another server in my pocket, do nitty-gritty settings, allow selected apps background access, try to find what changed and what broke every update. I'm using Linux for 20 years, and I'm not going to change that, however Android is not Linux and settings persistence on Android is just not present. My parents use Samsung A9s, and I help them configure theirs from time to time, and seems like every important setting is either buried six levels deep or is not guaranteed to stick after an arbitrary time. While iPhone's (or Apple's) ecosystem lacks control, it promises dependability, and this is huge in removing obstacles from your productivity. I can just get things done in my iPhone and never touch settings app ever, except the occasional "is my battery doing good" checks.

bamboozled 4y ago
Exactly the same sentiment for me. I use both devices and I couldn't be more happy with the freedom this allows me. I own everything about the critical devices I work on, Linux. I have a magical device which "just works" in my Apple products. If someone breaks this, I'll be sad.
- shever73 4y ago
  The "it just works" argument is what keeps me using an iPhone, even though my computers and servers all run Linux. Years ago, I replaced my trusty Nokia 6310 with an O2 XDA phone. It ran Windows CE, routinely crashed or froze and would be unable to make or receive calls. Since then, I've always wanted a phone that just works. The iPhone is the nearest thing to that for me.
  - bamboozled 4y ago
    I "rooted" my Android once, it was a nightmare. Never doing that again...on my primary phone at least.

alkonaut 4y ago

I want to own nowthihg. And while that obviously doesn’t preclude anyone else owning something, I’m pretty sure the Apple ecosystem for non-owner users could shrink in case there is an option to leave it. That said, I’m completely with the service/content companies when it comes to subscriptions for content. And I won’t buy a car needing a “subscription” to use physical features.

interpol_p 4y ago

I think this is less about control, and more about avoiding the 15-30% fee charged for selling through the App Store As a user, I have always been able to run what I want on Apple devices. Most recently I found my kids were seeing bad recommendations on the YouTube app on Apple TV. I did not like the recommendations, or the adverts. I was able to clone Yattee[1] from Github and build it to the Apple TV from my laptop on the couch Not as easy as side-loading, but also not difficult. Now when you want to _sell_ something like this, you can't. I'm fine with that. Freedom to run code is different from the freedom to package it up and sell it on a platform you don't own Google makes side-loading hard[2] on Android for exactly the same reasons. They give preferential treatment[3] to big apps to prevent them from starting competing stores I have the level of control that I like over my devices. I can't install my own OS on an iPhone, but there's great developments on Mac[4]. Given the hardware is now basically identical, this seems OK [1] https://github.com/yattee/yattee https://github.com/yattee/yattee [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-android-sideloading-google-2730588/ https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-android-sideloadin... [3] https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/08/30/google-allegedly-offered-netflix-a-sweetheart-deal-to-keep-using-the-play-stores-payment-system/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/08/30/google-allegedly-of... [4] https://asahilinux.org https://asahilinux.org

steve1977 4y ago

If you want to own stuff and are not a fan of subscriptions, Spotify is probably not the company to root for.

sunshinerag 4y ago

I do not want to control or micromanage my devices. I like someone to take care of all the little details that I am not an expert in but would like to be served with good taste. I would pay good money for such a device/service. Apple fits the bill. I believe there are other phones for perennial tinkerers. (I once was)

mschuster91 4y ago

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Apple is like Disney in that regard: they want absolute control over their brand and the associated experience. They don't want to get caught in shitstorms or legal trouble over stuff they cannot control such as covid misinformation, Nazi violence or pedophiles, so they require content moderation from apps that allow UGC. They don't want to deal with people complaining that they don't get their money back, so they require using their payment gateway where they can control the payment flow. They don't want applications to send marketing email spam to users' email addresses, so they require "Sign in with Apple", where they can supply a virtual email address. It's not my world, but I do understand that this demand is a core part of their user experience they sell to their customers.

piyush_soni 4y ago

It was never about you (the customer), if you were thinking that. It was always about they keeping the control so that they can monetize every possible part of the ecosystem. Giving you the freedom takes that opportunity away. You see how they kept chanting "privacy" and slowly started tracking every move of yours in the app store and started showing you the ads, and you kept on believing "you're not a product when you buy an Apple device". No one stops to think how they removed the headphone jack because "courage" and chargers from the box because "environment", and customers still have the illusion of choice while they've been milked constantly.

Altho00 4y ago

The steam deck has really been a breath of fresh air to me. To have a company release a device in 2022 with a full linux distro with root access telling you that it's yours and that you can do anything you want with it and also releasing all the parts you might need alongside guides and stuff is really amazing. Of course it's too big to whipe it out like a phone and too small to comfortably replace a laptop but their philosophy is great.

celticninja 4y ago

There should be an option for users to opt out of the walled garden.

isolli 4y ago

For the record: - "Mercedes-Benz to introduce acceleration subscription fee" [0] - "BMW starts selling heated seat subscriptions for $18 a month" [1] [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63743597 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63743597 [1] https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscriptions-microtransactions-heated-seats-feature https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscription...

hurril 4y ago

While I completely agree with your sentiment, the problem is that of normalisation otherwise. If it's not such a big ask to require of you, that you accept side loading of apps for instance, then my efforts to keep making a stand on privacy grounds will increase exponentially. I.e.: if it's normal to do side loading, then I become the odd man out for not wanting that on my device. I'll have to tell my boss that, no, it's to do with security concerns in general that I don't accept HR:s fine app.

HellDunkel 4y ago

The car industry still will have some competition going on so there is a good chance you will be able to avoid subscription (traditional aftersales excluded). Big tech? not so much.

VoodooJuJu 4y ago

We're sorry, but you don't have a choice. You will own nothing, and you will be happy.

gadders 4y ago

You'll own nothing and be happy.

tejohnso 4y ago

> I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. Yes. And it's easy to think that for a single issue like this it's a minor problem. Just don't buy Apple products. But there's a larger issue. > in 10 years we’ll all have cars with a half dozen subscriptions forced on us Right. I want to opt out of that. I also want to opt out of the corporate oversight of my property or tools in general. And while we're at it, I want to opt out of the inflationary debt driven monetary policy. And I want to opt out of vehicle-centric neighbourhood planning. Also proxy wars propagated by my government. The list goes on. And there's a burden to all of this that I'm not sure how to deal with. Happily embrace the illusion of choice, I guess? I don't use Apple products, never have.

magic123_ 4y ago
I technically agree with you, and I'm not saying you were currently doing what I'm about to complain about; but I find very annoying the fact that a lot of people seem to use this line of thinking to justify more or less every shitty decision made by these huge corporations.

nonethewiser 4y ago

This topic usually seems to miss some pragmatism. Regardless of whether or not Apple's approach is _good_ (and it most certainly isnt, except for Apple), they can do it. We can stop pontificating on whether their official position makes sense. It doesnt matter - they are doing it. The real questions are whether buying Apple is worth it. And if there are any roadblocks for the competition that could be removed.

geocar 4y ago

> I want the option to control my devices. ... I want complete control over it. Learn! I can install my own software on my iPhone, and I can install software people have shared with me that I can inspect. I can affect the repairs I have the tools to make. You don't need anything but a brain to learn how to do these things, but you'll definitely need a brain to understand why (or when) you shouldn't: > I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist > What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? What people like Elon Musk and Daniel Ek are asking for the ability to install software on my phone that allows them to install more software that I cannot inspect. Now to be clear: I have the ability to do this thing to my device, but I don't think I should do it for the same reason I don't want to give any application on my computer my root password -- I understand one application needs to know it, but as soon as there's two that means there are two single-points-of-failure, and that's worse; a mistake in either program could reveal all of the secrets my phone has, or trick me into giving away ones that are only in my head. I am also glad it is a little difficult because it means my friends and family cannot be easily tricked into doing it.

eternalban 4y ago

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Apple can legitimately be worried that possible subpar/bad experiences with an Apple device (caused by user choices) will damage their brand and what the name is supposed to stand for in consumer space. It is fair to assume that normal people will not pay attention to details such as 'I disabled the walled garden'. So I'm pretty sure their position is 'Sure, your device but we're certainly not going to help you damage our brand's reputation'. They may have a point since your device at most costs $2k. Their reputation cost Apple billions of dollars to acquire.

roody15 4y ago

Agree completely. Just simply a money issue. Apple likes to retain full control of its device almost like its a console. This enables maximum profit.

boringg 4y ago

I want to point out the cognitive dissonance here. Spotify is a subscription based product that completely removes your ability to own and control your music (I lose songs all the time super frustrating because of whatever deals spotify has in the background with the record labels). Your comment while valid doesn't really work with the example Spotify CEO railing against Apple. That said your frustrating is valid and there are many good points here as to why that model is no longer in vogue and you might be the minority in the public (I sympathize with you).

pwdisswordfish9 4y ago

If you had the option to sideload apps, Facebook might have pressured you to do that (and leave them free from Apple’s oversight) or lose your friends. Because you can’t, Apple was able to have privacy controls imposed upon them kicking and screaming. You may argue this argument is wrong, but it’s not like it is totally incomprehensible.

danaris 4y ago

If Apple did not require all apps to come through the App Store, and enforce some version of the current rules on such apps, it would not be long at all before, for instance, Facebook pulled their app from the App Store and released a new version that required changing those settings in order to sideload it (and had detailed instructions on how to do so)...and made sure that app could gather as much information as possible about your phone and everything you do on it. Up to and including silently recording you with the microphone, depending on just how well Apple has access to that locked down in the OS. Is this a certainty? No. But it's much too high a probability for my comfort. Furthermore, there would be a large number of developers who would just say "screw the App Store, screw Apple's frameworks, screw their rules" and similarly release their apps for sideloading only. Many of these would also have unacceptable levels of malware, spyware, terrible bugs, or just plain godawful design. Yes, the App Store has its problems, but it absolutely has value. When advocating for a change in a major system, it is both foolish and irresponsible not to consider how those changes would be abused by people with bad intentions. Just because you and people like you would only use the extra freedom for good does not mean that no one would use it for evil. That doesn't mean you should never make a change that can be used for evil, or course. It means you need to be aware of the tradeoffs, take them into account, and be open about your willingness to accept the bad along with the good.

martin82 4y ago

Nein, nein, nein! You will own nothing, and you will be happy now. Please be happy now!