3 ms·
And who should have that power of implementation? You, because of your opinion? The companies? Or the people who bought and paid for the devices? It is emphati
by jrm4 3y ago
And who should have that power of implementation? You, because of your opinion? The companies? Or the people who bought and paid for the devices?
It is emphatically not the case that there exists any meaningful difficulty or cost to do the implementation. Just open/root the devices for those who choose to do so and let them go. Or would you rather limit freedom?
- can16358p 3y agoOpening up a device just because a very niche user base (HN isn't representitive of general public) has a proof-of-concept use case that isn't productive in most cases, that would bring maintenance issues and possible attack vectors? I'm glad Apple doesn't do that and focus on what generally matters.
- smoldesu 3y agoI mean, I feel like I've heard this argument a lot... "HN isn't representative of general public" "We don't need file browsers because the general public doesn't use it" "You shouldn't be able to install Emulators because the general public doesn't" If we follow this reductive line of reasoning, nobody would ever do anything on an iPhone besides buy stuff. The iPhone supports hundreds of features that aren't representative of the general public, Apple chooses to deny you this one because they are afraid of it hurting their bottom line.
- paulcole 3y agoI would 100% rather limit freedom of the end user at the expense of the company’s freedom. It’s my choice to buy the product or not.