22 ms·

This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. We

by giobox 3y ago

This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. We know because this exact strategy works just fine on Apple's other computer platform, the Mac. Personally, I hate that our phones, which increasingly are our personal computer, are often no longer just a general purpose compute device to use how I want, if i want. The walled garden also relies enormously on Apple - a publicly traded for profit enterprise - being a benign benefactor, which to date has been (relatively) true. The future on a long timescale may not be so nice. Were this to change, you don't easily have a say in alternative software. Why shouldn't you be able to install a linux distro and turn your old iPhone or iPad into a really power-efficient home server-type appliance, if you want to? My old MacBook is doing exactly this.

threeseed 3y ago
Many of us don't want a computer in our pocket. We want a simplistic, managed, fuss-free device that isn't another source of malware, viruses, dark patterns e.g. unsubscribing and where basic things like uninstalling requires a Terminal. If you want a computer then there are plenty of companies that satisfy your requirements. So why not encourage and support them instead of trying to turn the iPhone into something a lot of people don't want.
- devmor 3y ago
  If Apple allowed us to run the apps created for the iPhone outside of iOS I'm sure we wouldn't be having this discussion. Many of us are in the ecosystem not out of personal choice, but out of necessity (be it professional or social).
- howinteresting 3y ago
  What phone platform is both open and lets you communicate over iMessage without absurd workarounds? To get a blue bubble you must give up control over your mobile life to Apple.
  - __d 3y ago
    So your choice is clear. What do you value more?
    - howinteresting 3y ago
      In a just world you wouldn't have to make that choice.
      - alexdunmow 3y ago
        There's nothing just about this world, and if iPhones are your biggest concern in this regard then you're profiting from that injustice.
        howinteresting 3y ago
        https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as
  - nobody9999 3y ago
    >To get a blue bubble you must give up control over your mobile life to Apple. As someone who has never used Apple products (well, except for the OS on an Apple II I built from a kit as a high school project in 1983), I don't understand why a "blue bubble" is important. Would you mind explaining that to me? Not being snarky here, I just really don't understand what value there is in a "blue bubble."
    - johnny22 3y ago
      it's a status marker. Only people who can afford the iphone get a blue bubble.
      - filoleg 3y ago
        > it's a status marker Not as much as you probably believe it is (at least in the US), given it has the majority smartphone owneship share here.
- wwweston 3y ago
  Like the GP said, this is a false dichotomy. Something as simple as accessible sideloading or a "let me do unsafe things" switch buried deep in the preferences app can give people who want it greater control and let those who prefer the walled garden keep the benefits.
  - greggh 3y ago
    Get a different phone then. Don't try to take the exact reason some of us bought an iPhone away from us.
    - TheRealPomax 3y ago
      Ah yes, "instead of getting a feature added for free that I won't need, and the presence of which would not impact me or anyone like me in any way, shape, or form, how about everyone just buys another $1500 phone?" Maybe because getting a feature added for free that you won't need, and the presence of which would not impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form, won't impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form. Just go "I'd never need that, but power to you if Apple ever adds it. Which we can be pretty sure of they won't". Don't hate on folks for wanting things that you don't want, but also won't affect your life in any way if they got it.
      - rad_gruchalski 3y ago
        > Maybe because getting a feature added for free that you won't need, and the presence of which would not impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form, won't impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form. How do you know that allowing sideloading does’t effectively mean opening a bunch of backdoors on the device? What if the the tight grip over the hardware + software is the best way to ensure that millions of users stay reasonably safe? Isn’t this basically a way to prevent supply chain attacks? I don’t know… do you know? How can you say such things with so much confidence?
        kibwen 3y ago
- vGPU 3y ago
  Agreed. My business depends on my phone. If I can’t call clients or pull google maps up, I’m screwed. I have both an iPhone and an Android. I’ve never had an iPhone die for no good reason. Every single android phone I’ve owned prior to my OP 8T has died in under a year. I got hit with the LG bootloop bug on my first android phone and it just went from there. And that’s just hardware. The other day I realized my 8T had bricked itself. I hadn’t used it in a few days, and an OTA update broke something. Wouldn’t flash back the normal way either, I had to go and dig up specialized software and a copy of the ROM from XDA. I’ve never had an iPhone have a bug that a simple reboot wouldn’t fix. The same thing extends to computers too. I think macOS is an abomination, but the hardware they put out it leaps and bounds ahead of pretty much every other manufacturer. In comparison, my surface book 2 has been a steaming pile of shit from day 1. I built my desktop, but my laptop is a MBP. I’d get 3-4 hours of battery on the SB2 with brightness all the way down. The MBP will literally last all day unless I’m running Thinkorswim. Whoever thought that its performance was acceptable should be shot. Even on my desktop it will routinely use 5gb+ RAM alone.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    You’re just proving the point that there’s and absolute need for sideloading.
  - bombolo 3y ago
    > Every single android phone I’ve owned prior to my OP 8T has died in under a year. Ah, yes… comparing a 1500$ iphone with a 50$ android and complaining about the quality.
    - wiseowise 3y ago
      I’ve used S10 a couple years back, the point still stands.
      - oblio 3y ago
        I've had several Android phones now, if I do change them before 3 years it's due to their battery. 1 billion people use iPhone, 4+ billion use Android. Both platforms are solid.
- rdedev 3y ago
  I used to be pretty anti walled garden but after seeing comments like yours I've come to understand and respect the other side. That being said more and more companies are now just blindly copying what apple is doing
  - hparadiz 3y ago
    Yea. That's the problem all along with walled gardens. Twenty years will go by and you'll find yourself unable to do the most basic thing becaused corporate control over an environment is a slow creep.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  Nobody knows how to build a non-computer that does what people expect phones to do. It's going to have to be a computer or nothing. The only question is whether it's your computer or someone else's.
- FpUser 3y ago
  >"Many of us don't want a computer in our pocket." And many of us do. Smartphone is a really powerful one and is relatively cheap due to the economy of scale. >"If you want a computer then there are plenty of companies that satisfy your requirements." Nope. I already have powerful computer in my pocket. It just artificially crippled.
- manigandham 3y ago
  If you don’t want the extra functionality then just don’t use it. You can use the iPhone without ever installing any 3rd party apps, but it would be silly to say nobody else can just because you won’t.
rad_gruchalski 3y ago
I don’t think I present a false dichotomy. I shared my own opinion. I appreciate that others may have different point of view.
- chlorion 3y ago
  How exactly would allowing a third party operating system on the device negatively impact your user experience? Can you explain why you believe that allowing access to the hardware, only after explicitly and deliberately enabling access via some sort of hardware switch or whatnot, in a way that does not alter the default experience in any measurable way, conflicts with your preferences? I can understand liking the software that it comes with by default, I just don't understand how allowing a different OS to be installed, if you choose to install it, conflicts with anything.
  - rad_gruchalski 3y ago
    > Can you explain why you believe that I never said that. But if we are already discussing this. How do you know that opening the hardware doesn’t mean significantly dropping iPhone security stance? I don’t know, I’m asking. I’m fine to be convinced it’s possible but that would require a real technical analysis how such hardware switch can be implemented, without words like “maybe” or “possibly”.
    - hparadiz 3y ago
      Because through experiance I've never heard of anyone or been myself ever hacked by a third party through the internet using an Android phone over my entire tech career. I've been using Android since 1.0. But I have personally hacked Android phones before by exploiting a zero day on an early firmware of my device that has since been patched and it was a huge pain requiring physical access to the device and a computer with a USB cable. And I know that iPhones still have the exact same flaw because Cydia still exists. So why do you believe you are secure if someone comes into physical posession of your phone? Why is this argument ever even brought up?
m3kw9 3y ago
Why not use an android then?
- wiseowise 3y ago
  Because Android is not iOS with side loading.
hot_gril 3y ago
Opening the walled garden doesn't simply add more choice. Here's one example, the Mac App Store. It's a ghost town. Even probably the most downloaded app ever, Chrome, isn't on it. If the iPhone allowed non-App-Store apps, you'd soon find yourself required to download each app from a random website. Which is fine on a Mac but not necessarily what people want on iPhones.
- everfree 3y ago
  > If the iPhone allowed non-App-Store apps, you'd soon find yourself required to download each app from a random website. If that's so likely to happen, why hasn't it happened on Android?
  - hot_gril 3y ago
    Play store is more permissive than App Store, so there's less reason for publishers to leave, but there's also more junk on it as a result. They can't act strict like Apple without fragmenting it. Still, it's starting to. There are already multiple stores, Google Play and Samsung Galaxy at least. Fortnite for a while was only standalone from Epic's website (but is now on Samsung too).
    - everfree 3y ago
      More permissive in which ways that matter to a legitimate publisher? I'm pretty sure both of them ban third-party in-app-purchases, for example.
      - hot_gril 3y ago
        It's all-around, but the ones I can name... Apple has some very particular rules about how you can direct users to external places to purchase things, which I don't think are present on Play Store. Also more strict about apps requesting permissions they don't make a strong case for needing. And rules about offensive content, and restrictions against apps they believe there are too many of. No game emulators allowed either. The ban on third-party iaps was pretty recent on Android, like 2022. For instance: - I made a simple news-sharing app. App Store pushed back against me a few times about the offensive content policy and reporting mechanism not being up to their standards. I never heard back from the Play Store, they just OK'd it the first time. - I made a college-only dating app. App Store said they won't allow any more dating apps that aren't different enough (mine wasn't), Play Store said ok. - A startup I knew was making an NFT app with a beginner-friendly way to purchase using USD. Apple objected to purchases not going through IAPs. They escalated a bunch of times and eventually got it through. Play Store didn't care at all.
eek2121 3y ago
I have to disagree. I moved from Android to an iPhone because I WANT a walled garden. I need you to understand that I build my own PCs/gaming rig, have been in IT for years, and I've been a full time developer for decades. The thing about the iPhone is that I DON'T have to think about it. Malware is VERY rare, MUCH more rare than Android, and I DON'T have to worry about...basically anything. This is coming from a guy running 2 desktops and a laptop. A Windows desktop for gaming, a Linux Desktop for productivity, and a Macbook Pro for the day gig. Oh and I also have a Windows laptop for a mix of everything on the go.
- mcmcmc 3y ago
  You disagree that users should have a choice? The comment you replied to didn’t say the walled garden shouldn’t exist, or that it’s bad, just that people who own the device should have a choice, i.e. you can stay on iOS with the walled garden, or you can flash it with whatever the hell else you want. The second choice doesn’t invalidate the first.
  - simondotau 3y ago
    Everyone has a choice. Choose Android. If you think iPhone is the wrong choice, don't choose it. Is Android really so terrible that you're having difficulty deciding between it and Apple's walled garden? Surely it's not THAT bad.
    - wiseowise 3y ago
      Do I understand correctly that you suggest something without even using it?
      - simondotau 3y ago
        As a developer I use Android a lot. It's fine. I don't see what the big deal is.
        3y ago
bb88 3y ago
What's sad was that the Apple line of computers was exactly this. Completely programmable. Completely usable. But was despised by Steve Jobs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_jug02JATc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_jug02JATc I'm not saying that Steve Jobs wasn't successful, or wasn't a visionary, or didn't save Apple. I'm just saying, the Apple II shipped with AppleSoft Basic. The Mac had no such language or built in compiler. I remember my friend back in college had an Apple IIc, and someone actually wrote a C compiler for it. He used it AFAIK all the way through college until the mid nineties, 12 years after it's original release date roughly in 1984. What I miss about computers from this time is that the Apple IIc had a joystick port. When I was like 12 (1985ish) I discovered I could get a DB9 connector and got a CDs cell which acted like a light sensitive resistor. This allowed me to play games that needed only a X or Y axis movement just by hovering my hand over the sensor. Edited to add: To this day, I don't own an Apple computer. The mac's were just waaay too expensive. Around 1996/1997 after college, I enjoyed Unix style operating systems more than windows or mac, and promptly got a PC and ran linux on it when I got a full time job out of college. And linux back then installed a C compiler typically too!! Windows and mac did not.
- agumonkey 3y ago
  A lot of small computers during the early days were seen as programmable things. Then it became a user interactive interface more than something to hack on. Maybe the shift of influence between Wozniak and Jobs explains that.
  - bb88 3y ago
    That's weird. I see all computers as programmable, even those from the 1980s. Maybe it's just me!
    - agumonkey 3y ago
      early 80s machines were what I had in mind, I remember my aunt having bought a tiny tiny amstrad niche typewriter and the manual was 50% BASIC programming which surprised me a lot. Only later, when GUIs started to pop, the spirit changed into a user friendly app platform and not something to hack.
aidenn0 3y ago
> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. Biggest difference between iPhone and Android is this; I can put any .apk file on my android phone that I want; the ability to do so is just turned off by default; it's a walled-garden out-of-the-box, but the hurdles for "opening the gate" are relatively minor.
- DaanDL 3y ago
  Aren't they also going to allow sideloading in iOS 17?
  - gambiting 3y ago
    It's not fully confirmed. But it's likely given that if they don't, they are almost certainly going to be forced to.
    - wkat4242 3y ago
      They will probably do it only in Europe though! According to the latest rumours.
meling 3y ago
I’m not so sure that “I can choose” to stay in the walled garden, if, for example, Spotify decides to only be available through another App Store that I don’t consider trustworthy.
- krger 3y ago
  >I’m not so sure that “I can choose” to stay in the walled garden, if, for example, Spotify decides to only be available through another App Store that I don’t consider trustworthy. Sure you can. You can decide which is more important to you: "Having an iPhone" or "Using Spotify on my mobile phone."
  - skazazes 3y ago
    Similarly to how you can currently decide which is more important to you: "Having an iPhone" or "The ability to sideload apps on your device"
    - krger 3y ago
      Exactly.
tshaddox 3y ago
> We know because this exact strategy works just fine on Apple's other computer platform, the Mac. Personally, I hate that our phones, which increasingly are our personal computer, are often no longer just a general purpose compute device to use how I want, if i want. I think this is the heart of the disagreement between people who like the iPhone walled garden (I’m one of them) and people who agree with you. I think it’s where reasonable people can disagree (except of course when it comes to broad legislation protecting or prohibiting such walled gardens). I don’t think the iPhone is comparable to a personal computer like a Mac, even though of course the hardware and software architecture is very similar (and increasingly so). I still think that smartphones are, for most people (especially people who are aware of the key differences between iOS and Android and still make an informed choice to use iOS), much more like “integrated consumer electronics devices” like gaming consoles, or car infotainment systems, or heck even a microwave (your microwave probably also contains at least one Turing-complete stored-program architecture computer).
- fsflover 3y ago
  All devices you listed, including iPhones, would have no downsides from being open. Quality of software has nothing to do with user restrictions. Even the opposite: the more open a platform is, the easier users can improve it and find/fix bugs. It's security through obscurity versus openness all over again. I would gladly hack my microwave to get rid of a stupid, long, loud sound at the end of its work.
  - mantas 3y ago
    What about following counter-example. There're many tiny apps that are next-to-required. E.g. mass transit tickets, paying for parking, banking apps. With the walled garden, they've to stick to at least some standards. Now if we open up the platform, what stops them from making shitty malware-ridden apps offered on scammy 3rd party stores? I won't move my mortgage to another bank because my bank app now requires me to install a weird-looking altstore... Or would I?
    - fsflover 3y ago
jjav 3y ago
> our phones, which increasingly are our personal computer To me a phone can never be a personal computer because it serves a different master. My computers (so far anyway) do what I want the way I want it. On a phone I'm a mere untrusted user, not the owner of the device (even though I have to pay for it).
scarface_74 3y ago
> We know because this exact strategy works just fine on Apple's other computer platform, the Mac And Apple sells around 20 million Macs a year and 250 Million+ iPhones/iPads. It’s not exactly a mass market product with around 10% market share or less. > The future on a long timescale may not be so nice. Were this to change, you don't easily have a say in alternative software. In the long term your phone will be useless as a phone. Right now, the 2012 iPhone is the oldest phone that you can connect to modern cell phone networks as older protocols get turned off. How much software do you really have that’s iOS only or that you would have to buy again if you wanted to choose Android. But the answer is really not that hard. If you don’t like Apple’s “walled garden”, buy an Android like 85% of the world.
- nmcela 3y ago
  What an amazing world we live in. Pick this giant greedy tech monopoly datagarden or the other one. It's a pseudochoice. Walled datagardenism needs to STOP.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    There are a few open source Google free Android phones you can buy.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  > But the answer is really not that hard. If you don’t like Apple’s “walled garden”, buy an Android like 85% of the world. Android not iOS without walled garden, just like Windows is not Mac. Stop pushing that meme. OS evolves just like everything else. Want frozen set of features? Buy a feature phone.
  - inferiorhuman 3y ago
    Want sideloading? Buy a phone that supports it.
    - wiseowise 3y ago
bilekas 3y ago
> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. I actually just had this discussion yesterday at length, en-mass, most day-to-day regular users will not focus on their apps, or even care to check the update status of the OS, in the regard iOS offers more 'out of the box' security and thus overall is a better option. If you allow any other OS for example, you can't manage the security of that device anymore. So no it's not a false choice. It's just a choice.
- GTP 3y ago
  > If you allow any other OS for example, you can't manage the security of that device anymore. Sure, the original manufacturer can't manage the security anymore, but that's kinda the point. As an Android user, when my manufacturer stops shipping security updates I can switch to a custom rom that is still updated.
  - IMTDb 3y ago
    An android is famously more secure and suffers from less malwares / viruses / ... than iOS due to custom ROM, sideloading etc being available on the device.
- manigandham 3y ago
  Again, the point is that it should be available to the people who want to.
  - sbuk 3y ago
    Ok. Simple question, as it stands, how does that benefit the platform.
    - manigandham 3y ago
      What is “the platform” exactly?
mattlutze 3y ago
There is no false choice here. Only a choice. Apple creates and sells a catalog of products. They choose to tightly couple their hardware to specific operating systems and software. Lots of others have tried to copy Apple's hardware approach, but leave their hardware uncoupled. Some have done a great job, and in some generations surpassed the quality of the macbooks etc. Similarly, some of Samsung, OnePlus, and others' phones are great bits of hardware and are open. Some have better cameras, better overall specs. There's plenty of choice, and no reason for Apple to have to open up and support the complexity cost of any operating system on their platform, just because some of us passionate tech folks want Apple's specific design language in our pocket but running idk Arch.
- j1elo 3y ago
  I've already read the same fallacy in several replies. Why would Apple have to supoort the (supposed, not true in my opinion) complexity of any operating system on their platform? They wouldn't!!! It would be Arch's job to be able to work properly on the hardware. I don't understand why everybody is assuming that Apple leaving the door open for people with advanced tech knowledge to install alternative software, would mean that Apple has to provide supoort for that software to run properly.
  - sbuk 3y ago
    I actually agree with this. This is the status quo on Silicon Macs. But let's not pretend that there will be untold levels of caterwauling when Apple choose not to document any of it. Also, in my experience, the majority of people with "advanced tech knowledge" (that is as iky as the phrase "power user") are exactly those who I'd want to keep out. They'd likely be the ones doing stupid things for their friends and family to make the device "better" (read "work how they want it to).
- manigandham 3y ago
  Trillion dollar mega corporations should give their users all the choice and flexibility they want, not the other way around.
gwd 3y ago
> Why shouldn't you be able to install a linux distro and turn your old iPhone or iPad into a really power-efficient home server-type appliance, if you want to? Why didn't you buy a phone that allowed you to do this? This sort of argument seems to me to be fundamentally inconsistent. The only reason to pass a law which will force Apple to do something is if there is a "Moloch trap" [1], in which Apple can take advantage of crowd dynamics to do force the crowd into doing something which most people in the crowd don't actually want to do. But the argument for a walled garden on phones is precisely the same: The argument is that without a walled garden, you get a "Moloch trap": because they can't collect the Apple Tax, the only way for them to make money is to spy on you and sell your data -- something you as the consumer don't want, and that maybe Apple doesn't want either. (And before you say, that Apple can simply treat the phones like they treat their computers, where they simply sell the hardware and don't make extra money either from the Apple Tax or from spying on you -- there's another "Moloch Trap" with shares and capitalism: If Apple's phones are significantly less profitable than Google's, then shareholder will rebel and replace the CEO with someone who will be as profitable as Google. If you forbid Apple from collecting the Apple Tax, then Moloch will force them to spy on you -- unless you manage to forbid anyone from spying.) If Moloch Traps don't exist, then there's no reason to force Apple to open up their phones, because the Market will provide you with a good alternative. If Moloch Traps do exist, then there's a reason not to force Apple to open up their phones, as the walled garden helps them prevent a different kind of trap. [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
coldtea 3y ago
>This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. There are a few reasons. E.g. allowing sideloading amounts to basically allowing any third party with clout whose apps users want to use (Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc) to mandate the use of their own apps bypassing all related protections and integrations. It also enables smaller malicious third parties to demand the same (but at least there the user has to be duped into installing them. Whereas with big-name apps, even users who know what they're doing could have a legitimate need to run those apps). So, what about supporting alternative OSes/software? So basically, Apple not to sell a phone (with OS and everything), but a generic target phone hardware, that comes with their iOS preinstalled? Isn't that a quite different demand? >The future on a long timescale may not be so nice. On a long timescale you can change devices. It's not like something you buy now you'll have to run in 10 years.
krger 3y ago
>This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. Correct. There is no reason the iPhone cannot be both. There is also no reason why Apple should be required to make it both simply because that's what a vanishingly small number of vocal malcontents wish for.
Hippocrates 3y ago
> Why shouldn't you be able to install a linux distro and turn your old iPhone or iPad into a really power-efficient home server-type appliance, if you want to? My old MacBook is doing exactly this. I don't wholly disagree, but there are good reasons. 1. Warranty and repair: I once went to the Genius Bar because the speakers on my iPhone 6 were crackling and popping. I expected them to do an in-warranty repair or swap. Nope. They told me that they couldn't help because I had a developer beta of iOS installed. They recommended I go home and downgrade to a GA build and see if the problem persists. It was very wise of them not to help me do that, because I had compatibility issues with my backups and lost a bunch of data, but lo and behold, the downgrade fixed my speaker problem. Sometimes the damage is permanent: I recall a software bug in windows 10 that was [ruining SSDs](https://www.tomsguide.com/news/windows-10-update-could-kill-your-ssd-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/news/windows-10-update-could-kill-...) Software updates can brick phones, such as in Apple's own [Error 53](https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628). This is actually really prevalent in home-brew/jailbreak installs. I'd bricked a couple Xboxen myself, and didn't dare seek help via Microsoft, but others surely have. Keeping a lithium-ion battery at 100% is not the best for it's health, so now most Apple OSs will try reach a peak battery charge just as you will likely begin using it, and normally holds at 3/4 capacity or so. Software can cause permanent hardware problems, or ones that neither you nor support are equipped to fix. It can exponentially increase complexity on support staff to try. Replacement would affect their bottom line, so they need to then find a way to see if you tampered with the software and deny support or replacement, but what if you did this and then sold it? This all gets complicated, unfriendly, and costly quick. 2. "It just works" This idea that Apple products "Just Work" is core to their marketing. I've used hackintoshes for years, and know there are many, many things that "Just Won't Work" (one of those things is power management). Maybe you're willing to take a chance on a linux distro anyway. There is still an outward impression others can glean while noticing you using a product. This is why franchises have standards. They want to maintain a level of quality for those that may patronize or even glance at the product. To Apple, the business works better if they force a single, well supported experience.
victor106 3y ago
Comparing an iPhone to a Mac is a false comparison. Mac is a development machine for some and I want to do things on it that I do NOT want to do on my phone. Also, my phone is more important than my Mac. It has most of my personal info and I can call emergency services and others can call me during an emergency. So I really like Apple's thinking on this. Lock down the phone but give enough controls on the Mac to enable development.
chrischen 3y ago
> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. In theory... but in practice if you allow it to not be a walled garden, then it will tip one way over the other. You suddenly give companies the ability to say "bring down your walls or don't use our app." While you technically still have a choice, it's not much of a choice if you depend on a certain app. The fact is we are all subject to the choices of other companies, developers, users, etc, so for those of us who prefer the walls it won't do us much good if everyone is living outside of the walls.
NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> The walled garden also relies enormously on Apple - a publicly traded for profit enterprise - being a benign benefactor, which to date has been (relatively) true. Only outside China. In China, you'll find protest apps banned [1], websites blocked at the system level [2], VPN apps banned, and more [3]. One could say they're just complying with Chinese law, like any other company doing business in China would be forced to. But that's misleading - other companies have not put themselves in the position of jailers of their users, so when they are forced to follow the law, their users are much less harmed. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50009971 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50009971 [2] https://theintercept.com/2023/01/26/apple-china-censorship-hong-kong-gitlab/ https://theintercept.com/2023/01/26/apple-china-censorship-h... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple#China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple#China

by giobox 3y ago

threeseed 3y ago

Many of us don't want a computer in our pocket. We want a simplistic, managed, fuss-free device that isn't another source of malware, viruses, dark patterns e.g. unsubscribing and where basic things like uninstalling requires a Terminal. If you want a computer then there are plenty of companies that satisfy your requirements. So why not encourage and support them instead of trying to turn the iPhone into something a lot of people don't want.

devmor 3y ago
If Apple allowed us to run the apps created for the iPhone outside of iOS I'm sure we wouldn't be having this discussion. Many of us are in the ecosystem not out of personal choice, but out of necessity (be it professional or social).
howinteresting 3y ago
What phone platform is both open and lets you communicate over iMessage without absurd workarounds? To get a blue bubble you must give up control over your mobile life to Apple.
- __d 3y ago
  So your choice is clear. What do you value more?
  - howinteresting 3y ago
    In a just world you wouldn't have to make that choice.
    - alexdunmow 3y ago
      There's nothing just about this world, and if iPhones are your biggest concern in this regard then you're profiting from that injustice.
      - howinteresting 3y ago
        https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as
- nobody9999 3y ago
  >To get a blue bubble you must give up control over your mobile life to Apple. As someone who has never used Apple products (well, except for the OS on an Apple II I built from a kit as a high school project in 1983), I don't understand why a "blue bubble" is important. Would you mind explaining that to me? Not being snarky here, I just really don't understand what value there is in a "blue bubble."
  - johnny22 3y ago
    it's a status marker. Only people who can afford the iphone get a blue bubble.
    - filoleg 3y ago
      > it's a status marker Not as much as you probably believe it is (at least in the US), given it has the majority smartphone owneship share here.
wwweston 3y ago
Like the GP said, this is a false dichotomy. Something as simple as accessible sideloading or a "let me do unsafe things" switch buried deep in the preferences app can give people who want it greater control and let those who prefer the walled garden keep the benefits.
- greggh 3y ago
  Get a different phone then. Don't try to take the exact reason some of us bought an iPhone away from us.
  - TheRealPomax 3y ago
    Ah yes, "instead of getting a feature added for free that I won't need, and the presence of which would not impact me or anyone like me in any way, shape, or form, how about everyone just buys another $1500 phone?" Maybe because getting a feature added for free that you won't need, and the presence of which would not impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form, won't impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form. Just go "I'd never need that, but power to you if Apple ever adds it. Which we can be pretty sure of they won't". Don't hate on folks for wanting things that you don't want, but also won't affect your life in any way if they got it.
    - rad_gruchalski 3y ago
      > Maybe because getting a feature added for free that you won't need, and the presence of which would not impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form, won't impact you or anyone like you in any way, shape, or form. How do you know that allowing sideloading does’t effectively mean opening a bunch of backdoors on the device? What if the the tight grip over the hardware + software is the best way to ensure that millions of users stay reasonably safe? Isn’t this basically a way to prevent supply chain attacks? I don’t know… do you know? How can you say such things with so much confidence?
      - kibwen 3y ago
vGPU 3y ago
Agreed. My business depends on my phone. If I can’t call clients or pull google maps up, I’m screwed. I have both an iPhone and an Android. I’ve never had an iPhone die for no good reason. Every single android phone I’ve owned prior to my OP 8T has died in under a year. I got hit with the LG bootloop bug on my first android phone and it just went from there. And that’s just hardware. The other day I realized my 8T had bricked itself. I hadn’t used it in a few days, and an OTA update broke something. Wouldn’t flash back the normal way either, I had to go and dig up specialized software and a copy of the ROM from XDA. I’ve never had an iPhone have a bug that a simple reboot wouldn’t fix. The same thing extends to computers too. I think macOS is an abomination, but the hardware they put out it leaps and bounds ahead of pretty much every other manufacturer. In comparison, my surface book 2 has been a steaming pile of shit from day 1. I built my desktop, but my laptop is a MBP. I’d get 3-4 hours of battery on the SB2 with brightness all the way down. The MBP will literally last all day unless I’m running Thinkorswim. Whoever thought that its performance was acceptable should be shot. Even on my desktop it will routinely use 5gb+ RAM alone.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  You’re just proving the point that there’s and absolute need for sideloading.
- bombolo 3y ago
  > Every single android phone I’ve owned prior to my OP 8T has died in under a year. Ah, yes… comparing a 1500$ iphone with a 50$ android and complaining about the quality.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    I’ve used S10 a couple years back, the point still stands.
    - oblio 3y ago
      I've had several Android phones now, if I do change them before 3 years it's due to their battery. 1 billion people use iPhone, 4+ billion use Android. Both platforms are solid.
rdedev 3y ago
I used to be pretty anti walled garden but after seeing comments like yours I've come to understand and respect the other side. That being said more and more companies are now just blindly copying what apple is doing
- hparadiz 3y ago
  Yea. That's the problem all along with walled gardens. Twenty years will go by and you'll find yourself unable to do the most basic thing becaused corporate control over an environment is a slow creep.
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
Nobody knows how to build a non-computer that does what people expect phones to do. It's going to have to be a computer or nothing. The only question is whether it's your computer or someone else's.
FpUser 3y ago
>"Many of us don't want a computer in our pocket." And many of us do. Smartphone is a really powerful one and is relatively cheap due to the economy of scale. >"If you want a computer then there are plenty of companies that satisfy your requirements." Nope. I already have powerful computer in my pocket. It just artificially crippled.
manigandham 3y ago
If you don’t want the extra functionality then just don’t use it. You can use the iPhone without ever installing any 3rd party apps, but it would be silly to say nobody else can just because you won’t.

rad_gruchalski 3y ago

I don’t think I present a false dichotomy. I shared my own opinion. I appreciate that others may have different point of view.

chlorion 3y ago
How exactly would allowing a third party operating system on the device negatively impact your user experience? Can you explain why you believe that allowing access to the hardware, only after explicitly and deliberately enabling access via some sort of hardware switch or whatnot, in a way that does not alter the default experience in any measurable way, conflicts with your preferences? I can understand liking the software that it comes with by default, I just don't understand how allowing a different OS to be installed, if you choose to install it, conflicts with anything.
- rad_gruchalski 3y ago
  > Can you explain why you believe that I never said that. But if we are already discussing this. How do you know that opening the hardware doesn’t mean significantly dropping iPhone security stance? I don’t know, I’m asking. I’m fine to be convinced it’s possible but that would require a real technical analysis how such hardware switch can be implemented, without words like “maybe” or “possibly”.
  - hparadiz 3y ago
    Because through experiance I've never heard of anyone or been myself ever hacked by a third party through the internet using an Android phone over my entire tech career. I've been using Android since 1.0. But I have personally hacked Android phones before by exploiting a zero day on an early firmware of my device that has since been patched and it was a huge pain requiring physical access to the device and a computer with a USB cable. And I know that iPhones still have the exact same flaw because Cydia still exists. So why do you believe you are secure if someone comes into physical posession of your phone? Why is this argument ever even brought up?

m3kw9 3y ago

Why not use an android then?

wiseowise 3y ago
Because Android is not iOS with side loading.

hot_gril 3y ago

Opening the walled garden doesn't simply add more choice. Here's one example, the Mac App Store. It's a ghost town. Even probably the most downloaded app ever, Chrome, isn't on it. If the iPhone allowed non-App-Store apps, you'd soon find yourself required to download each app from a random website. Which is fine on a Mac but not necessarily what people want on iPhones.

everfree 3y ago
> If the iPhone allowed non-App-Store apps, you'd soon find yourself required to download each app from a random website. If that's so likely to happen, why hasn't it happened on Android?
- hot_gril 3y ago
  Play store is more permissive than App Store, so there's less reason for publishers to leave, but there's also more junk on it as a result. They can't act strict like Apple without fragmenting it. Still, it's starting to. There are already multiple stores, Google Play and Samsung Galaxy at least. Fortnite for a while was only standalone from Epic's website (but is now on Samsung too).
  - everfree 3y ago
    More permissive in which ways that matter to a legitimate publisher? I'm pretty sure both of them ban third-party in-app-purchases, for example.
    - hot_gril 3y ago
      It's all-around, but the ones I can name... Apple has some very particular rules about how you can direct users to external places to purchase things, which I don't think are present on Play Store. Also more strict about apps requesting permissions they don't make a strong case for needing. And rules about offensive content, and restrictions against apps they believe there are too many of. No game emulators allowed either. The ban on third-party iaps was pretty recent on Android, like 2022. For instance: - I made a simple news-sharing app. App Store pushed back against me a few times about the offensive content policy and reporting mechanism not being up to their standards. I never heard back from the Play Store, they just OK'd it the first time. - I made a college-only dating app. App Store said they won't allow any more dating apps that aren't different enough (mine wasn't), Play Store said ok. - A startup I knew was making an NFT app with a beginner-friendly way to purchase using USD. Apple objected to purchases not going through IAPs. They escalated a bunch of times and eventually got it through. Play Store didn't care at all.

eek2121 3y ago

I have to disagree. I moved from Android to an iPhone because I WANT a walled garden. I need you to understand that I build my own PCs/gaming rig, have been in IT for years, and I've been a full time developer for decades. The thing about the iPhone is that I DON'T have to think about it. Malware is VERY rare, MUCH more rare than Android, and I DON'T have to worry about...basically anything. This is coming from a guy running 2 desktops and a laptop. A Windows desktop for gaming, a Linux Desktop for productivity, and a Macbook Pro for the day gig. Oh and I also have a Windows laptop for a mix of everything on the go.

mcmcmc 3y ago
You disagree that users should have a choice? The comment you replied to didn’t say the walled garden shouldn’t exist, or that it’s bad, just that people who own the device should have a choice, i.e. you can stay on iOS with the walled garden, or you can flash it with whatever the hell else you want. The second choice doesn’t invalidate the first.
- simondotau 3y ago
  Everyone has a choice. Choose Android. If you think iPhone is the wrong choice, don't choose it. Is Android really so terrible that you're having difficulty deciding between it and Apple's walled garden? Surely it's not THAT bad.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    Do I understand correctly that you suggest something without even using it?
    - simondotau 3y ago
      As a developer I use Android a lot. It's fine. I don't see what the big deal is.
      - 3y ago

bb88 3y ago

What's sad was that the Apple line of computers was exactly this. Completely programmable. Completely usable. But was despised by Steve Jobs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_jug02JATc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_jug02JATc I'm not saying that Steve Jobs wasn't successful, or wasn't a visionary, or didn't save Apple. I'm just saying, the Apple II shipped with AppleSoft Basic. The Mac had no such language or built in compiler. I remember my friend back in college had an Apple IIc, and someone actually wrote a C compiler for it. He used it AFAIK all the way through college until the mid nineties, 12 years after it's original release date roughly in 1984. What I miss about computers from this time is that the Apple IIc had a joystick port. When I was like 12 (1985ish) I discovered I could get a DB9 connector and got a CDs cell which acted like a light sensitive resistor. This allowed me to play games that needed only a X or Y axis movement just by hovering my hand over the sensor. Edited to add: To this day, I don't own an Apple computer. The mac's were just waaay too expensive. Around 1996/1997 after college, I enjoyed Unix style operating systems more than windows or mac, and promptly got a PC and ran linux on it when I got a full time job out of college. And linux back then installed a C compiler typically too!! Windows and mac did not.

agumonkey 3y ago
A lot of small computers during the early days were seen as programmable things. Then it became a user interactive interface more than something to hack on. Maybe the shift of influence between Wozniak and Jobs explains that.
- bb88 3y ago
  That's weird. I see all computers as programmable, even those from the 1980s. Maybe it's just me!
  - agumonkey 3y ago
    early 80s machines were what I had in mind, I remember my aunt having bought a tiny tiny amstrad niche typewriter and the manual was 50% BASIC programming which surprised me a lot. Only later, when GUIs started to pop, the spirit changed into a user friendly app platform and not something to hack.

aidenn0 3y ago

> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. Biggest difference between iPhone and Android is this; I can put any .apk file on my android phone that I want; the ability to do so is just turned off by default; it's a walled-garden out-of-the-box, but the hurdles for "opening the gate" are relatively minor.

DaanDL 3y ago
Aren't they also going to allow sideloading in iOS 17?
- gambiting 3y ago
  It's not fully confirmed. But it's likely given that if they don't, they are almost certainly going to be forced to.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    They will probably do it only in Europe though! According to the latest rumours.

meling 3y ago

I’m not so sure that “I can choose” to stay in the walled garden, if, for example, Spotify decides to only be available through another App Store that I don’t consider trustworthy.

krger 3y ago
>I’m not so sure that “I can choose” to stay in the walled garden, if, for example, Spotify decides to only be available through another App Store that I don’t consider trustworthy. Sure you can. You can decide which is more important to you: "Having an iPhone" or "Using Spotify on my mobile phone."
- skazazes 3y ago
  Similarly to how you can currently decide which is more important to you: "Having an iPhone" or "The ability to sideload apps on your device"
  - krger 3y ago
    Exactly.

tshaddox 3y ago

> We know because this exact strategy works just fine on Apple's other computer platform, the Mac. Personally, I hate that our phones, which increasingly are our personal computer, are often no longer just a general purpose compute device to use how I want, if i want. I think this is the heart of the disagreement between people who like the iPhone walled garden (I’m one of them) and people who agree with you. I think it’s where reasonable people can disagree (except of course when it comes to broad legislation protecting or prohibiting such walled gardens). I don’t think the iPhone is comparable to a personal computer like a Mac, even though of course the hardware and software architecture is very similar (and increasingly so). I still think that smartphones are, for most people (especially people who are aware of the key differences between iOS and Android and still make an informed choice to use iOS), much more like “integrated consumer electronics devices” like gaming consoles, or car infotainment systems, or heck even a microwave (your microwave probably also contains at least one Turing-complete stored-program architecture computer).

fsflover 3y ago
All devices you listed, including iPhones, would have no downsides from being open. Quality of software has nothing to do with user restrictions. Even the opposite: the more open a platform is, the easier users can improve it and find/fix bugs. It's security through obscurity versus openness all over again. I would gladly hack my microwave to get rid of a stupid, long, loud sound at the end of its work.
- mantas 3y ago
  What about following counter-example. There're many tiny apps that are next-to-required. E.g. mass transit tickets, paying for parking, banking apps. With the walled garden, they've to stick to at least some standards. Now if we open up the platform, what stops them from making shitty malware-ridden apps offered on scammy 3rd party stores? I won't move my mortgage to another bank because my bank app now requires me to install a weird-looking altstore... Or would I?
  - fsflover 3y ago

jjav 3y ago

> our phones, which increasingly are our personal computer To me a phone can never be a personal computer because it serves a different master. My computers (so far anyway) do what I want the way I want it. On a phone I'm a mere untrusted user, not the owner of the device (even though I have to pay for it).

scarface_74 3y ago

> We know because this exact strategy works just fine on Apple's other computer platform, the Mac And Apple sells around 20 million Macs a year and 250 Million+ iPhones/iPads. It’s not exactly a mass market product with around 10% market share or less. > The future on a long timescale may not be so nice. Were this to change, you don't easily have a say in alternative software. In the long term your phone will be useless as a phone. Right now, the 2012 iPhone is the oldest phone that you can connect to modern cell phone networks as older protocols get turned off. How much software do you really have that’s iOS only or that you would have to buy again if you wanted to choose Android. But the answer is really not that hard. If you don’t like Apple’s “walled garden”, buy an Android like 85% of the world.

nmcela 3y ago
What an amazing world we live in. Pick this giant greedy tech monopoly datagarden or the other one. It's a pseudochoice. Walled datagardenism needs to STOP.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  There are a few open source Google free Android phones you can buy.
wiseowise 3y ago
> But the answer is really not that hard. If you don’t like Apple’s “walled garden”, buy an Android like 85% of the world. Android not iOS without walled garden, just like Windows is not Mac. Stop pushing that meme. OS evolves just like everything else. Want frozen set of features? Buy a feature phone.
- inferiorhuman 3y ago
  Want sideloading? Buy a phone that supports it.
  - wiseowise 3y ago

bilekas 3y ago

> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. I actually just had this discussion yesterday at length, en-mass, most day-to-day regular users will not focus on their apps, or even care to check the update status of the OS, in the regard iOS offers more 'out of the box' security and thus overall is a better option. If you allow any other OS for example, you can't manage the security of that device anymore. So no it's not a false choice. It's just a choice.

GTP 3y ago
> If you allow any other OS for example, you can't manage the security of that device anymore. Sure, the original manufacturer can't manage the security anymore, but that's kinda the point. As an Android user, when my manufacturer stops shipping security updates I can switch to a custom rom that is still updated.
- IMTDb 3y ago
  An android is famously more secure and suffers from less malwares / viruses / ... than iOS due to custom ROM, sideloading etc being available on the device.
manigandham 3y ago
Again, the point is that it should be available to the people who want to.
- sbuk 3y ago
  Ok. Simple question, as it stands, how does that benefit the platform.
  - manigandham 3y ago
    What is “the platform” exactly?

mattlutze 3y ago

There is no false choice here. Only a choice. Apple creates and sells a catalog of products. They choose to tightly couple their hardware to specific operating systems and software. Lots of others have tried to copy Apple's hardware approach, but leave their hardware uncoupled. Some have done a great job, and in some generations surpassed the quality of the macbooks etc. Similarly, some of Samsung, OnePlus, and others' phones are great bits of hardware and are open. Some have better cameras, better overall specs. There's plenty of choice, and no reason for Apple to have to open up and support the complexity cost of any operating system on their platform, just because some of us passionate tech folks want Apple's specific design language in our pocket but running idk Arch.

j1elo 3y ago
I've already read the same fallacy in several replies. Why would Apple have to supoort the (supposed, not true in my opinion) complexity of any operating system on their platform? They wouldn't!!! It would be Arch's job to be able to work properly on the hardware. I don't understand why everybody is assuming that Apple leaving the door open for people with advanced tech knowledge to install alternative software, would mean that Apple has to provide supoort for that software to run properly.
- sbuk 3y ago
  I actually agree with this. This is the status quo on Silicon Macs. But let's not pretend that there will be untold levels of caterwauling when Apple choose not to document any of it. Also, in my experience, the majority of people with "advanced tech knowledge" (that is as iky as the phrase "power user") are exactly those who I'd want to keep out. They'd likely be the ones doing stupid things for their friends and family to make the device "better" (read "work how they want it to).
manigandham 3y ago
Trillion dollar mega corporations should give their users all the choice and flexibility they want, not the other way around.

gwd 3y ago

> Why shouldn't you be able to install a linux distro and turn your old iPhone or iPad into a really power-efficient home server-type appliance, if you want to? Why didn't you buy a phone that allowed you to do this? This sort of argument seems to me to be fundamentally inconsistent. The only reason to pass a law which will force Apple to do something is if there is a "Moloch trap" [1], in which Apple can take advantage of crowd dynamics to do force the crowd into doing something which most people in the crowd don't actually want to do. But the argument for a walled garden on phones is precisely the same: The argument is that without a walled garden, you get a "Moloch trap": because they can't collect the Apple Tax, the only way for them to make money is to spy on you and sell your data -- something you as the consumer don't want, and that maybe Apple doesn't want either. (And before you say, that Apple can simply treat the phones like they treat their computers, where they simply sell the hardware and don't make extra money either from the Apple Tax or from spying on you -- there's another "Moloch Trap" with shares and capitalism: If Apple's phones are significantly less profitable than Google's, then shareholder will rebel and replace the CEO with someone who will be as profitable as Google. If you forbid Apple from collecting the Apple Tax, then Moloch will force them to spy on you -- unless you manage to forbid anyone from spying.) If Moloch Traps don't exist, then there's no reason to force Apple to open up their phones, because the Market will provide you with a good alternative. If Moloch Traps do exist, then there's a reason not to force Apple to open up their phones, as the walled garden helps them prevent a different kind of trap. [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

coldtea 3y ago

>This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. There are a few reasons. E.g. allowing sideloading amounts to basically allowing any third party with clout whose apps users want to use (Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc) to mandate the use of their own apps bypassing all related protections and integrations. It also enables smaller malicious third parties to demand the same (but at least there the user has to be duped into installing them. Whereas with big-name apps, even users who know what they're doing could have a legitimate need to run those apps). So, what about supporting alternative OSes/software? So basically, Apple not to sell a phone (with OS and everything), but a generic target phone hardware, that comes with their iOS preinstalled? Isn't that a quite different demand? >The future on a long timescale may not be so nice. On a long timescale you can change devices. It's not like something you buy now you'll have to run in 10 years.

krger 3y ago

>This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. Correct. There is no reason the iPhone cannot be both. There is also no reason why Apple should be required to make it both simply because that's what a vanishingly small number of vocal malcontents wish for.

Hippocrates 3y ago

> Why shouldn't you be able to install a linux distro and turn your old iPhone or iPad into a really power-efficient home server-type appliance, if you want to? My old MacBook is doing exactly this. I don't wholly disagree, but there are good reasons. 1. Warranty and repair: I once went to the Genius Bar because the speakers on my iPhone 6 were crackling and popping. I expected them to do an in-warranty repair or swap. Nope. They told me that they couldn't help because I had a developer beta of iOS installed. They recommended I go home and downgrade to a GA build and see if the problem persists. It was very wise of them not to help me do that, because I had compatibility issues with my backups and lost a bunch of data, but lo and behold, the downgrade fixed my speaker problem. Sometimes the damage is permanent: I recall a software bug in windows 10 that was [ruining SSDs](https://www.tomsguide.com/news/windows-10-update-could-kill-your-ssd-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/news/windows-10-update-could-kill-...) Software updates can brick phones, such as in Apple's own [Error 53](https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628). This is actually really prevalent in home-brew/jailbreak installs. I'd bricked a couple Xboxen myself, and didn't dare seek help via Microsoft, but others surely have. Keeping a lithium-ion battery at 100% is not the best for it's health, so now most Apple OSs will try reach a peak battery charge just as you will likely begin using it, and normally holds at 3/4 capacity or so. Software can cause permanent hardware problems, or ones that neither you nor support are equipped to fix. It can exponentially increase complexity on support staff to try. Replacement would affect their bottom line, so they need to then find a way to see if you tampered with the software and deny support or replacement, but what if you did this and then sold it? This all gets complicated, unfriendly, and costly quick. 2. "It just works" This idea that Apple products "Just Work" is core to their marketing. I've used hackintoshes for years, and know there are many, many things that "Just Won't Work" (one of those things is power management). Maybe you're willing to take a chance on a linux distro anyway. There is still an outward impression others can glean while noticing you using a product. This is why franchises have standards. They want to maintain a level of quality for those that may patronize or even glance at the product. To Apple, the business works better if they force a single, well supported experience.

victor106 3y ago

Comparing an iPhone to a Mac is a false comparison. Mac is a development machine for some and I want to do things on it that I do NOT want to do on my phone. Also, my phone is more important than my Mac. It has most of my personal info and I can call emergency services and others can call me during an emergency. So I really like Apple's thinking on this. Lock down the phone but give enough controls on the Mac to enable development.

chrischen 3y ago

> This is a false choice - there's no reason the iPhone can't be both a walled garden-type device and support alternative OSes/software, just like a computer. In theory... but in practice if you allow it to not be a walled garden, then it will tip one way over the other. You suddenly give companies the ability to say "bring down your walls or don't use our app." While you technically still have a choice, it's not much of a choice if you depend on a certain app. The fact is we are all subject to the choices of other companies, developers, users, etc, so for those of us who prefer the walls it won't do us much good if everyone is living outside of the walls.

NoRelToEmber 3y ago

> The walled garden also relies enormously on Apple - a publicly traded for profit enterprise - being a benign benefactor, which to date has been (relatively) true. Only outside China. In China, you'll find protest apps banned [1], websites blocked at the system level [2], VPN apps banned, and more [3]. One could say they're just complying with Chinese law, like any other company doing business in China would be forced to. But that's misleading - other companies have not put themselves in the position of jailers of their users, so when they are forced to follow the law, their users are much less harmed. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50009971 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50009971 [2] https://theintercept.com/2023/01/26/apple-china-censorship-hong-kong-gitlab/ https://theintercept.com/2023/01/26/apple-china-censorship-h... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple#China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple#China