11 ms·
Switch to another phone then. Easy peasy. Why would you buy a phone with this known limitation if you care about it?
by dnissley 3y ago
Switch to another phone then. Easy peasy. Why would you buy a phone with this known limitation if you care about it?
- partiallypro 3y agoNow apply this argument to PCs in the 90s and you can probably see how dumb it is.
- dnissley 3y agoWas Microsoft preventing people from installing firefox on their PCs? Am I misremembering this era?
- chungy 3y agoIt was Netscape at the time, and yes. Yes, they were.
- dnissley 3y agoMicrosoft required PC manufacturers to have IE installed along with Windows, which is shitty, but not nearly as shitty as preventing users from installing Netscape, which they did not do.
- yreg 3y agoHow is shipping OS with preinstalled apps shitty?
- IanCal 3y agoMakes it much harder for any similar apps to compete, even if they're better. So you end up with worse overall outcomes.
- sbuk 3y agoThey absolutely did. The whole antitrust case revolved around Microsoft threatening OEMs to terminate their reseller agreements if they sold the machines with Netscape Navigator pre-installed. It is the literal definition of monopoly abuse!
- dnissley 3y agoPardon me for not being more precise -- they never prevented end users from installing Netscape on their machines.
- hn_acker 3y agoIf we assume for the sake of argument that a particular customer would knowingly buy a computer from an OEM who pre-installed Netscape on it, then the OEM is the user of the computer before the end user buys it. Why should Microsoft be allowed to prohibit such a pre-installation? For security, maybe, but that probably wasn't Microsoft's motivation.
- throwaway290 3y agoBy that logic Apple does not prevent end users from rooting the phone and installing anything they like, it just makes it very inconvenient... and less shady than Microsoft's shell execute bug.
- mpol 3y agoIt was a different situation. Microsoft Windows was considered a monopoly, with around 95% of the desktop market (there was no mobile market yet). Microsoft used this to gain a monopoly in desktop browsers. When you are a monopoly, other rules apply, you cannot just abuse your customers and competitors with it.
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoThey weren't preventing you from installing Netscape. They were bundling IE with their computers by default, and less technical savvy people didn't know they could install and use another browser.
- adventured 3y agoMicrosoft's anti-trust problems were not primarily about Netscape. If that's all it had been it would have been a trivial resolution. They were about vendor abuse, vendor contracts. Which is one of the key ways Microsoft tried to maintain its power over the tech industry. And of course as another person noted, Netscape was not in any manner blocked off of Windows. Netscape lost because it was charging for a browser while IE was free and usually installed by default. Then Netscape compounded the disaster by producing a couple of particularly terrible browser versions in a row while IE kept improving. There was no scenario where a $49 browser was going to win regardless.
- sbuk 3y agoThe vendor abuse you mention involved threats around supplying Navigator pre-installed.
- wvenable 3y agoIt's funny that Microsoft had to fight so hard when they could have just developed an operating system from the start, like iOS, that limited installations to whatever they pre-approved. It's always harder to take something away than never give it as an option in the first place.
- jacquesm 3y ago> Was Microsoft preventing people from installing firefox on their PCs? It wasn't FireFox, but Netscape definitely was actively worked against. > Am I misremembering this era? Apparently. But here is a link to refresh your memory. https://bootcamp.uxdesign.cc/the-netscape-microsoft-browser-wars-a-story-of-unethical-tactics-and-corporate-domination-703c4c76f1a8 https://bootcamp.uxdesign.cc/the-netscape-microsoft-browser-... To save you a click: "The Shell Execute Bug However, Microsoft’s most significant tactic was the infamous “shell execute bug.” This bug caused some users to fail when trying to install Netscape, but it was not present when installing Internet Explorer, giving Microsoft yet another advantage. While Microsoft claimed the bug was unintentional, many believed it was a deliberate attempt to prevent users from installing Netscape. The bug caused significant damage to Netscape’s market share and cemented Microsoft’s dominance in the browser market."
- a-user-you-like 3y agoIf Microsoft advertised and open system and then lied, that’s immoral. But they had no obligation to even allow other software to be installed.
- jacquesm 3y ago> But they had no obligation to even allow other software to be installed. Of course they did, what kind of nonsense is this? It isn't their computer.
- a-user-you-like 3y agoWhat entitlement. Microsoft makes an OS, they can design it how they want. You can buy it if you want.
- tristan957 3y agoDid you just make an account to call others entitled and accuse them of being coercive?
- xdennis 3y agoMicrosoft was forcing people to pay for Windows when they bought a computer even if they didn't want to use Windows. PC makers had to pay for licenses based on the number of computers sold, regardless of whether they were bundling Windows with them or not.
- skullone 3y agoMaybe people would simply like choice? I know I know, Apple doesn't really offer any choice on their phones, but the point is they should.
- cmdli 3y agoBut people have a choice. They can choose Android, but they don’t, even though they know iPhones are locked down. By this point, you have to assume that the people who buy iPhones are okay with it. Apple doesn’t have a monopoly by any means.
- stri8ted 3y agoThis argument holds less weight, when you consider things like iMessages, where there are network effects and no cross-platform support. Also, there are a number of apps that are only available on IOS, due to its higher market share and greater user spend. So there is a high switching cost, which is a direct function of Apple's dominant market position.
- hamandcheese 3y agoI buy iPhones, but I'm not okay with it. Android has some of what I want, but a lot of what I don't. The market is not competitive enough to actually be able to vote with my feet/dollars. Options are give up control (choose Apple) or give up privacy (choose Google). That is not a choice consumers should be forced to make.
- martimarkov 3y agoSo we should allow random app stores and browsers and magically keep the privacy? Yeah 100% the other stores will not allow for private APIs and circumvent privacy protections and anti-tracking mechanisms. I would 100% believe Facebook on the App Store vs Facebook on the Meta store will be the same…
- ThatPlayer 3y agoPrivate APIs and anti-tracking mechanisms are part of the operating system, not apps. As long as Apple's services don't get those same access, neither does any other app from a 3rd party app store.
- grishka 3y agoIt's not about personal choices, it's about enabling fair competition. If you sell a general-purpose computing device and market it as one, you should relinquish any control of it once it's sold.
- sbuk 3y agoWho decided the iPhone is a general-purpose computing device?
- grishka 3y agoApple did, with their marketing.
- Apocryphon 3y agoApple did for iPads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S5BLs51yDQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S5BLs51yDQ https://9to5mac.com/2017/11/16/ipad-pro-whats-a-computer-ad/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/11/16/ipad-pro-whats-a-computer-ad/
- nouveaux 3y agoI have a different take on the ad. The ad is saying that computer is the obsolete experience, not that the iPad can do everything a computer can do. If Apple truely believed that, they would not have a mac line up. For a certain demographic of people, I would agree. I continue to push the iPad for my aging parents because it can do what they need to do without my tech support. They don't need all the flexibility of a computer as a general purpose computing device. They just need to browse the web, write emails and watch videos, and the iPad is perfect for them.
- chmod775 3y agoObligatory: https://youtu.be/jCb-WcxO5SU?t=52 https://youtu.be/jCb-WcxO5SU?t=52
- shuckles 3y agoThat ad says literally the opposite of what you claim: the iPad is NOT a computer.
- xdennis 3y agoThe only choice is Apple or Android. That's hardly a choice. Governments need to force companies which have too much power.