4 ms·

Why?

by pb7 3y ago

Why?

smoldesu 3y ago
For one, it would return us to the status-quo where the user decides what to install on the hardware they own. That seems pretty important to me, even if you hate Europe or Apple.
- tinus_hn 3y ago
  If only there were hardware where you could install whatever you want. If only that hardware had a very large majority market share in the EU. Ah. One can dream.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    Well, now it will be the only market in Europe. Apple is welcome to leave if they disagree.
  - Kim_Bruning 3y ago
    That would be nice, wouldn't it? I have a feeling the majority market share may have shifted a bit since 1999. (edit: I mean from PC to IOS and Android)
  - realusername 3y ago
    Like what? The Nokia N900 or the Pinephone? There's never been any realistic choice to make.
    - ribosometronome 3y ago
      He's clearly referring to Android.
      - realusername 3y ago
        Yes I know but it's not like Android is really opened either. Unless "patch your own rom if you are unhappy" counts.
- pb7 3y ago
  What is the relationship between wanting them to lose billions and having that option? Sounds like you're just wishing harm on the organization that gave you this platform in the first place.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    If giving the user more power over software installation hurts Apple, then I guess I am wishing them harm. If Apple's approach was without harm though, they wouldn't have been targeted by European regulators with the DMA in the first place.
    - pb7 3y ago
      That's not what the original comment said though. The comment was about companies losing money, not about gaining certain freedoms.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        I didn't write that comment :P My point was less related to the cause-and-effect, and more focused on the undeniable need for user control. Apple is the reason why the Digital Market Act exists - go read it, you'll very quickly realize that the language targets them. It also (rightfully) implicates Microsoft and Google, but it very explicitly paints Apple's relationship with the iPhone as a "Gatekeeper" situation. The reasoning should be obvious; OEMs don't deserve that level of control. Apple could implement all of their meaningful features competitively, as-is, without being the sole trusted distributor of iPhone apps. Plus, even if you love Apple and hate Europe, features like this let you meaningfully resist European mandates. If Europe demands that SMS apps have a backdoor (fancy that), Apple users would have options that aren't provided by Apple. In a world where FAANG is bought and owned by the US government and gets regularly subpoenaed for data, that might be an affordance you value.
        discard124 3y ago
        > If Europe demands that SMS apps have a backdoor (fancy that), Apple users would have options that aren't provided by Apple. This makes no sense. If Europe makes rules about backdoors or outlawing E2E, they will apply to every app store and every app, not just Apple.
doctorpangloss 3y ago
Who do you think pays for all of that?

Why?

by pb7 3y ago

Why?

For one, it would return us to the status-quo where the user decides what to install on the hardware they own. That seems pretty important to me, even if you hate Europe or Apple.

tinus_hn 3y ago
If only there were hardware where you could install whatever you want. If only that hardware had a very large majority market share in the EU. Ah. One can dream.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  Well, now it will be the only market in Europe. Apple is welcome to leave if they disagree.
- Kim_Bruning 3y ago
  That would be nice, wouldn't it? I have a feeling the majority market share may have shifted a bit since 1999. (edit: I mean from PC to IOS and Android)
- realusername 3y ago
  Like what? The Nokia N900 or the Pinephone? There's never been any realistic choice to make.
  - ribosometronome 3y ago
    He's clearly referring to Android.
    - realusername 3y ago
      Yes I know but it's not like Android is really opened either. Unless "patch your own rom if you are unhappy" counts.
pb7 3y ago
What is the relationship between wanting them to lose billions and having that option? Sounds like you're just wishing harm on the organization that gave you this platform in the first place.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  If giving the user more power over software installation hurts Apple, then I guess I am wishing them harm. If Apple's approach was without harm though, they wouldn't have been targeted by European regulators with the DMA in the first place.
  - pb7 3y ago
    That's not what the original comment said though. The comment was about companies losing money, not about gaining certain freedoms.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      I didn't write that comment :P My point was less related to the cause-and-effect, and more focused on the undeniable need for user control. Apple is the reason why the Digital Market Act exists - go read it, you'll very quickly realize that the language targets them. It also (rightfully) implicates Microsoft and Google, but it very explicitly paints Apple's relationship with the iPhone as a "Gatekeeper" situation. The reasoning should be obvious; OEMs don't deserve that level of control. Apple could implement all of their meaningful features competitively, as-is, without being the sole trusted distributor of iPhone apps. Plus, even if you love Apple and hate Europe, features like this let you meaningfully resist European mandates. If Europe demands that SMS apps have a backdoor (fancy that), Apple users would have options that aren't provided by Apple. In a world where FAANG is bought and owned by the US government and gets regularly subpoenaed for data, that might be an affordance you value.
      - discard124 3y ago
        > If Europe demands that SMS apps have a backdoor (fancy that), Apple users would have options that aren't provided by Apple. This makes no sense. If Europe makes rules about backdoors or outlawing E2E, they will apply to every app store and every app, not just Apple.

doctorpangloss 3y ago

Who do you think pays for all of that?