5 ms·

"Curated system", not curated apps. Words matter and I chose those for a reason. The "gotcha" you attempted just makes it clear that you have no idea why the wa

"Curated system", not curated apps. Words matter and I chose those for a reason. The "gotcha" you attempted just makes it clear that you have no idea why the walled garden creates an environment that is more attractive to the average user.

fsflover 3y ago
> the walled garden creates an environment that is more attractive to the average user. Any studies confirming this, or is it just your opinion? In my experience, nobody who owns an iPhone knows about the walled garden (among non-tech people at least).
- generalizations 3y ago
  > studies confirming this Market share is pretty easy to look up? iPhones are massively popular, and have the majority market share in the US. > nobody who owns an iPhone knows about the walled garden That's-a bingo! Exactly. Because it just works, because Apple has tight control over the pipeline. They don't need to know and it seems like tech people don't appreciate the degree to which a trustworthy, mostly-idiot-proof appliance is incredibly valuable to the average user. Choosing between stores and warnings about trojans in security apps are not things that most users care about or want to think about. iPhones are great because the user can have little idea what they're doing, and still be pretty sure they won't screw it up. As I've said elsewhere, I run void linux on my personal thinkpads because I customize everything. But that's not for everyone.
  - fsflover 3y ago
    People choose Apple due to the feeling of being secure, which has nothing to do with the walled garden, and probably actual security is harmed by it (see the fiasco with iMessage zero-clicks). Another reason is that everything just works, which can be achieved on GNU/Linux, too: see laptops with preinstalled systems.
stale2002 3y ago
The point being that you can't have it both ways here. You are the one who made the "just don't use it" argument, as applied to the iPhone. If you can use that argument, then so can everyone else. We can equally say "Ok, just continue to only use the iPhone app store". Its your argument. Either it applies or it doesn't. If you want to say that your argument is bad, thats fine. But if you don't then the argument can be equally used against you. I expect that you'll ignore this clear contradiction though and not address it like you just did in your comment, and if you do that I will take that as an agreement that your argument was bad and you just don't want to admit it, thus you avoid addressing the contradiction.
- generalizations 3y ago
  > You are the one who made the "just don't use it" argument Uh, read a little farther up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680209 > Ok, just continue to only use the iPhone app store So, I imagine that if I restate my point here, you'll just ignore it. So how about I point you to elsewhere in this thread that I've made the point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680211 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39681056 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39681056 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680739 In case you missed it, the key takeaway: > You're missing the forest for the trees. Apple offers a curated environment largely through the curation of the app store. That curated environment is massively valuable to the average user. That's the asset Apple is trying to protect. I've noticed this trend with a lot of my engineering / tech friends: really good at tech, but completely clueless in understanding the actual value to users that a tech thing provides. That's the distinction which makes this not-a-contradiction; but since you're probably mistaking the technology itself for the value it provides, that won't make sense.
  - stale2002 3y ago
    So then that means that your original argument about "just go use an android" is equally wrong. If you disagree with that argument, fine. But you can't use it in support of anything. So then no, people cannot "just go use an android" as their choice is equally taken away from them by Apple's market power and decisions. It's totally fine for you to admit that your original argument of "just don't use X" is stupid. Which is why we now have regulation. Which isn't going to go away. Goodbye 30% fee!

fsflover 3y ago

> the walled garden creates an environment that is more attractive to the average user. Any studies confirming this, or is it just your opinion? In my experience, nobody who owns an iPhone knows about the walled garden (among non-tech people at least).

generalizations 3y ago
> studies confirming this Market share is pretty easy to look up? iPhones are massively popular, and have the majority market share in the US. > nobody who owns an iPhone knows about the walled garden That's-a bingo! Exactly. Because it just works, because Apple has tight control over the pipeline. They don't need to know and it seems like tech people don't appreciate the degree to which a trustworthy, mostly-idiot-proof appliance is incredibly valuable to the average user. Choosing between stores and warnings about trojans in security apps are not things that most users care about or want to think about. iPhones are great because the user can have little idea what they're doing, and still be pretty sure they won't screw it up. As I've said elsewhere, I run void linux on my personal thinkpads because I customize everything. But that's not for everyone.
- fsflover 3y ago
  People choose Apple due to the feeling of being secure, which has nothing to do with the walled garden, and probably actual security is harmed by it (see the fiasco with iMessage zero-clicks). Another reason is that everything just works, which can be achieved on GNU/Linux, too: see laptops with preinstalled systems.

stale2002 3y ago

The point being that you can't have it both ways here. You are the one who made the "just don't use it" argument, as applied to the iPhone. If you can use that argument, then so can everyone else. We can equally say "Ok, just continue to only use the iPhone app store". Its your argument. Either it applies or it doesn't. If you want to say that your argument is bad, thats fine. But if you don't then the argument can be equally used against you. I expect that you'll ignore this clear contradiction though and not address it like you just did in your comment, and if you do that I will take that as an agreement that your argument was bad and you just don't want to admit it, thus you avoid addressing the contradiction.

generalizations 3y ago
> You are the one who made the "just don't use it" argument Uh, read a little farther up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680209 > Ok, just continue to only use the iPhone app store So, I imagine that if I restate my point here, you'll just ignore it. So how about I point you to elsewhere in this thread that I've made the point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680211 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39681056 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39681056 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39680739 In case you missed it, the key takeaway: > You're missing the forest for the trees. Apple offers a curated environment largely through the curation of the app store. That curated environment is massively valuable to the average user. That's the asset Apple is trying to protect. I've noticed this trend with a lot of my engineering / tech friends: really good at tech, but completely clueless in understanding the actual value to users that a tech thing provides. That's the distinction which makes this not-a-contradiction; but since you're probably mistaking the technology itself for the value it provides, that won't make sense.
- stale2002 3y ago
  So then that means that your original argument about "just go use an android" is equally wrong. If you disagree with that argument, fine. But you can't use it in support of anything. So then no, people cannot "just go use an android" as their choice is equally taken away from them by Apple's market power and decisions. It's totally fine for you to admit that your original argument of "just don't use X" is stupid. Which is why we now have regulation. Which isn't going to go away. Goodbye 30% fee!