3 ms·

It’s awful twisted that the people trying to use government fiat to reduce consumer choice and narrow the range of acceptable business models try to cloak thems

by paulmd 3y ago

It’s awful twisted that the people trying to use government fiat to reduce consumer choice and narrow the range of acceptable business models try to cloak themselves in the language of rights and freedoms. Just not the freedom to choose a walled garden (with its own set of - yes - positives). That choice needs to be taken away. For your freedom. One might say - managed freedom.

jojobas 3y ago
Should this be judged against Apple, nothing prevents Apple from maintaining their walled garden, and nothing prevents you from staying in it. It's more freedom, not less.
- tpmoney 3y ago
  If nothing would prevent Apple from doing what they're doing today, then what is this case all about? Apple's value proposition with iOS isn't just the app store. It's that the app store IS the only way to get something on to iOS. It has to go through them and their review process first. Their value claim is that if you can install it on an iPhone, then you can be assured that it goes through some review process that Apple controls and has been checked against some set of restrictions Apple has, and complies with various things Apple demands. Whether that value is sufficient for any individual consumer is up to them, but very clearly they can't make that same claim if they're required by law to allow apps to come from outside sources and bypass those restrictions.
  - jojobas 3y ago
    "If you check the box 'only allow Apple store' on first startup and never uncheck it, you get only apps reviewed by Apple and giving up 30% of revenue". There, problem solved.
    - tpmoney 3y ago
      Remind me again why "buy any other phone in the world" isn't sufficient for everyone else if this check box is supposed to be sufficient for current iPhone customers? If the only viable smart phone in the world was Apple's, there might be a point to all of this. But the market is almost exactly split right in half and there is nothing at all that you can't do in an Android phone that you would suddenly be able to do if only Apple allowed side loading on the iPhone. So why does Apple and their customer base have to give up things they seemingly want for the minority of people who want to install apks from websites?
      - skeaker 3y ago
        > So why does Apple and their customer base have to give up things they seemingly want Wrong, they are not giving anything up. They gain an option and lose nothing. Gaining a new opt-in feature is not a loss and is in fact the opposite. Nobody has to "give up" anything.
        averageRoyalty 3y ago
        You appear to have decidedly ignored the key of the comment you replied to: > Remind me again why "buy any other phone in the world" isn't sufficient for everyone else if this check box is supposed to be sufficient for current iPhone customers? Also - whilst you're correct in spirit - people are giving up an element of safety. The concept of being able to install anything I want on my iPhone is appealing to me, but not to when I support the technology my 90 year old grandmother uses. Having a locked down device is appealing to me and a complete non-issue to her. We (in my country, I assume yours has similar rules) don't allow children to buy alcohol, cigarettes, knives or spraypaint, don't allow people to drive without seatbelts, don't allow guns without a license, don't allow cars to be sold without minimal safety ratings etc. These restrictions are annoying for a few but are a positive for most of society. And unlike most of the above examples, you can easily and legally purchase another smart phone without the guard rails in place. This is for sure a loss for the consumer market as a whole.
        skeaker 3y ago

by paulmd 3y ago

jojobas 3y ago

Should this be judged against Apple, nothing prevents Apple from maintaining their walled garden, and nothing prevents you from staying in it. It's more freedom, not less.

tpmoney 3y ago
If nothing would prevent Apple from doing what they're doing today, then what is this case all about? Apple's value proposition with iOS isn't just the app store. It's that the app store IS the only way to get something on to iOS. It has to go through them and their review process first. Their value claim is that if you can install it on an iPhone, then you can be assured that it goes through some review process that Apple controls and has been checked against some set of restrictions Apple has, and complies with various things Apple demands. Whether that value is sufficient for any individual consumer is up to them, but very clearly they can't make that same claim if they're required by law to allow apps to come from outside sources and bypass those restrictions.
- jojobas 3y ago
  "If you check the box 'only allow Apple store' on first startup and never uncheck it, you get only apps reviewed by Apple and giving up 30% of revenue". There, problem solved.
  - tpmoney 3y ago
    Remind me again why "buy any other phone in the world" isn't sufficient for everyone else if this check box is supposed to be sufficient for current iPhone customers? If the only viable smart phone in the world was Apple's, there might be a point to all of this. But the market is almost exactly split right in half and there is nothing at all that you can't do in an Android phone that you would suddenly be able to do if only Apple allowed side loading on the iPhone. So why does Apple and their customer base have to give up things they seemingly want for the minority of people who want to install apks from websites?
    - skeaker 3y ago
      > So why does Apple and their customer base have to give up things they seemingly want Wrong, they are not giving anything up. They gain an option and lose nothing. Gaining a new opt-in feature is not a loss and is in fact the opposite. Nobody has to "give up" anything.
      - averageRoyalty 3y ago
        You appear to have decidedly ignored the key of the comment you replied to: > Remind me again why "buy any other phone in the world" isn't sufficient for everyone else if this check box is supposed to be sufficient for current iPhone customers? Also - whilst you're correct in spirit - people are giving up an element of safety. The concept of being able to install anything I want on my iPhone is appealing to me, but not to when I support the technology my 90 year old grandmother uses. Having a locked down device is appealing to me and a complete non-issue to her. We (in my country, I assume yours has similar rules) don't allow children to buy alcohol, cigarettes, knives or spraypaint, don't allow people to drive without seatbelts, don't allow guns without a license, don't allow cars to be sold without minimal safety ratings etc. These restrictions are annoying for a few but are a positive for most of society. And unlike most of the above examples, you can easily and legally purchase another smart phone without the guard rails in place. This is for sure a loss for the consumer market as a whole.
        skeaker 3y ago