4 ms·
Apple doesn't obstruct her from using Android. Again, I vote that the app stays up. But you are being silly by portraying Apple as evil.
by kvnn 14y ago
Apple doesn't obstruct her from using Android.
Again, I vote that the app stays up. But you are being silly by portraying Apple as evil.
- lukeschlather 14y agoDon't Apple devices have locked bootloaders? I think it's a little disingenuous to say that Apple doesn't obstruct her from using Android when they have gone to a lot of trouble to ensure you can't run Android on an iPad. (Not to say you can't, but Apple has intentionally put up barriers to prevent it.)
- kvnn 14y agoI meant what I said more literally than you took it. Apple doesn't obstruct her from using Android. She can choose not to use Apple products. Edit: keep in mind this is what I was replying to: They reserved for themselves the power to obstruct the author's use of her own tools, which should be a human right second only to food and shelter.
- lukeschlather 14y agoApple doesn't own the product; they sold it to her, and shouldn't obstruct her from using it as she sees fit. Your sentiment seems to imply that no one actually buys anything from Apple, they merely rent, and Apple rightly has the final say over how the renter uses the product. I don't see how the idea that she can simply choose to use another product really makes sense unless she's renting it.
- kvnn 14y agoThis is a good argument.
- flyinRyan 14y agoSomeone probably sold you a microwave. How easy is it to install Linux on it? They haven't provided you a way to and may have even erected barriers to stop you from doing so. Wouldn't that put any and all embedded device/"appliance" manufacturer in the same boat? As far as I know, Apple doesn't want people to think of the iPad as a "computer" but as a device or appliance.
- lukeschlather 14y agoI'm a vegetarian; I see what Apple has done as more akin to selling a microwave that detects when there's meat in it and refuses to power on. Sorry, it's not a microwave, it's a vegetable cooker.
- hetman 14y agoBut then Microsoft never obstructed anyone from using Macs instead. That line of argumentation didn't seem to interest the courts much.
- Jtsummers 14y agoMicrosoft had a monopoly, >95% market share at the time of the anti-trust suit. They deliberately blocked other OSes from manufacturers' PCs (BeOS, for instance, from Compaq's lineup). Apple may have the largest single share, but they are not in a monopoly position.
- LinXitoW 14y agoWell, iOS is also the only OS to run on iDevices. You can't switch to Android on your iPhone, you need to get a new phone altogether, just like you would've had to get a new Mac, instead of just installing another(BeOS) OS.
- Jtsummers 14y agoActually, BeOS ran on macs. But the point remains, Apple is not in the market position to force out OS competition. They're in a position to make Their consumer device run their OS more easily than an alternate OS. They don't prevent anyone else from launching Android or Windows mobile devices, and they aren't in a position to. Their strongest anti-consumer position is the app store (in the sense that there is a gateway preventing consumer choice), but if you really care you can get around it by jail breaking, or just leave the platform. And if developers cared about their position, they should flood the android market with the apps needed to drive consumers away from iOS.