4 ms·
I 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 mi
by kvnn 14y ago
I 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.