4 ms·
> You cannot blame apple for acting in its own best interests. That’s the nature of the capitalism beast. I care about end-users. I care about my interests. I
by Sakos 2y ago
> You cannot blame apple for acting in its own best interests. That’s the nature of the capitalism beast.
I care about end-users. I care about my interests. I don't care about Apple's interests, because they are only "incidentally" useful to me as long as they align with my interests. Their own best interests are not any of my concern. I don't care if this is best for them, because it makes the rest of us worse off.
Of course I can blame Apple for acting in its own best interests. The same way I can blame Shell or BP for covering up climate change research in "their own best interests". The same way I can blame EA for putting Ultimate Team in FIFA with insane microtransactions or Bethesda for forcing Arkane Austin to make a live service game like Redfall instead of Prey 2.
We don't live to serve corporations. We have no obligation to agree to every decision they make if they're in "their best interest" and we have no obligation to further businesses solely to the benefit of the businesses themselves.
> If you want hardware to be opened up for the installation of other operating systems, you’ll have to lobby a governing body for that.
And I hope regulation requiring interoperability and open platforms to ensure longevity and end-user control of their own devices is what happens. Because clearly companies like Apple can't be trusted to make choices that benefit everybody. That isn't going to stop me from criticizing Apple for making these decisions.
It's also not like this is something specific to Apple that I'm upset about. I'm also worried about Qualcomm's ARM chips in Windows devices, because I trust neither Qualcomm nor Microsoft to maintain an open platform analogous to what we've had with x86. Long-term, regulation will probably be required anyway.
- brookst 2y ago> I care about end-users. I care about my interest It’s likely that your interests diverge from the majority of end users. Most people do not want you or me protecting them from highly integrated systems. Fair to talk about what you want, but I think it’s a mistake to assume your needs are representative.
- thebruce87m 2y ago> We have no obligation to agree to every decision they make I think you have a misunderstanding here. No one is talking about agreeing with the decision. People are arguing that they are being malicious without evidence of this, as always happens with apple and it detracts from the conversation. My point is that they have no obligation to support Linux. Not supporting it isn’t something that can be classed as malicious unless there is evidence to show it was intentional and for a bad reason. If you want hardware support policies changed inside apple you should push for this through industry regulation, which I would support.