3 ms·

This attitude always utterly frustrates me. I simply don’t understand it. Is your view that a company’s worth should be determined by how quickly it copies any

This attitude always utterly frustrates me. I simply don’t understand it. Is your view that a company’s worth should be determined by how quickly it copies any random feature introduced by a ‘competitor’? Do you understand that if every person that voices these complaints had things ‘their way’, then Apple’s collective development backlog would be filled to the brim with stuff that’s utterly original? And, if Apple had done it as soon as GrapheneOS did, can you honestly say that you wouldn’t still be complaining about Apple copying things? What would actually satisfy you? All this OS culture war BS aside, is what you’re expecting of Apple here even remotely in line with your professional experience?

eredengrin 2y ago
> This attitude always utterly frustrates me. I simply don’t understand it. Is your view that a company’s worth should be determined by how quickly it copies any random feature introduced by a ‘competitor’? Yes I let my frustration and cynicism obscure my message, my apologies. To be clear, I love that apple copied this. I think they should've copied it as soon as GrapheneOS did it, if not invented it themselves. One of the most frustrating things to me about apple is that they claim to be the "pro-privacy" company, but then in many ways they are worse than what you can find in open source projects that in comparison could be described as hobby projects (with all due respect to the GrapheneOS devs - it's an excellent project and does actually get a fair amount of donations afaik but at the end of the day we're talking like maybe a few full time devs vs apple's workforce, it should not be hard for apple to compete). It's just tough to believe that apple is so resource starved that they couldn't do better than this. I want them to be pro privacy, I want them to put pressure on google so that everyone can have privacy regardless of their OS. Others in this thread have mentioned great ideas about implementing these sort of permissions at the contact field level, I love that idea and I hope apple does it too, although I'm not holding my breath. I can understand the use-case for WhatsApp wanting my contact's phone numbers, but there's no way it needs the addresses/birthdays/anniversaries or anything else I have on my contact cards, and even if it did come up with features related to those fields, it should be my choice whether the fields are exposed or not. > Do you understand that if every person that voices these complaints had things ‘their way’, then Apple’s collective development backlog would be filled to the brim with stuff that’s utterly original? Sure, there's a lot I'd love for apple to do and I fully understand I'm just not their target audience. My original complaint was specifically directed towards the mismatch between their marketing and the reality of apple products when I fully believe they have the resources to align those two things. I just did a horrible job communicating that. > And, if Apple had done it as soon as GrapheneOS did, can you honestly say that you wouldn’t still be complaining about Apple copying things? Again, not complaining about apple copying things. Please copy all the good things and then make them better! Copy them so well that it makes google want to copy them too, then one day if it is not practical to use GrapheneOS, maybe I won't mind using stock android/ios so much. > What would actually satisfy you? All this OS culture war BS aside, is what you’re expecting of Apple here even remotely in line with your professional experience? I probably can't ever be fully satisfied but if apple passed the (low) bar of allowing third party app stores/sideloading and had a decent open source app ecosystem (which in my understanding is pretty intertwined with the sideloading), I'd legitimately consider using an iphone, if only because I have nearly as many complaints with android/google. Based on what is happening with apple in EU, I don't see it happening any time soon but maybe in a decade or two if we're lucky they'll be beaten into compliance. No idea what your second question means.

eredengrin 2y ago

> This attitude always utterly frustrates me. I simply don’t understand it. Is your view that a company’s worth should be determined by how quickly it copies any random feature introduced by a ‘competitor’? Yes I let my frustration and cynicism obscure my message, my apologies. To be clear, I love that apple copied this. I think they should've copied it as soon as GrapheneOS did it, if not invented it themselves. One of the most frustrating things to me about apple is that they claim to be the "pro-privacy" company, but then in many ways they are worse than what you can find in open source projects that in comparison could be described as hobby projects (with all due respect to the GrapheneOS devs - it's an excellent project and does actually get a fair amount of donations afaik but at the end of the day we're talking like maybe a few full time devs vs apple's workforce, it should not be hard for apple to compete). It's just tough to believe that apple is so resource starved that they couldn't do better than this. I want them to be pro privacy, I want them to put pressure on google so that everyone can have privacy regardless of their OS. Others in this thread have mentioned great ideas about implementing these sort of permissions at the contact field level, I love that idea and I hope apple does it too, although I'm not holding my breath. I can understand the use-case for WhatsApp wanting my contact's phone numbers, but there's no way it needs the addresses/birthdays/anniversaries or anything else I have on my contact cards, and even if it did come up with features related to those fields, it should be my choice whether the fields are exposed or not. > Do you understand that if every person that voices these complaints had things ‘their way’, then Apple’s collective development backlog would be filled to the brim with stuff that’s utterly original? Sure, there's a lot I'd love for apple to do and I fully understand I'm just not their target audience. My original complaint was specifically directed towards the mismatch between their marketing and the reality of apple products when I fully believe they have the resources to align those two things. I just did a horrible job communicating that. > And, if Apple had done it as soon as GrapheneOS did, can you honestly say that you wouldn’t still be complaining about Apple copying things? Again, not complaining about apple copying things. Please copy all the good things and then make them better! Copy them so well that it makes google want to copy them too, then one day if it is not practical to use GrapheneOS, maybe I won't mind using stock android/ios so much. > What would actually satisfy you? All this OS culture war BS aside, is what you’re expecting of Apple here even remotely in line with your professional experience? I probably can't ever be fully satisfied but if apple passed the (low) bar of allowing third party app stores/sideloading and had a decent open source app ecosystem (which in my understanding is pretty intertwined with the sideloading), I'd legitimately consider using an iphone, if only because I have nearly as many complaints with android/google. Based on what is happening with apple in EU, I don't see it happening any time soon but maybe in a decade or two if we're lucky they'll be beaten into compliance. No idea what your second question means.