6 ms·
Of course I wish the hardware were somehow more open, but to a large extent, it's directly because of hardware based privacy features. If you allowed third-par
by lukev 2y ago
Of course I wish the hardware were somehow more open, but to a large extent, it's directly because of hardware based privacy features.
If you allowed third-party components without restraint, there'd be no way to prevent someone swapping out a component.
Lock-in and planned obsolescence are also factors, and ones I'm glad the EU (and others) are pushing back here. But it isn't as if there are no legitimate tradeoffs.
Regarding screw tightening... if they ever completely remove the ability to run untrusted code, yes, then I'll admit I was wrong. But I am more than happy to have devices be locked down by default. My life has gotten much easier since I got my elderly parents and non-technical siblings to move completely to the Apple ecosystem. That's the tradeoff here.
- amelius 2y ago> My life has gotten much easier since I got my elderly parents and non-technical siblings to move completely to the Apple ecosystem. That's the tradeoff here. Yeah, but this is hacker news.
- Klonoar 2y ago“Hacker News” was always the arm of Valley startup mentality, not Slashdot-era Linux enthusiast privacy spook groupthink. It is unfortunate that this change has occurred.
- dartharva 2y ago> Slashdot-era Linux enthusiast privacy spook groupthink This is what the vast majority of discourse on these topics has been dominated by on every platform, not just HN. I wonder if there's a shorter term for this, none of 4chan /g/'s crass terms cover this kind of depiction.
- talldayo 2y ago> I wonder if there's a shorter term for this Competition-enabled rationalism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xserve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xserve
- amelius 2y agoStartups sometimes want to build hardware products, and in that case they mostly can't rely on __consumer__ products like Apple sells. Apple gobbling up supply chains and production capacity is not something a hardware startup should be happy with. Also, startup engineers don't necessarily like "alien technology", which is what Apple is becoming by developing everything behind closed doors and with little cooperation. Startups don't like to pay 10-30% of their revenue just for running their software on a device someone has already paid for. There are more reasons to dislike Apple than you can find on Slashdot.
- Klonoar 2y ago> Apple gobbling up supply chains and production capacity is not something a hardware startup should be happy with. You start with a very good and fair point. > Also, startup engineers don't necessarily like "alien technology", which is what Apple is becoming by developing everything behind closed doors and with little cooperation. > Startups don't like to pay 10-30% of their revenue just for running their software on a device someone has already paid for. You ended with one that is pretty much at odds with my experience. Startups value distribution channels, and the App Store has been fantastic for this. Furthermore, it's one thing to dislike Apple. It's another thing for people to veer off into conspiracy theory, which is what half the threads on here have started to do.
- _yb2s 2y agoWhere do you think those Slashdot era Linux enthusiasts now work?
- orf 2y agoOne of the most underrated macOS features is the screen sharing app - it’s great for seamless tech support with parents. It works via your keychain and your contacts, and the recipient gets a little notification to allow you to view their screen. That’s it - no downloads, no login, no 20 minutes getting a Remote Desktop screen share set up.
- baxuz 2y agoAs fas as I see, it's not possible to connect to a device that uses the same Apple account, which is what I have done in my case. It has to be a different one. Also, it only seems to work on a local network with hostnames.
- trogdor 2y agoYou’re talking about through FaceTime, right? Or is there another native screen sharing app that I am unaware of?
- orf 2y agoA different one: it’s called “Screen Sharing.app” and it’s under Utilities. After you open it, press “Connections -> New” and start typing a contact name. They get a little notification if they are online, and if they accept you have a seamless screen sharing experience ready to go. It’s honestly magic for the “my parents have an error message and don’t know what to do” situation. I assume they have you in their contacts as well for it to work.
- traceroute66 2y ago> I wish the hardware were somehow more open Some of us are old enough to remember the era of the officially authorised Apple clones in the 90's. Some of us worked in hardware repair roles at the time. Some of us remember the sort of shit the third-party vendors used to sell as clones. Some of us were very happy the day Apple called time on the authorised clone industry. The tight-knit integration between Apple OS and Apple Hardware is a big part of what makes their platform so good. I'm not saying perfect. I'm just saying if you look at it honestly as someone who's used their kit alongside PCs for many decades, you can see the difference.
- ferbivore 2y agoNobody is asking for Mac clones, I just want to be able to replace the SSD when it dies...
- hollandheese 2y agoOr not have to pay $800 for a 2TB SSD that actually costs about $100.
- talldayo 2y agoSome of us remember that Franklin Computers never tried to monopolize and subsequently exploit a captive userbase for recurring service revenue. Some of us might even be of the opinion that such a competition was beneficial to consumers that wanted more.
- nkmskdmfodf 2y ago> to a large extent, it's directly because of hardware based privacy features. First, this is 100% false. Second, security through obscurity is almost universally discouraged and considered bad practice.
- ghostpepper 2y agoThis is a common saying but in reality, security through obscurity is widely deployed and often effective. More pragmatic advice would be to not rely solely on security through obscurity, but rather to practice defence in depth.
- nkmskdmfodf 2y agoSecurity by insecurity is also 'widely deployed and often effective'.
- bilekas 2y agoObfuscation is not security.. So there can't be "security through obscurity". Widely deployed doesn't mean it's a positive action, and effective ? It just can't be as it's not a security. People really need to pay more attention to these things, or else we DO get nonsense rolled out as "effective".
- MediumOwl 2y ago> Second, security through obscurity is almost universally discouraged and considered bad practice. This is stupid advice that is mindlessly repeated. Security by obscurity only is bad, sure. Adding obscurity to other layers of security is good. Edit: formatting
- meibo 2y agoNo, that's just plain wrong in this case. It makes proper security research much harder and what's going on with your hardware less obvious.
- nkmskdmfodf 2y ago