5 ms·

> why shouldn't they be able to charge the fees they want? It's their platform. Wrong. I argue it's my phone. Why shouldn't I be allowed to install what I want

> why shouldn't they be able to charge the fees they want? It's their platform. Wrong. I argue it's my phone. Why shouldn't I be allowed to install what I want on it? Why stop at app for 30% fees? It puts a lot of work into Safari too, why not 30% of every purchase made through safari? > Mandating Apple to allow sideloading is essentially saying ... that it should allow users do on their iOS devices what they can do on their macOS devices.

cedws 2y ago
>Wrong. I argue it's my phone. Why shouldn't I be allowed to install what I want on it? It's your phone that you bought from Apple with full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. >that it should allow users do on their iOS devices what they can do on their macOS devices. Software limitations are not exclusive to Apple. They're everywhere. For instance, manufacturers intentionally kneecap CPUs/GPUs so they can sell the same chips from the same wafer at different price points. Why aren't they targeted too? You bought the whole chip but you don't get to use it.
- do_not_redeem 2y ago
  > If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. Sounds like a "we should improve society somewhat" moment. https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/342.png https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/342... If you have two choices and one is barely better than the other, you think people shouldn't be allowed to acknowledge the negative aspects of the thing they chose?
  - roenxi 2y ago
    Overruling the world's premier phone-maker on questions of how to design a phone is not improving society. I'm giving Apple money specifically because they designed the phone. I don't want the EU trying to figure it out; they have a reverse-midas touch. Things touch ends up slumping. It is a very salient point that the reason they are issuing orders to a US company is because they "helped" all the EU companies make decisions until they were effectively forced out of the market with failed tech policies. If you want a phone built by someone who doesn't know how to design a phone, I'm sure there are already lots of tiny and irrelevant players already in the EU that you can patronise. The phone probably won't be particularly good though, evidenced by the fact that most people with a choice prefer to let Apple make all the decisions. Or various Asian groups who have a knack for tech.
    - bored13 2y ago
      In a similar vein, I dislike forcing of the USB-C port. I think we are going to approach a wall (especially concerning foldables) where the thickness of the port is a limiting factor and it should be up to the user to decide if its worth going thinner with a proprietary port. If customers choose to go with USB-C, a thicker phone, larger battery etc, that is all and well, I feel that will happen anyways. But it should be up to the customer & manufacturer, not the government.
      - jraph 2y ago
        > up to the customer & manufacturer Yeah, no. In this specific topic, we've had plenty of time to establish that it is isn't the case. Power is not balanced between individuals and manufacturers. USB is a horrible mess but for the first time in my life, I can travel with one charger that works with all the devices I take with me. I could even travel without a charger and be pretty sure I will be able to find one at the destination. People around me seem as happy as me about this and it wasn't the case as long as manufacturers were not forced to use USB. Nobody complains about the port form factor. That's simply not a concern.
        kelnos 2y ago
        Yep. Whenever I travel, I bring a single 60W USB-C charger that charges my laptop, my phone, and even other random gadgets I might need to bring with me. I have an older micro-USB Kindle that annoys me. Of course, for most trips I never need to charge it, as long as I charge it before I leave, so for all practical purposes it's fine. My wife just bought an iPhone 16 to replace her iPhone XR, and if it weren't for her AirPods from a few years ago, she'd be able to avoid carrying around that extra lightning cable too. This might feel like a minor, first-world problem, but it is annoying. And when you scale it up, there's so much waste with so many people needing two cables, one of which could have never been manufactured, had we all been using the same ports all along.
    - protimewaster 2y ago
      This feels like a really wild take on regulations to me. Are iPhones also worse because they have to meet consumer safety laws?
  - nozzlegear 2y ago
    > If you have two choices and one is barely better than the other I don't think "barely better" accurately represents the situation, since the other choice here literally allows sideloading. It's not barely better, it is better if you want to sideload apps. To paraphrase your meme, society has already been improved somewhat.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - kelnos 2y ago
      The problem is you have to make a trade off, and for no reason. You might like iPhones in quite a few ways better than you like Android phones, but also really want to sideload. So what do you do? Well, you have to compromise. And not for a real technical reason. You have to compromise because Apple's business model depends on being able to extract more money from customers and developers by being a gatekeeper. Whenever a company's business model prevents me from doing something I want with a product they might sell me, I think twice about buying that product.
- dylan604 2y ago
  Why do people get upset about the limitations on Apple, yet happily accept that their Nintendo system will not play whatever they want to install, nor any other console system? Yes, it's a powerful computing device that is probably much more capable and can be made to do more things than the intended purpose. That's fine to be curious about, and if you are feeling adventurous enough to fight against the system to get it to do more, go right ahead. However, I see no reason why Apple should be forced into helping you do that. It's not an OSS system.
  - jamil7 2y ago
    The first part of this comment is a bit of a straw man, but I'll bite. The reason is that the discussion is nuanced, a smartphone plays a very different role in someone's life than a Nintendo Switch. For better or worse, a smartphone has become a requirement for critical services that we all rely on.
    - wtallis 2y ago
      > The reason is that the discussion is nuanced, a smartphone plays a very different role in someone's life than a Nintendo Switch. That doesn't really align with the arguments people actually put forth for sideloading on iPhones. "It's my device, I should be able to run whatever I want" is the most common, and doesn't leave room for the nuance you're referencing. Like it or not, most people arguing for iPhone sideloading are using arguments that also demand sideloading on game consoles. It's not at all a straw man.
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    Nintendo should have to open up their system (all consoles should), Apple just a higher priority because of how common their devices are.
  - elashri 2y ago
    > Why do people get upset about the limitations on Apple, yet happily accept that their Nintendo system will not play whatever they want to install, nor any other console system Many people can get upset and complain about many things at the same time. For me I have a smartphone and it is essential to have one for everyday life now. Gaming devices are not playing the same role in people's life. But in principle I would agree that people should advocate for more control over all their devices.
- burnt_toast 2y ago
  > It's your phone that you bought from Apple with full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. This is an unfair argument. No consumer can be expected to do hours of research on every purchase they make and understand the implications of everything. Manufacturers can say almost anything they want as "marketing" and can/do change the terms at anytime they wish. > Software limitations are not exclusive to Apple. They're everywhere. For instance, manufacturers intentionally kneecap CPUs/GPUs so they can sell the same chips from the same wafer at different price points. Why aren't they targeted too? You bought the whole chip but you don't get to use it. Yes and motherboard manufacturers have also offered BIOS options to bypass those kneecaps. I remember having fun unlocking the fourth core on my AMD Athlon II x3 455 and getting the "whole chip". It's not quite the same scenario though. Some of those CPUs/GPUs have hardware issues such as an unstable core and the company is making the best of it by selling them as lesser models instead of trashing them.
  - dmitrygr 2y ago
    > No consumer can be expected to do hours of research on every purchase they make and understand the implications of everything. And yet you expect them to do that research for EVERY APP someone on the phone tells them to install?! That is how scammers walked my grandma through installing a fake banking app on her android phone, and stole all her money. Luckily iOS stops that!
    - burnt_toast 2y ago
      I'm not the one blaming consumers here. Sorry to hear about your Grandmother but just because someone has an Iphone doesn't mean the scammers will give up. They'll just pick another attack vector.
      - dmitrygr 2y ago
        So far, they give up when they hear that it is not an android. I'll take it.
    - 2y ago
- Gud 2y ago
  I bought my iPhone after it was ruled Apple must allow side loading to comply with EU law.
- kelnos 2y ago
  > If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. The problem with this line of reasoning is that we don't have much choice. iPhone or Android. That's it. Someone can very reasonably want the sideloading ability of Android with the stronger privacy stance of an iPhone. Someone who has Macs might like Android's sideloading abilities, but also value the iPhone's integration with macOS and the larger Apple ecosystem. Sure, your stance can be, "too bad; you still have to make a choice, knowing the pluses and minuses of each platform". And yes, that's where we are today. But we don't have to be, and there's mostly no reason (aside from Apple's business model) that we can't have more choices and more freedoms.
- _aavaa_ 2y ago
  > full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. Yes, and I and plenty of others are arguing that these restrictions are anti competitive and anti consumer, and should be illegal. Nothing about the hardware benefits, longer term software support, and aesthetic qualities of iPhones requires these restrictions. > voted with your wallet, but you didn't. Instead I’m voting with my vote. > are not exclusive to Apple And they are as much of a problem there as they are here. There are lots of right to repair laws being put forward to try to stop this shitty behaviour.
sunshinerag 2y ago
You are allowed to NOT buy that phone? You are allowed to buy a phone that allows the use case you look for. Why should your use case be forced on rest?

cedws 2y ago

>Wrong. I argue it's my phone. Why shouldn't I be allowed to install what I want on it? It's your phone that you bought from Apple with full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. >that it should allow users do on their iOS devices what they can do on their macOS devices. Software limitations are not exclusive to Apple. They're everywhere. For instance, manufacturers intentionally kneecap CPUs/GPUs so they can sell the same chips from the same wafer at different price points. Why aren't they targeted too? You bought the whole chip but you don't get to use it.

do_not_redeem 2y ago
> If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. Sounds like a "we should improve society somewhat" moment. https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/342.png https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/342... If you have two choices and one is barely better than the other, you think people shouldn't be allowed to acknowledge the negative aspects of the thing they chose?
- roenxi 2y ago
  Overruling the world's premier phone-maker on questions of how to design a phone is not improving society. I'm giving Apple money specifically because they designed the phone. I don't want the EU trying to figure it out; they have a reverse-midas touch. Things touch ends up slumping. It is a very salient point that the reason they are issuing orders to a US company is because they "helped" all the EU companies make decisions until they were effectively forced out of the market with failed tech policies. If you want a phone built by someone who doesn't know how to design a phone, I'm sure there are already lots of tiny and irrelevant players already in the EU that you can patronise. The phone probably won't be particularly good though, evidenced by the fact that most people with a choice prefer to let Apple make all the decisions. Or various Asian groups who have a knack for tech.
  - bored13 2y ago
    In a similar vein, I dislike forcing of the USB-C port. I think we are going to approach a wall (especially concerning foldables) where the thickness of the port is a limiting factor and it should be up to the user to decide if its worth going thinner with a proprietary port. If customers choose to go with USB-C, a thicker phone, larger battery etc, that is all and well, I feel that will happen anyways. But it should be up to the customer & manufacturer, not the government.
    - jraph 2y ago
      > up to the customer & manufacturer Yeah, no. In this specific topic, we've had plenty of time to establish that it is isn't the case. Power is not balanced between individuals and manufacturers. USB is a horrible mess but for the first time in my life, I can travel with one charger that works with all the devices I take with me. I could even travel without a charger and be pretty sure I will be able to find one at the destination. People around me seem as happy as me about this and it wasn't the case as long as manufacturers were not forced to use USB. Nobody complains about the port form factor. That's simply not a concern.
      - kelnos 2y ago
        Yep. Whenever I travel, I bring a single 60W USB-C charger that charges my laptop, my phone, and even other random gadgets I might need to bring with me. I have an older micro-USB Kindle that annoys me. Of course, for most trips I never need to charge it, as long as I charge it before I leave, so for all practical purposes it's fine. My wife just bought an iPhone 16 to replace her iPhone XR, and if it weren't for her AirPods from a few years ago, she'd be able to avoid carrying around that extra lightning cable too. This might feel like a minor, first-world problem, but it is annoying. And when you scale it up, there's so much waste with so many people needing two cables, one of which could have never been manufactured, had we all been using the same ports all along.
  - protimewaster 2y ago
    This feels like a really wild take on regulations to me. Are iPhones also worse because they have to meet consumer safety laws?
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  > If you have two choices and one is barely better than the other I don't think "barely better" accurately represents the situation, since the other choice here literally allows sideloading. It's not barely better, it is better if you want to sideload apps. To paraphrase your meme, society has already been improved somewhat.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - kelnos 2y ago
    The problem is you have to make a trade off, and for no reason. You might like iPhones in quite a few ways better than you like Android phones, but also really want to sideload. So what do you do? Well, you have to compromise. And not for a real technical reason. You have to compromise because Apple's business model depends on being able to extract more money from customers and developers by being a gatekeeper. Whenever a company's business model prevents me from doing something I want with a product they might sell me, I think twice about buying that product.
dylan604 2y ago
Why do people get upset about the limitations on Apple, yet happily accept that their Nintendo system will not play whatever they want to install, nor any other console system? Yes, it's a powerful computing device that is probably much more capable and can be made to do more things than the intended purpose. That's fine to be curious about, and if you are feeling adventurous enough to fight against the system to get it to do more, go right ahead. However, I see no reason why Apple should be forced into helping you do that. It's not an OSS system.
- jamil7 2y ago
  The first part of this comment is a bit of a straw man, but I'll bite. The reason is that the discussion is nuanced, a smartphone plays a very different role in someone's life than a Nintendo Switch. For better or worse, a smartphone has become a requirement for critical services that we all rely on.
  - wtallis 2y ago
    > The reason is that the discussion is nuanced, a smartphone plays a very different role in someone's life than a Nintendo Switch. That doesn't really align with the arguments people actually put forth for sideloading on iPhones. "It's my device, I should be able to run whatever I want" is the most common, and doesn't leave room for the nuance you're referencing. Like it or not, most people arguing for iPhone sideloading are using arguments that also demand sideloading on game consoles. It's not at all a straw man.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Nintendo should have to open up their system (all consoles should), Apple just a higher priority because of how common their devices are.
- elashri 2y ago
  > Why do people get upset about the limitations on Apple, yet happily accept that their Nintendo system will not play whatever they want to install, nor any other console system Many people can get upset and complain about many things at the same time. For me I have a smartphone and it is essential to have one for everyday life now. Gaming devices are not playing the same role in people's life. But in principle I would agree that people should advocate for more control over all their devices.
burnt_toast 2y ago
> It's your phone that you bought from Apple with full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. This is an unfair argument. No consumer can be expected to do hours of research on every purchase they make and understand the implications of everything. Manufacturers can say almost anything they want as "marketing" and can/do change the terms at anytime they wish. > Software limitations are not exclusive to Apple. They're everywhere. For instance, manufacturers intentionally kneecap CPUs/GPUs so they can sell the same chips from the same wafer at different price points. Why aren't they targeted too? You bought the whole chip but you don't get to use it. Yes and motherboard manufacturers have also offered BIOS options to bypass those kneecaps. I remember having fun unlocking the fourth core on my AMD Athlon II x3 455 and getting the "whole chip". It's not quite the same scenario though. Some of those CPUs/GPUs have hardware issues such as an unstable core and the company is making the best of it by selling them as lesser models instead of trashing them.
- dmitrygr 2y ago
  > No consumer can be expected to do hours of research on every purchase they make and understand the implications of everything. And yet you expect them to do that research for EVERY APP someone on the phone tells them to install?! That is how scammers walked my grandma through installing a fake banking app on her android phone, and stole all her money. Luckily iOS stops that!
  - burnt_toast 2y ago
    I'm not the one blaming consumers here. Sorry to hear about your Grandmother but just because someone has an Iphone doesn't mean the scammers will give up. They'll just pick another attack vector.
    - dmitrygr 2y ago
      So far, they give up when they hear that it is not an android. I'll take it.
  - 2y ago
Gud 2y ago
I bought my iPhone after it was ruled Apple must allow side loading to comply with EU law.
kelnos 2y ago
> If you wanted a phone with more freedom you could have bought another device and voted with your wallet, but you didn't. The problem with this line of reasoning is that we don't have much choice. iPhone or Android. That's it. Someone can very reasonably want the sideloading ability of Android with the stronger privacy stance of an iPhone. Someone who has Macs might like Android's sideloading abilities, but also value the iPhone's integration with macOS and the larger Apple ecosystem. Sure, your stance can be, "too bad; you still have to make a choice, knowing the pluses and minuses of each platform". And yes, that's where we are today. But we don't have to be, and there's mostly no reason (aside from Apple's business model) that we can't have more choices and more freedoms.
_aavaa_ 2y ago
> full knowledge of the restrictions beforehand. Yes, and I and plenty of others are arguing that these restrictions are anti competitive and anti consumer, and should be illegal. Nothing about the hardware benefits, longer term software support, and aesthetic qualities of iPhones requires these restrictions. > voted with your wallet, but you didn't. Instead I’m voting with my vote. > are not exclusive to Apple And they are as much of a problem there as they are here. There are lots of right to repair laws being put forward to try to stop this shitty behaviour.

sunshinerag 2y ago

You are allowed to NOT buy that phone? You are allowed to buy a phone that allows the use case you look for. Why should your use case be forced on rest?