3 ms·

Our Changing Relationship with Apple

19 points by ksec 2y ago

Juliate 2y ago
There's another point changing, but that's not specific to Apple, to its investment towards developers, and to its "exigence" of quality; it's related to all US technology. While it may not have the same perspective and impact for US Americans, for others (europeans, here), it has: the current main issue now with Apple is that it is a US company. As Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, so much others. As such, given the direction the US government is going, we (Europeans) _have to_ divest, as much as possible [1], from relying on US-based technology, for both pro and personal use. Because, now, what trust or guarantee do we have our data and processes could not be taken hostage or offline or used against us by an adversary? the choice is obvious. We would never have invested our tech reliance on Russian tech, for instance. I hear the comments "that's ludicrous, those are serious US business companies, won't happen, what are you going to do". But how are these serious US business companies free from any political interference from that kind of government? [1] That hurts, already, and that will hurt. It means invest a lot into our own tech that is objectively not on par at all, but we realistically have no choice.
- snovymgodym 2y ago
  > We would never have invested our tech reliance on Russian tech, for instance. Energy, on the other hand...
  - Juliate 2y ago
    We shut it off precisely because it became a political lever for Russia.
    - snovymgodym 2y ago
      Except it's not shut off. European countries are still buying tons of hydrocarbon resources from Russia.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  The problem is that we are way deep into this sh**, all major layers of the stack from CPUs to programming languages, are mostly sponsored, or owned by US companies. To go back to the diversity we had during cold war days, it will take decades, and we need a solution now.
  - Juliate 2y ago
    But the point is not for us now anymore. The point is to enable tomorrow’s independance. So we have to start diversifying now.
    - pjmlp 2y ago
      Agreed.
- creer 2y ago
  > Because, now, what trust or guarantee do we have our data and processes could not be taken hostage or offline or used against us by an adversary? Don't be too happy to support euro political initiatives - for example when it comes to the security and privacy of your (european) data. It hasn't been pretty. And out of the pack, it's Apple that has been resisting the trend - and probably has the better offer for non-technical users.
  - Juliate 2y ago
    Totally agree with you on both points. Yet, we don't know how strong Apple can be in the face of an adversarial government. And we do need something to compete with it, aiming to have at least the same goals in privacy and user friendliness. The task is huge, and it probably doesn't even start with tech itself, but here we are.
BowBun 2y ago
I don't disagree with the idea that Apple may have peaked and started turning the corner into anti-consumer behavior. That said, even as an Apple detractor, I don't think it's fair to say they haven't continue driving innovation since 2010. Off the top of my head: Apple Watch, the M-series chips, and even to a lesser degree AirTags are all big technical innovations that are now entrenched in our societies. Yes pieces of this all existed before, but so did the pieces of the iPhone. I do think they tend to put out the best-executed products when they see it through (not sure if that held up with Vision Pro since I never tried it).
- goosedragons 2y ago
  I think a lot of Apple's success with the Apple Watch and Airtag is that they didn't make it a fair fight. Competing products are deliberately hobbled because they just can't do what Apple does because Apple doesn't allow it. That's not innovation. M-series are I think overhyped, they aren't bad and they certainly are better than the old Intel CPUs they were shipping. AMD has been nipping at their heels despite not always having the latest and greatest foundry nodes at their fingertips.
  - Jtsummers 2y ago
    Android devices grossly out number iOS devices. If Samsung, Google, Sony, HTC, etc. wanted to make their own watch or tag system they could have. Even better, Garmin at least has figured out how to make their watches work with both iOS and Android so cross-compatibility is possible and greatly expands the potential market share. Apple's Apple Watch only works with iOS, restricting its total market share to approximately the same as the number of iOS devices in active use (approximate because you can activate the watch for other people in your family but without an appropriate iDevice).
    - bitpush 2y ago
      How did a comment about Apple restricting competition become about Apples market share? That's not the point here. Apple didn't allow fair competition for alternate peripherals (watch etc) and it has got nothing to do with iPhones market share.
1123581321 2y ago
Lots of familiar names in those comments. It would be great if this caused an influx of Linux ecosystem users and contributors that led to higher design standards in open source.
- creer 2y ago
  Open source gets you lots of diversity - but it has always been hard to drive "polish" and support for non-technical users. I feel because most open source developers work on what matters to them. Support for non-technical users then mostly comes from the manufacturers of hands-off devices that run linux like Android for the kernel, wifi routers, infrastructure servers and software, software engineering objects (build systems, libraries, tools?)... and you have to recognize things have been pretty successful there: few non-technical users even recognize that these run linux or other open source.
- creer 2y ago
  Apple has often had a tense relationship with developers. When things change in the apple-provided development environment, it's rarely with the third-party developers in mind, it seems. That's not new. It would be nice if that improved over time - but so far, it's not there?
linguae 2y ago
I’ve had similar feelings about Apple since the mid-2010s, that my interests as a Mac user are not in line with Apple’s interests as a corporation. Since Steve Jobs passed away, Apple made moves that made the Mac less attractive to me, most notably the shift to soldered RAM throughout its lineup and even moving to soldered storage. I now use Windows as my daily driver on my personal machine, but I’m not happy with my options, which involve either paying exorbitant prices for a Mac that has the amount of RAM that I need (my PC desktop has 64GB) or dealing with the shortcomings of Windows and desktop Linux. Unfortunately personal computing has undergone “enshittification” across the board in the past 10-15 years, and one could make a good argument that Apple has been the least bad offender. Indeed, I still choose a Mac at work whenever it’s an option, and I have an iPhone because I prefer iOS to Android. I personally believe today’s tech giants have too much power. More specifically, they have too much control over the computing experience, and they use their control in ways that benefit the platform owners at the expense of the user. I love free, open source software and I use it whenever I get the chance; indeed, I have and regularly use Linux servers and development VMs, and I sometimes use a Linux desktop in certain settings, such as on my Raspberry Pi devices. I’m appreciative for the Linux desktop, but the ecosystem lacks the polish of even Mac OS X Tiger from 20 years ago. I understand that writing an entire ecosystem of software is a massive effort that requires time and coordination, and it’s very difficult to have Mac OS X Tiger-like cohesion and conformity in a bazaar-like development ecosystem. However, this seems to work well for infrastructure like compilers (GCC, LLVM, the various compilers for other languages), databases (PostgreSQL and MySQL), and even the base operating systems themselves (Linux + the GNU tools, the BSDs). Perhaps the way out of “enshittification” and reliance on tech giants for our computing needs is to have an ecosystem of user-focused companies and non-profits serving us. I quit using Facebook last month after over 18 years of use. I use a Framework 13 laptop because I value user-serviceability and upgradability. Regarding the FOSS desktop, I have some ideas I’ve been thinking of for over five years regarding how we can promote component-based software as an alternative to large, siloed applications, not only to improve usability, but also to make development easier (http://mmcthrow-musings.blogspot.com/2020/10/where-did-personal-computing-go-wrong.html http://mmcthrow-musings.blogspot.com/2020/10/where-did-perso...).
amadeuspagel 2y ago
Peak Apple is now, with many deeply locked into the ecosystem, with different devices that only work with each other, with friends and family members communicating using services that only work with these devices, and these people with their stupid glorification brought it there, and it doesn't matter what they think about it now.

19 points by ksec 2y ago

There's another point changing, but that's not specific to Apple, to its investment towards developers, and to its "exigence" of quality; it's related to all US technology. While it may not have the same perspective and impact for US Americans, for others (europeans, here), it has: the current main issue now with Apple is that it is a US company. As Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, so much others. As such, given the direction the US government is going, we (Europeans) _have to_ divest, as much as possible [1], from relying on US-based technology, for both pro and personal use. Because, now, what trust or guarantee do we have our data and processes could not be taken hostage or offline or used against us by an adversary? the choice is obvious. We would never have invested our tech reliance on Russian tech, for instance. I hear the comments "that's ludicrous, those are serious US business companies, won't happen, what are you going to do". But how are these serious US business companies free from any political interference from that kind of government? [1] That hurts, already, and that will hurt. It means invest a lot into our own tech that is objectively not on par at all, but we realistically have no choice.

snovymgodym 2y ago
> We would never have invested our tech reliance on Russian tech, for instance. Energy, on the other hand...
- Juliate 2y ago
  We shut it off precisely because it became a political lever for Russia.
  - snovymgodym 2y ago
    Except it's not shut off. European countries are still buying tons of hydrocarbon resources from Russia.
pjmlp 2y ago
The problem is that we are way deep into this sh**, all major layers of the stack from CPUs to programming languages, are mostly sponsored, or owned by US companies. To go back to the diversity we had during cold war days, it will take decades, and we need a solution now.
- Juliate 2y ago
  But the point is not for us now anymore. The point is to enable tomorrow’s independance. So we have to start diversifying now.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    Agreed.
creer 2y ago
> Because, now, what trust or guarantee do we have our data and processes could not be taken hostage or offline or used against us by an adversary? Don't be too happy to support euro political initiatives - for example when it comes to the security and privacy of your (european) data. It hasn't been pretty. And out of the pack, it's Apple that has been resisting the trend - and probably has the better offer for non-technical users.
- Juliate 2y ago
  Totally agree with you on both points. Yet, we don't know how strong Apple can be in the face of an adversarial government. And we do need something to compete with it, aiming to have at least the same goals in privacy and user friendliness. The task is huge, and it probably doesn't even start with tech itself, but here we are.

BowBun 2y ago

I don't disagree with the idea that Apple may have peaked and started turning the corner into anti-consumer behavior. That said, even as an Apple detractor, I don't think it's fair to say they haven't continue driving innovation since 2010. Off the top of my head: Apple Watch, the M-series chips, and even to a lesser degree AirTags are all big technical innovations that are now entrenched in our societies. Yes pieces of this all existed before, but so did the pieces of the iPhone. I do think they tend to put out the best-executed products when they see it through (not sure if that held up with Vision Pro since I never tried it).

goosedragons 2y ago
I think a lot of Apple's success with the Apple Watch and Airtag is that they didn't make it a fair fight. Competing products are deliberately hobbled because they just can't do what Apple does because Apple doesn't allow it. That's not innovation. M-series are I think overhyped, they aren't bad and they certainly are better than the old Intel CPUs they were shipping. AMD has been nipping at their heels despite not always having the latest and greatest foundry nodes at their fingertips.
- Jtsummers 2y ago
  Android devices grossly out number iOS devices. If Samsung, Google, Sony, HTC, etc. wanted to make their own watch or tag system they could have. Even better, Garmin at least has figured out how to make their watches work with both iOS and Android so cross-compatibility is possible and greatly expands the potential market share. Apple's Apple Watch only works with iOS, restricting its total market share to approximately the same as the number of iOS devices in active use (approximate because you can activate the watch for other people in your family but without an appropriate iDevice).
  - bitpush 2y ago
    How did a comment about Apple restricting competition become about Apples market share? That's not the point here. Apple didn't allow fair competition for alternate peripherals (watch etc) and it has got nothing to do with iPhones market share.

1123581321 2y ago

Lots of familiar names in those comments. It would be great if this caused an influx of Linux ecosystem users and contributors that led to higher design standards in open source.

creer 2y ago
Open source gets you lots of diversity - but it has always been hard to drive "polish" and support for non-technical users. I feel because most open source developers work on what matters to them. Support for non-technical users then mostly comes from the manufacturers of hands-off devices that run linux like Android for the kernel, wifi routers, infrastructure servers and software, software engineering objects (build systems, libraries, tools?)... and you have to recognize things have been pretty successful there: few non-technical users even recognize that these run linux or other open source.
creer 2y ago
Apple has often had a tense relationship with developers. When things change in the apple-provided development environment, it's rarely with the third-party developers in mind, it seems. That's not new. It would be nice if that improved over time - but so far, it's not there?

linguae 2y ago

I’ve had similar feelings about Apple since the mid-2010s, that my interests as a Mac user are not in line with Apple’s interests as a corporation. Since Steve Jobs passed away, Apple made moves that made the Mac less attractive to me, most notably the shift to soldered RAM throughout its lineup and even moving to soldered storage. I now use Windows as my daily driver on my personal machine, but I’m not happy with my options, which involve either paying exorbitant prices for a Mac that has the amount of RAM that I need (my PC desktop has 64GB) or dealing with the shortcomings of Windows and desktop Linux. Unfortunately personal computing has undergone “enshittification” across the board in the past 10-15 years, and one could make a good argument that Apple has been the least bad offender. Indeed, I still choose a Mac at work whenever it’s an option, and I have an iPhone because I prefer iOS to Android. I personally believe today’s tech giants have too much power. More specifically, they have too much control over the computing experience, and they use their control in ways that benefit the platform owners at the expense of the user. I love free, open source software and I use it whenever I get the chance; indeed, I have and regularly use Linux servers and development VMs, and I sometimes use a Linux desktop in certain settings, such as on my Raspberry Pi devices. I’m appreciative for the Linux desktop, but the ecosystem lacks the polish of even Mac OS X Tiger from 20 years ago. I understand that writing an entire ecosystem of software is a massive effort that requires time and coordination, and it’s very difficult to have Mac OS X Tiger-like cohesion and conformity in a bazaar-like development ecosystem. However, this seems to work well for infrastructure like compilers (GCC, LLVM, the various compilers for other languages), databases (PostgreSQL and MySQL), and even the base operating systems themselves (Linux + the GNU tools, the BSDs). Perhaps the way out of “enshittification” and reliance on tech giants for our computing needs is to have an ecosystem of user-focused companies and non-profits serving us. I quit using Facebook last month after over 18 years of use. I use a Framework 13 laptop because I value user-serviceability and upgradability. Regarding the FOSS desktop, I have some ideas I’ve been thinking of for over five years regarding how we can promote component-based software as an alternative to large, siloed applications, not only to improve usability, but also to make development easier (http://mmcthrow-musings.blogspot.com/2020/10/where-did-personal-computing-go-wrong.html http://mmcthrow-musings.blogspot.com/2020/10/where-did-perso...).

amadeuspagel 2y ago

Peak Apple is now, with many deeply locked into the ecosystem, with different devices that only work with each other, with friends and family members communicating using services that only work with these devices, and these people with their stupid glorification brought it there, and it doesn't matter what they think about it now.