5 ms·

I guess this kind of article always gets attention, but they always seem so stupid to me. A thing exists that I don't want. I could: (1) ignore the thing; or

by jmull 2y ago

I guess this kind of article always gets attention, but they always seem so stupid to me. A thing exists that I don't want. I could: (1) ignore the thing; or (2) complain that the thing isn't something I want (1) seems so obviously the right thing to do. This goes double when the thing you do want does, in fact, exist. But, no, the internet opts for (2). I guess complaining just feels good, even when it's about something that has zero actual effect on you (or on anyone, even).

dangus 2y ago
The author literally just bought the wrong device for their needs. Probably 95% of people who own computers do not need root access and should not have it, possibly ever. The iPad is a great device for all the people who need what it offers. It's an amazing graphical tablet, it's a cheap way to watch movies and play games, and it's an amazing system to use while standing without a desk (e.g., for retail and outdoor situations). All of these use cases have nothing to do with gaining root access. Heck, I don't even think most of my development tasks on a real desktop computer involve elevating into root privileges. I'd sure like the ability to but if it was taken away from me I'm not sure it would affect me all that much. "I don't consider any system without root access to be a real computer. So anyway, I decided to buy a Roku streaming box as my main computer and it sucks! What's wrong with the world today!?"
- pjmlp 2y ago
  Some folks seem to be in the fashion that everything with a CPU can get a monitor and a keyboard attached to it, regardless of the original design purpose.
  - Apocryphon 2y ago
    Why not? https://www.youtube.com/@BringusStudios https://www.youtube.com/@BringusStudios
    - pjmlp 2y ago
      Personally I rather buy hardware fit for purpose.
      - pessimizer 2y ago
        The hardware isn't keeping a keyboard or monitor from connecting, unless it was specifically designed to prevent that.
      - Dylan16807 2y ago
        The hardware is fit for purpose. That's what makes the situation frustrating. It's a software lock.
        pjmlp 2y ago
        That wasn't what it was being sold for, so no it isn't.
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        Interesting definition. I would have said what it's sold for doesn't matter at all when we're taking about whether it's fit for some arbitrary purpose. I want to probe your definition a bit. Let's say a factory makes gears. All the broken ones get recycled. After all quality checks have been done, some of the passing gears are pulled off the line and redirected to the gift shop to be sold as paperweights. 1. Are unsold gears in the factory storeroom fit for purpose as gears? 2. Are unsold gears in the gift shop fit for purpose as gears? 2a. If yes, do they lose that fit at the moment of sale? 2b. If no, do they regain that fit if the factory has production issues and brings a crate back from the gift shop to sell as gears?
        pjmlp 2y ago
        Comparing Apples to Oranges. One is a device sold with a specific purpose that the buyers knowingly paid for, the other is a piece of isolated pieces pluggable hardware.
  - Daishiman 2y ago
    There is no reason apart from Apple's closed-source restrictive software policies that the device is nowhere near as useful as it could be.
    - linguae 2y ago
      Agreed. The iPad, from a hardware point of view, is a close approximation to Alan Kay's Dynabook concept (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook). It's a shame that iPads are so locked down; I'd love to use an iPad with an unrestricted operating system. I have a Microsoft Surface 7 Pro. Even though Windows is not my favorite operating system, I enjoy using the hardware. I'm also looking forward to Framework's upcoming 12" convertible tablet; I also have a Framework 13 laptop.
      - intrasight 2y ago
        Pricing will be key for that Framework 12. I hope it's competitive. Like ~$600.
    - pjmlp 2y ago
      If it doesn't fit you, don't buy it only to complain. There are other vendors with more open experiences. If those vendors actually get enough market share, maybe even Apple might adopt them. Exactly like they did with keyboards, pen, and windows management, that came before on PC and Android tablets.
      - Daishiman 2y ago
        If the largest vendor of computer hardware on the planet purposely locks down its devices for no apparent consumer benefit then informed users have every right to complain to the less informed how this harms the entire market in the long run.
        pjmlp 2y ago
        It is the largest vendor, exactly because only a minority cares about using a UNIX shell on their tablets.
  - bhelkey 2y ago
    Apple sells keyboards with trackpads for the iPad [1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/ipad-keyboards/ https://www.apple.com/ipad-keyboards/
- bluefirebrand 2y ago
  > Probably 95% of people who own computers do not need root access and should not have it, possibly ever But they should be able to take it to someone else who can use root access to fix it The idea that a person should not have any access to be an admin of a physical device that they own is ridiculous They might not need it, they might not ever use it, but they should absolutely be able to if a situation calls for it
  - api 2y ago
    Unfortunately if you give non-technical users root you are also giving root to the phishing site or fraudster that cons them into giving it root. It's hard for technical people to get their heads around just what a hostile environment the modern scam and hustler riddled slop and spam infested Internet is. Using the net as a non-technical user is like walking around a dodgy high crime area of some third world city at night as an unarmed sixteen year old girl there on holiday. Tech folks get so good at ignoring and skipping all that nonsense that they stop noticing it. I get three or four phishing or scam attempts a week, some of which look convincing if you don't know how to examine an e-mail domain or a URL. It's a hellscape. An exercise for readers who don't believe me: get on a Windows machine and try to use regular web search to find and download a piece of software outside the App Store. Pretend you are non-technical and just looking for something to get something done. Be sure you do this from a VM you can delete after it becomes compromised, assuming you can actually get to a download at all behind all the popups and scam "your PC is infected!" sites.
    - pessimizer 2y ago
      Most techies not only know many, many people who aren't technical, they are also the ones who are called on when their family and friends get suckered. It is not ignorance that makes technical people think that everyone should be able to get root access to the things they "own," it is experience. This is so much "you support free speech because you're a good person, but if you heard what some people say..." > An exercise for readers who don't believe me With the number of actual Windows installations I, and other technical people, have cleaned the slime off of, this isn't persuasive. People who use Linux generally aren't ignorant of Windows, although some extreme Apple partisans might be.
belorn 2y ago
If ignoring the thing would work then people would do that. The problem is not that anti-consumer products exist along side pro-consumer products. It is that anti-consumer products out compete pro-consumer products to the point that all that remains (within reasons) are anti-consumer products. There are market reasons for this behavior. Asymmetric information in markets (lemon markets), true cost obfuscation, hidden terms, platform capture, manipulations in form of anti-patterns, monopoly behavior, to just mention a few of the very large ones.
- jmull 2y ago
  How would ignoring the ipad not have solved OP's problem? They could have just replaced their old macbook with a new macbook. Not that there's anything wrong with trying something new, IMO. But if you do so without doing any research, and it turns out to not be what you expected, there's nothing to complain about. Hopefully OP just returned the ipad and got a macbook upon realizing their mistake. You seem to be suggesting something deceptive is going on here, but there doesn't seem to be any sign of that.
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    I would agree with you if computing devices were trivial aesthetic devices, instead of central to a lot of what we do. I would agree with you if 1000 vendors of versatile computing tools put out 10,000 products with all kinds of uncorrelated options. I would agree with you if even one vendor put out high-end quality, safe but ungated, customizable products for all form factors. (Safe out of the box, but all safeguards opt-out enabled.) But neither wonderful extreme exists. Unfortunately, not even scaled down, bad caricatures, in a dark room, if you spend a mint, versions of that reality exist. Instead, due to increasingly locked down devices, we are all left making tradeoffs we wish we didn’t have to make. And not because guardrail opt-outs would be hard or costly to provide, but because manufacturers work hard to eliminate technically trivial opt-outs, or even any hero level effort opt-ours, and tell us they are doing this — for us!?!? “We want you to be safe.” I don’t want to be safe. “No, we want you to be safe.” Help, let me out! “No, we want you to be safe.” Can my family and friends at least visit me? “No, not those family and friends. Would you like to see our menu of family and friend options? We want you to be safe.” If each of us only chose devices on one dimension, it is likely everyone could find a product they like. But we choose devices to balance many concerns, and the artificially inflexible offerings can feel bleak. Because they are! (Both artificial & bleak). This is essentially the reason open source software exists. Providing ungated alternatives - enabling self-serve specialization by customization - and keeping closed/gated software on its toes. But the real economic conundrums of open source are nothing compared to the *practical* economic conundrums of open hardware. And increasingly, wide appeal operating systems are low-level integrated with hardware defenses - for good reasons. But without opt-outs.
Daishiman 2y ago
You are literally adding even less value than the article by commenting on how a supposedly useless article is useless. And I don't agree. Those of us who know that markets have network effects and who believe that open computing is a value for humanity and closed systems opposite understand that it is value for new readers to know that things could be better, so as to steer at least some of the consumer choice away from these toxic, disposable products.
hansvm 2y ago
This article seems a little ranty, but you could definitely be forgiven for thinking that iPads are general-purpose computing devices. There aren't any hardware limitations, and for years (haven't checked the last year or two), Apple was heavily advertising them as being just that, especially with keyboards and other add-ons. If you weren't intimately familiar with the goings-on, had brand loyalty from a MacBook that previously did what you wanted, and only spent an hour or three of research (a few hundred dollars of your time, or a 10-30% tax on this upcoming purchase) after seeing those ads, an article about how you were swindled would be appropriate.
- BiteCode_dev 2y ago
  Tablets and phones have been criticized for a decade for being limited artificially, locked down and more oriented consumption than production. Mac products are especially famous for restricting the users in what in can do in exchange for whatever peace of mind that brings. If you are going to spend hundred of dollars on a product without doing even a basic research about it, you are 100% responsible of the outcome.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- threeseed 2y ago
  > definitely be forgiven for thinking that iPads are general-purpose computing devices The iPad is about to reach its 15 birthday. No one should be forgiven for confusing it with a MacBook.
- bhelkey 2y ago
  I don't particularly care for the limitations Apple puts on iPads. Instead, I have a Windows Surface that I use to mostly as a laptop and occasionally as a tablet. That being said, Apple has a 14 day return policy [1]. If you feel swindled, which should be immediately obvious, just return the device. [1] https://www.apple.com/us-edu/shop/help/returns_refund https://www.apple.com/us-edu/shop/help/returns_refund
ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
Rants == clicks. No one really cares about folks extolling the virtues of stuff. They want good, meaty, abuse. I used to like Mr. Cranky, a lot more than Siskel and Eibert.
aiwejflj 2y ago
Ugh. Yeah. Why post it here? Tablets and phones are for consumption, not production. End of story. This person just wrote some clickbait to generate some ad revenue.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  What's the commercial depict? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4
archagon 2y ago
Are you seriously making the argument that writing to effect change is a waste of time? People do (2) because they want things to be different, and given enough writers, the needle may eventually move. Today, there's a lot more iPad-should-be-open sentiment than there was a few years ago, even from long-time Apple pundits and fans. Regulation is also quickly catching up.

by jmull 2y ago

dangus 2y ago

The author literally just bought the wrong device for their needs. Probably 95% of people who own computers do not need root access and should not have it, possibly ever. The iPad is a great device for all the people who need what it offers. It's an amazing graphical tablet, it's a cheap way to watch movies and play games, and it's an amazing system to use while standing without a desk (e.g., for retail and outdoor situations). All of these use cases have nothing to do with gaining root access. Heck, I don't even think most of my development tasks on a real desktop computer involve elevating into root privileges. I'd sure like the ability to but if it was taken away from me I'm not sure it would affect me all that much. "I don't consider any system without root access to be a real computer. So anyway, I decided to buy a Roku streaming box as my main computer and it sucks! What's wrong with the world today!?"

pjmlp 2y ago
Some folks seem to be in the fashion that everything with a CPU can get a monitor and a keyboard attached to it, regardless of the original design purpose.
- Apocryphon 2y ago
  Why not? https://www.youtube.com/@BringusStudios https://www.youtube.com/@BringusStudios
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    Personally I rather buy hardware fit for purpose.
    - pessimizer 2y ago
      The hardware isn't keeping a keyboard or monitor from connecting, unless it was specifically designed to prevent that.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      The hardware is fit for purpose. That's what makes the situation frustrating. It's a software lock.
      - pjmlp 2y ago
        That wasn't what it was being sold for, so no it isn't.
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        Interesting definition. I would have said what it's sold for doesn't matter at all when we're taking about whether it's fit for some arbitrary purpose. I want to probe your definition a bit. Let's say a factory makes gears. All the broken ones get recycled. After all quality checks have been done, some of the passing gears are pulled off the line and redirected to the gift shop to be sold as paperweights. 1. Are unsold gears in the factory storeroom fit for purpose as gears? 2. Are unsold gears in the gift shop fit for purpose as gears? 2a. If yes, do they lose that fit at the moment of sale? 2b. If no, do they regain that fit if the factory has production issues and brings a crate back from the gift shop to sell as gears?
        pjmlp 2y ago
        Comparing Apples to Oranges. One is a device sold with a specific purpose that the buyers knowingly paid for, the other is a piece of isolated pieces pluggable hardware.
- Daishiman 2y ago
  There is no reason apart from Apple's closed-source restrictive software policies that the device is nowhere near as useful as it could be.
  - linguae 2y ago
    Agreed. The iPad, from a hardware point of view, is a close approximation to Alan Kay's Dynabook concept (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook). It's a shame that iPads are so locked down; I'd love to use an iPad with an unrestricted operating system. I have a Microsoft Surface 7 Pro. Even though Windows is not my favorite operating system, I enjoy using the hardware. I'm also looking forward to Framework's upcoming 12" convertible tablet; I also have a Framework 13 laptop.
    - intrasight 2y ago
      Pricing will be key for that Framework 12. I hope it's competitive. Like ~$600.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    If it doesn't fit you, don't buy it only to complain. There are other vendors with more open experiences. If those vendors actually get enough market share, maybe even Apple might adopt them. Exactly like they did with keyboards, pen, and windows management, that came before on PC and Android tablets.
    - Daishiman 2y ago
      If the largest vendor of computer hardware on the planet purposely locks down its devices for no apparent consumer benefit then informed users have every right to complain to the less informed how this harms the entire market in the long run.
      - pjmlp 2y ago
        It is the largest vendor, exactly because only a minority cares about using a UNIX shell on their tablets.
- bhelkey 2y ago
  Apple sells keyboards with trackpads for the iPad [1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/ipad-keyboards/ https://www.apple.com/ipad-keyboards/
bluefirebrand 2y ago
> Probably 95% of people who own computers do not need root access and should not have it, possibly ever But they should be able to take it to someone else who can use root access to fix it The idea that a person should not have any access to be an admin of a physical device that they own is ridiculous They might not need it, they might not ever use it, but they should absolutely be able to if a situation calls for it
- api 2y ago
  Unfortunately if you give non-technical users root you are also giving root to the phishing site or fraudster that cons them into giving it root. It's hard for technical people to get their heads around just what a hostile environment the modern scam and hustler riddled slop and spam infested Internet is. Using the net as a non-technical user is like walking around a dodgy high crime area of some third world city at night as an unarmed sixteen year old girl there on holiday. Tech folks get so good at ignoring and skipping all that nonsense that they stop noticing it. I get three or four phishing or scam attempts a week, some of which look convincing if you don't know how to examine an e-mail domain or a URL. It's a hellscape. An exercise for readers who don't believe me: get on a Windows machine and try to use regular web search to find and download a piece of software outside the App Store. Pretend you are non-technical and just looking for something to get something done. Be sure you do this from a VM you can delete after it becomes compromised, assuming you can actually get to a download at all behind all the popups and scam "your PC is infected!" sites.
  - pessimizer 2y ago
    Most techies not only know many, many people who aren't technical, they are also the ones who are called on when their family and friends get suckered. It is not ignorance that makes technical people think that everyone should be able to get root access to the things they "own," it is experience. This is so much "you support free speech because you're a good person, but if you heard what some people say..." > An exercise for readers who don't believe me With the number of actual Windows installations I, and other technical people, have cleaned the slime off of, this isn't persuasive. People who use Linux generally aren't ignorant of Windows, although some extreme Apple partisans might be.

belorn 2y ago

If ignoring the thing would work then people would do that. The problem is not that anti-consumer products exist along side pro-consumer products. It is that anti-consumer products out compete pro-consumer products to the point that all that remains (within reasons) are anti-consumer products. There are market reasons for this behavior. Asymmetric information in markets (lemon markets), true cost obfuscation, hidden terms, platform capture, manipulations in form of anti-patterns, monopoly behavior, to just mention a few of the very large ones.

jmull 2y ago
How would ignoring the ipad not have solved OP's problem? They could have just replaced their old macbook with a new macbook. Not that there's anything wrong with trying something new, IMO. But if you do so without doing any research, and it turns out to not be what you expected, there's nothing to complain about. Hopefully OP just returned the ipad and got a macbook upon realizing their mistake. You seem to be suggesting something deceptive is going on here, but there doesn't seem to be any sign of that.
- Nevermark 2y ago
  I would agree with you if computing devices were trivial aesthetic devices, instead of central to a lot of what we do. I would agree with you if 1000 vendors of versatile computing tools put out 10,000 products with all kinds of uncorrelated options. I would agree with you if even one vendor put out high-end quality, safe but ungated, customizable products for all form factors. (Safe out of the box, but all safeguards opt-out enabled.) But neither wonderful extreme exists. Unfortunately, not even scaled down, bad caricatures, in a dark room, if you spend a mint, versions of that reality exist. Instead, due to increasingly locked down devices, we are all left making tradeoffs we wish we didn’t have to make. And not because guardrail opt-outs would be hard or costly to provide, but because manufacturers work hard to eliminate technically trivial opt-outs, or even any hero level effort opt-ours, and tell us they are doing this — for us!?!? “We want you to be safe.” I don’t want to be safe. “No, we want you to be safe.” Help, let me out! “No, we want you to be safe.” Can my family and friends at least visit me? “No, not those family and friends. Would you like to see our menu of family and friend options? We want you to be safe.” If each of us only chose devices on one dimension, it is likely everyone could find a product they like. But we choose devices to balance many concerns, and the artificially inflexible offerings can feel bleak. Because they are! (Both artificial & bleak). This is essentially the reason open source software exists. Providing ungated alternatives - enabling self-serve specialization by customization - and keeping closed/gated software on its toes. But the real economic conundrums of open source are nothing compared to the *practical* economic conundrums of open hardware. And increasingly, wide appeal operating systems are low-level integrated with hardware defenses - for good reasons. But without opt-outs.

Daishiman 2y ago

You are literally adding even less value than the article by commenting on how a supposedly useless article is useless. And I don't agree. Those of us who know that markets have network effects and who believe that open computing is a value for humanity and closed systems opposite understand that it is value for new readers to know that things could be better, so as to steer at least some of the consumer choice away from these toxic, disposable products.

hansvm 2y ago

This article seems a little ranty, but you could definitely be forgiven for thinking that iPads are general-purpose computing devices. There aren't any hardware limitations, and for years (haven't checked the last year or two), Apple was heavily advertising them as being just that, especially with keyboards and other add-ons. If you weren't intimately familiar with the goings-on, had brand loyalty from a MacBook that previously did what you wanted, and only spent an hour or three of research (a few hundred dollars of your time, or a 10-30% tax on this upcoming purchase) after seeing those ads, an article about how you were swindled would be appropriate.

BiteCode_dev 2y ago
Tablets and phones have been criticized for a decade for being limited artificially, locked down and more oriented consumption than production. Mac products are especially famous for restricting the users in what in can do in exchange for whatever peace of mind that brings. If you are going to spend hundred of dollars on a product without doing even a basic research about it, you are 100% responsible of the outcome.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
threeseed 2y ago
> definitely be forgiven for thinking that iPads are general-purpose computing devices The iPad is about to reach its 15 birthday. No one should be forgiven for confusing it with a MacBook.
bhelkey 2y ago
I don't particularly care for the limitations Apple puts on iPads. Instead, I have a Windows Surface that I use to mostly as a laptop and occasionally as a tablet. That being said, Apple has a 14 day return policy [1]. If you feel swindled, which should be immediately obvious, just return the device. [1] https://www.apple.com/us-edu/shop/help/returns_refund https://www.apple.com/us-edu/shop/help/returns_refund

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago

Rants == clicks. No one really cares about folks extolling the virtues of stuff. They want good, meaty, abuse. I used to like Mr. Cranky, a lot more than Siskel and Eibert.

aiwejflj 2y ago

Ugh. Yeah. Why post it here? Tablets and phones are for consumption, not production. End of story. This person just wrote some clickbait to generate some ad revenue.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
What's the commercial depict? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4

archagon 2y ago

Are you seriously making the argument that writing to effect change is a waste of time? People do (2) because they want things to be different, and given enough writers, the needle may eventually move. Today, there's a lot more iPad-should-be-open sentiment than there was a few years ago, even from long-time Apple pundits and fans. Regulation is also quickly catching up.