7 ms·

Maybe if the iPhone was the only phone available to purchase this argument has merit. But it's not, there are no shortage of other phones that provide the same

Maybe if the iPhone was the only phone available to purchase this argument has merit. But it's not, there are no shortage of other phones that provide the same features which are "essential to (your) practical participation in society)". If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own. And I don't really like that.

whstl 1y ago
There are only two viable phone OSs and both have problems. "Vote with your wallet" is a BS argument in such a duopoly, because people care about other stuff.
- _benton 1y ago
  There are many phones which let you flash your own OS and use with complete control. Please just purchase one of those and stop trying to interfere with my ability to purchase a phone that I want.
  - whstl 1y ago
    No. In my opinion it is perfectly fine for society to order a company to hypothetically limit you on this minor thing (and let's be frank: this is super minor), because opening up iOS would benefit companies, countries, economies and other users of phones.
    - _benton 1y ago
      Who are you to claim that my consumer desires are irrelevant?
      - whstl 1y ago
        Compared to major interests of "companies, countries, economies and other users of phones", this is inarguably small. Especially in the light of the only real complaint being that "there is a possibility of loss of security".
        _benton 1y ago
        The difference is that the choice to purchase devices that offer the freedom you want is available, if not the primary option. I don't wish to take that away from you. However you are advocating for the only choice for a locked down device be legislated out of existence. There is a fundamental difference here!
        whstl 1y ago
        You're right. I wish to take this away from you. To me this is completely fine, morally, philosophically and legally, and a lot of people seem to agree with me.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > a lot of people seem to agree with me Apple have over a billion iPhones out there I believe, and your phrasing of "it's all of us vs just you" is really inappropriate - both from an argumentation perspective and probably a fact perspective too.
        whstl 1y ago
        This phrasing is not the good representation of what I mean at all. And the fact that people have iPhones doesn't invalidate my assertion, also it doesn't affect my right to an opinion.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > also it doesn't affect my right to an opinion No-one's saying you don't have a right to an opinion. Everyone has that right. It's bad faith to try and misrepresent what the person you're talking to is saying.
        whstl 1y ago
        I didn't say or imply that you suggested otherwise, I was merely making a statement. > No-one's saying you don't have a right to an opinion Someone said to me “Who are you to claim that my consumer desires are irrelevant?” so you’re wrong.
      - fc417fc802 1y ago
        Your consumer desire ... to impose your own arbitrary wishes on other consumers? Apple opening up their platform would not preclude them from offering users an optional setting that continued to impose the current restrictions. Therefore it does not interfere with your own use of the platform. You have no standing here so to speak.
  - msgodel 1y ago
    Lol. It's legitimately easier to just buy a UMPC with an LTE card and use VOIP than do that. That's how bad the situation is at this point. I say this as someone who gets paid to work on open source and used PostMarketOS on my primary cell phone for years. Even technical people really only have two options right now.
    - sham1 1y ago
      Out of genuine curiosity since you mentioned UMPCs, what would be a good UMPC with LTE module support? I've looked into things like the various GPD Pocket devices, but I'm wondering if any of the other alternatives are any good. And of course, recommendations for LTE modules would be appreciated. Ideally built in, but external modules are also good, all they really need is linux support.
whstl 1y ago
> If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own. What about we meet in the middle and governments force Apple to only open 50% of the phones, for the same price. Would that satisfy you?
- _benton 1y ago
  No, because that requires the development and maintenance of two different operating systems, the cost of which is then passed to the consumer (me).
  - whstl 1y ago
    In this case I hope you have sympathy when I state that I dislike when Apple charges 30% on transactions (but also apps), because this cost is also passed to the consumer: me. And I 100% guarantee that the piece of this 30% pie is way bigger than the effort it would require them to divert their development like you're suggesting. EDIT: Oh, and I also bet their lawyer bill for fighting this is bigger than that too. :)
    - _benton 1y ago
      Not really, you can chose to purchase other devices with more favourable payment agreements. It's about having that choice, versus not having the ability to purchase a device with a higher level of security.
      - whstl 1y ago
        No. I prefer to contribute to companies and causes trying to make Apple to be forced to open up. I am 100% ok with limiting your choice. And if the argument has become about security, as others have said, Jailbreak has repeatedly relied on security issues, so the security problems have always been there.
      - ac29 1y ago
        I dont think anyone is arguing you shouldn't be allowed to pay 1000% markups on payment processing to Apple if you'd like to. But making the argument that Apple is the only company to solve secure payments on the internet is silly.
userbinator 1y ago
Google has been trying to do the same with Android. On one side it's called jailbreaking, on the other it's called rooting. It's really the same thing you're fighting against.

whstl 1y ago

There are only two viable phone OSs and both have problems. "Vote with your wallet" is a BS argument in such a duopoly, because people care about other stuff.

_benton 1y ago
There are many phones which let you flash your own OS and use with complete control. Please just purchase one of those and stop trying to interfere with my ability to purchase a phone that I want.
- whstl 1y ago
  No. In my opinion it is perfectly fine for society to order a company to hypothetically limit you on this minor thing (and let's be frank: this is super minor), because opening up iOS would benefit companies, countries, economies and other users of phones.
  - _benton 1y ago
    Who are you to claim that my consumer desires are irrelevant?
    - whstl 1y ago
      Compared to major interests of "companies, countries, economies and other users of phones", this is inarguably small. Especially in the light of the only real complaint being that "there is a possibility of loss of security".
      - _benton 1y ago
        The difference is that the choice to purchase devices that offer the freedom you want is available, if not the primary option. I don't wish to take that away from you. However you are advocating for the only choice for a locked down device be legislated out of existence. There is a fundamental difference here!
        whstl 1y ago
        You're right. I wish to take this away from you. To me this is completely fine, morally, philosophically and legally, and a lot of people seem to agree with me.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > a lot of people seem to agree with me Apple have over a billion iPhones out there I believe, and your phrasing of "it's all of us vs just you" is really inappropriate - both from an argumentation perspective and probably a fact perspective too.
        whstl 1y ago
        This phrasing is not the good representation of what I mean at all. And the fact that people have iPhones doesn't invalidate my assertion, also it doesn't affect my right to an opinion.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > also it doesn't affect my right to an opinion No-one's saying you don't have a right to an opinion. Everyone has that right. It's bad faith to try and misrepresent what the person you're talking to is saying.
        whstl 1y ago
        I didn't say or imply that you suggested otherwise, I was merely making a statement. > No-one's saying you don't have a right to an opinion Someone said to me “Who are you to claim that my consumer desires are irrelevant?” so you’re wrong.
    - fc417fc802 1y ago
      Your consumer desire ... to impose your own arbitrary wishes on other consumers? Apple opening up their platform would not preclude them from offering users an optional setting that continued to impose the current restrictions. Therefore it does not interfere with your own use of the platform. You have no standing here so to speak.
- msgodel 1y ago
  Lol. It's legitimately easier to just buy a UMPC with an LTE card and use VOIP than do that. That's how bad the situation is at this point. I say this as someone who gets paid to work on open source and used PostMarketOS on my primary cell phone for years. Even technical people really only have two options right now.
  - sham1 1y ago
    Out of genuine curiosity since you mentioned UMPCs, what would be a good UMPC with LTE module support? I've looked into things like the various GPD Pocket devices, but I'm wondering if any of the other alternatives are any good. And of course, recommendations for LTE modules would be appreciated. Ideally built in, but external modules are also good, all they really need is linux support.

whstl 1y ago

> If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own. What about we meet in the middle and governments force Apple to only open 50% of the phones, for the same price. Would that satisfy you?

_benton 1y ago
No, because that requires the development and maintenance of two different operating systems, the cost of which is then passed to the consumer (me).
- whstl 1y ago
  In this case I hope you have sympathy when I state that I dislike when Apple charges 30% on transactions (but also apps), because this cost is also passed to the consumer: me. And I 100% guarantee that the piece of this 30% pie is way bigger than the effort it would require them to divert their development like you're suggesting. EDIT: Oh, and I also bet their lawyer bill for fighting this is bigger than that too. :)
  - _benton 1y ago
    Not really, you can chose to purchase other devices with more favourable payment agreements. It's about having that choice, versus not having the ability to purchase a device with a higher level of security.
    - whstl 1y ago
      No. I prefer to contribute to companies and causes trying to make Apple to be forced to open up. I am 100% ok with limiting your choice. And if the argument has become about security, as others have said, Jailbreak has repeatedly relied on security issues, so the security problems have always been there.
    - ac29 1y ago
      I dont think anyone is arguing you shouldn't be allowed to pay 1000% markups on payment processing to Apple if you'd like to. But making the argument that Apple is the only company to solve secure payments on the internet is silly.

userbinator 1y ago

Google has been trying to do the same with Android. On one side it's called jailbreaking, on the other it's called rooting. It's really the same thing you're fighting against.