4 ms·

That explains why Apple supports customers using iDevices however they want, while Google locks down Android and asserts that it should be a federal crime to ru

That explains why Apple supports customers using iDevices however they want, while Google locks down Android and asserts that it should be a federal crime to run unapproved software. Wait. Maybe it's a bit more complex.

mpyne 14y ago
Yes, my first thought on reading that short argument was that it has all the logical rigor of INTERCAL. I especially like the leap the author took from 'an iDevice is an end in itself' to 'users can see this' to 'obviously that's why it is selling so well'. Not a one of those logical leaps is even plausible IMO, let alone so obvious that it can be thrown out there without further justification.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
shawndumas 14y ago
Apple thinks (rightly or wrongly) that giving you that control will diminish the experience. I used to hate it when people would install stupid stuff on Windows and then blame Microsoft for their bad Windows experience. It's like buying an <insert generally reliable car make> and putting a bunch of crappy aftermarket parts in it and then getting angry with the dealership when you're stuck on the side of the road.
- mayanksinghal 14y ago
  But then it is the fault of the user and not really the car dealership. Car dealership do not (cannot?) restrict you from using duplicate/fake/not-their parts, AFAIR. I do not think that anyone would hold the dealership responsible (legally and morally) for, say a mishap that happened because of a faulty fake tire.
  - shawndumas 14y ago
    Windows as a brand suffered greatly at the hands of OEMs and their crappy software, regardless of whose fault it was.
    - mayanksinghal 14y ago
      Actually that is a different issue. Windows doesn't restrict the user in installing softwares that they want to. Hell, it even allows user to keep using their product and subsequent MS softwares with sufficient independence even after realizing that the OS is pirated. What you are pointing out is the behaviour of OEMs which is rightly called out as obnoxious and degrading.

mpyne 14y ago

Yes, my first thought on reading that short argument was that it has all the logical rigor of INTERCAL. I especially like the leap the author took from 'an iDevice is an end in itself' to 'users can see this' to 'obviously that's why it is selling so well'. Not a one of those logical leaps is even plausible IMO, let alone so obvious that it can be thrown out there without further justification.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

shawndumas 14y ago

Apple thinks (rightly or wrongly) that giving you that control will diminish the experience. I used to hate it when people would install stupid stuff on Windows and then blame Microsoft for their bad Windows experience. It's like buying an <insert generally reliable car make> and putting a bunch of crappy aftermarket parts in it and then getting angry with the dealership when you're stuck on the side of the road.

mayanksinghal 14y ago
But then it is the fault of the user and not really the car dealership. Car dealership do not (cannot?) restrict you from using duplicate/fake/not-their parts, AFAIR. I do not think that anyone would hold the dealership responsible (legally and morally) for, say a mishap that happened because of a faulty fake tire.
- shawndumas 14y ago
  Windows as a brand suffered greatly at the hands of OEMs and their crappy software, regardless of whose fault it was.
  - mayanksinghal 14y ago
    Actually that is a different issue. Windows doesn't restrict the user in installing softwares that they want to. Hell, it even allows user to keep using their product and subsequent MS softwares with sufficient independence even after realizing that the OS is pirated. What you are pointing out is the behaviour of OEMs which is rightly called out as obnoxious and degrading.