5 ms·

> There is a simple solution to all of this: Google and Apple should no longer be allowed to operate any sort of "App Store" or software distribution channel.

> There is a simple solution to all of this: Google and Apple should no longer be allowed to operate any sort of "App Store" or software distribution channel. “Simple” solutions can produce unintended outcomes. You want to take a device that is targeted for “everyone” and not just tech savvy people and provide no control or standard to what can be loaded on it? The very idea of it is horrifying to me. You have apparently never sat down on an elderly persons PC in the early ‘00s and tried to sort out all manner of shopping toolbars, coupon widgets, and crapware that has caused their pc to slow to a crawl. It’s literally bad enough with the poor performing apps in app stores but it could be so much worse without it No thanks.

jjani 1y ago
Having to caveat it with "in the early '00s" already invalidates your thesis; it means we've managed to largely fix this issue on PC without resorting to giving away device ownership.
- bartread 1y ago
  I don’t think it invalidates the argument at all. I think it’s more a reflection that people mostly use other devices, like phones and tablets, for tasks they might have used a PC for 20 years ago - at least outside an office environment. That’s not to say the PC experience hasn’t improved - certainly Windows is at least more secure - but that it’s not the only factor, and I don’t think it’s the biggest factor either. One data point for you: the last company I worked for, when I joined in 2017, already >50% of external users were accessing our service via mobile devices.
  - pharrington 1y ago
    The formfactor is the biggest, possibly only, factor. The handheld formfactor works way better for most people than a huge (or even small) stationary brick, or even a laptop.
- kcplate 1y ago
  You think that companies adopting different technologies to discourage installing software that might be malicious because it hasn’t been reviewed as safe invalidates my argument? Ok, then.
jjav 1y ago
> You want to take a device that is targeted for “everyone” and not just tech savvy people and provide no control or standard to what can be loaded on it? The very idea of it is horrifying to me. Were you horrified by the Apple ][?
- bartread 1y ago
  This is no argument at all. When the Apple II was released microcomputers were still very much in the realms of enthusiasts, and were beginning to make inroads into education. The Apple II was never used by “everyone” and nobody expected it to be, even towards the end of its quite long life. No question, it was a stepping stone to where we are today but you can’t compare an enthusiast/early adopter product from nearly 50 years ago to contemporary Android and iOS devices that are intended for “everyone”, in the way you’re attempting with your comment.
- kcplate 1y ago
  Nope, but I didn’t have whole countries and millions of bad actors actively trying to steal information and act maliciously on that device either.
necovek 1y ago
That's easily solved, ain't it: check the "tech savvy" box, and all "safeguards" are off? Yet instead, we are getting increasingly fewer phones with unlockable bootloaders and root access available. What gives? I've also checked out my mom's phone a year or so back: she had so many crappy apps from official store that it was barely usable. Stores do not really help.
- kcplate 1y ago
  What possible motivation would Google or Apple have to appease such a small percentage of their user base? I’m “tech savvy” and I would never click that box. Frankly I can’t think of something more risky than installing some random piece of software on a device that I need and use everyday.
  - necovek 1y ago
    If that's the case, what is a practical difference between you having access to your device or not? You could be installing random crap from the store, or not from the store. Or you could not be installing random apps from either. I don't feel any more protected by device restrictions. Yes, containerization helps, but I like having root on my device (eg. I backup different .sqlite files from different apps through ssh to my phone). My phone has FDE, and is probably not at all less "safe" than yours.
    - kcplate 1y ago
      There are a number of mobile phones out there that are fully open. If you need root, go buy one. You seem to have a specific need that I am quite sure that 99.999% of the mobile phone using world do not have and never will have. If I am apple, I recognize that making a phone that makes the .001% happy probably will frustrate the 99.999%. They are quite happy to give that market of maybe 150k users to someone else to keep their 1.5B users content.
      - mathiaspoint 1y ago
        Outside of really niche stuff like the Pinephone there aren't. Because of things like this Android is increasingly incompatible with that use model and these days it's pretty safe to assume "phone" == "corporate administration you have no control over."
joquarky 1y ago
I remember the turning point in one early relationship was when I uninstalled Bonsai Buddy from a friend's computer and caused a meltdown.
- kcplate 1y ago
  Fuck that purple gorilla.

jjani 1y ago

Having to caveat it with "in the early '00s" already invalidates your thesis; it means we've managed to largely fix this issue on PC without resorting to giving away device ownership.

bartread 1y ago
I don’t think it invalidates the argument at all. I think it’s more a reflection that people mostly use other devices, like phones and tablets, for tasks they might have used a PC for 20 years ago - at least outside an office environment. That’s not to say the PC experience hasn’t improved - certainly Windows is at least more secure - but that it’s not the only factor, and I don’t think it’s the biggest factor either. One data point for you: the last company I worked for, when I joined in 2017, already >50% of external users were accessing our service via mobile devices.
- pharrington 1y ago
  The formfactor is the biggest, possibly only, factor. The handheld formfactor works way better for most people than a huge (or even small) stationary brick, or even a laptop.
kcplate 1y ago
You think that companies adopting different technologies to discourage installing software that might be malicious because it hasn’t been reviewed as safe invalidates my argument? Ok, then.

jjav 1y ago

> You want to take a device that is targeted for “everyone” and not just tech savvy people and provide no control or standard to what can be loaded on it? The very idea of it is horrifying to me. Were you horrified by the Apple ][?

bartread 1y ago
This is no argument at all. When the Apple II was released microcomputers were still very much in the realms of enthusiasts, and were beginning to make inroads into education. The Apple II was never used by “everyone” and nobody expected it to be, even towards the end of its quite long life. No question, it was a stepping stone to where we are today but you can’t compare an enthusiast/early adopter product from nearly 50 years ago to contemporary Android and iOS devices that are intended for “everyone”, in the way you’re attempting with your comment.
kcplate 1y ago
Nope, but I didn’t have whole countries and millions of bad actors actively trying to steal information and act maliciously on that device either.

necovek 1y ago

That's easily solved, ain't it: check the "tech savvy" box, and all "safeguards" are off? Yet instead, we are getting increasingly fewer phones with unlockable bootloaders and root access available. What gives? I've also checked out my mom's phone a year or so back: she had so many crappy apps from official store that it was barely usable. Stores do not really help.

kcplate 1y ago
What possible motivation would Google or Apple have to appease such a small percentage of their user base? I’m “tech savvy” and I would never click that box. Frankly I can’t think of something more risky than installing some random piece of software on a device that I need and use everyday.
- necovek 1y ago
  If that's the case, what is a practical difference between you having access to your device or not? You could be installing random crap from the store, or not from the store. Or you could not be installing random apps from either. I don't feel any more protected by device restrictions. Yes, containerization helps, but I like having root on my device (eg. I backup different .sqlite files from different apps through ssh to my phone). My phone has FDE, and is probably not at all less "safe" than yours.
  - kcplate 1y ago
    There are a number of mobile phones out there that are fully open. If you need root, go buy one. You seem to have a specific need that I am quite sure that 99.999% of the mobile phone using world do not have and never will have. If I am apple, I recognize that making a phone that makes the .001% happy probably will frustrate the 99.999%. They are quite happy to give that market of maybe 150k users to someone else to keep their 1.5B users content.
    - mathiaspoint 1y ago
      Outside of really niche stuff like the Pinephone there aren't. Because of things like this Android is increasingly incompatible with that use model and these days it's pretty safe to assume "phone" == "corporate administration you have no control over."

joquarky 1y ago

I remember the turning point in one early relationship was when I uninstalled Bonsai Buddy from a friend's computer and caused a meltdown.

kcplate 1y ago
Fuck that purple gorilla.