4 ms·
You can't call the ability to jailbreak "free to do so", any more than a prison cell is "free to escape out of". Sure jailbreaks exist, but not for all devices
by mmmooo 14y ago
You can't call the ability to jailbreak "free to do so", any more than a prison cell is "free to escape out of".
Sure jailbreaks exist, but not for all devices, and not without significant efforts by non-apple personnel (and significant effort from apple personnel to stop said 'freedom').
- bpatrianakos 14y agoYou're factually and practically correct but the problem here is that you seem to be operating under the assumption that your preferences are shared by everyone else or should be shared by everyone else and that's where I think you're wrong. Apple has made a decision to operate in a locked-down way so they can control the experience. And as much as people want to say its some evil plan to make a bajillion dollars the simpler and more plausible answer is because being in control of the experience actually makes the platform better for its users and the monopoly is just aside effect of that. People buy iDevices because they work well for them, not because they lack the freedom to choose something else and certainly not because of lock-in as many would have us believe. Yeah, it takes effort to jailbreak your device but so what? It's not meant to be jail broken. Your prison analogy is not a good one at all. It's more like the freedom to work on your car. It's like a person who really likes Volkswagen Jettas and buys one but wants a spoiler, racing stripes, and a V8 engine. Volkswagen isn't going to promote you doing that nor will they help you but you're still free to do it if you want to put in the effort. And if not, then choose another car. Apple does things a certain way and there are pros and cons to it. Google and others do things differently and they have their pros and cons. But in the end no one has taken your freedom away. You may want an iDevice with the benefits of Android "freedom" (freedom is in quotes because in this context it's subjective) but if you got that then it would no longer be an Apple product because you've taken away the very thing that makes Apple's iStuff, iStuff. All of these arguments just smack of "I think I know what's best for everyone"-ism and "I'm entitled to XYZ and I don't get it then that means I have no freedom"-ism. Right now youve got the freedom to choose between Android, Windows Phone, and iOS (I know there are others but let's not be pedantic about it). You're free to choose any one of them or none of them. If you want to mishmash features of all three then you'll have to do that itself because no one is obligated to create a piece of technology that exactly suits your every desire. You pick what suits you best and one thing you are entitled to do is complain about it. But if the market as a whole doesn't agree then you probably won't get it. What I'm really saying is that you can criticize and complain and lobby for the things that you want all day long and that's fine but don't exaggerate and start saying you've lost your freedom because you haven't. This is the real world where the only way to even be able to obtain a thing that does most of what you want is for the company making it to be able to profit off of it and that means trade offs and decisions that you may not agree with but are nonetheless best for a certain demographic for which the thing is made for.