14 ms·

>All in all, still extremely anti-consumer. One thing that ticks me off about this conversation is they are always framed as anti-consumer, instead of anti-dev

>All in all, still extremely anti-consumer. One thing that ticks me off about this conversation is they are always framed as anti-consumer, instead of anti-developer. It's Tim Sweeney, Mark Zuckerberg, and the ad networks who have the biggest gripe with these policies, not consumers. Consumers are the ones who bear the brunt of the cost when it comes to developers who desperately need to exercise their right to capture every and any piece of data the OS provides. >If I can download and run arbitrary code on my Mac--even if I have to jump through scary warnings--why should I not be able to do so on my phone? We saw how developers used that "freedom" - now all almost all software runs in a remote server and is delivered through a sandbox (and even then developers try as hard as possible to poison that as well).

Barrin92 1mo ago
>who desperately need to exercise their right to capture every and any piece of data the OS provides. thankfully the EU has extensive privacy regulations prohibiting developers from doing just that, so we can enjoy open platforms instead of being at the mercy of a private corporations protection racket as if it's the 19th century
- graemep 29d ago
  Are those regulations adequately enforced? Lots of smaller developers out of jurisdication, and lots of bigger ones treat it as a cost of doing business: the data is worth more than the fines.
- nemothekid 29d ago
  >open platforms instead of being at the mercy of a private corporations protection racket as if it's the 19th century But your gripe is not about open platforms. Your gripe is that Apple iOS is not an open platform. Those are two different things, there are open platforms out there. My complaint is that iOS as a closed platform is a feature, and Apple has been a good steward for that platform that has made it a stable computing platform for the general public. Corporations (cosplaying as "poor indie developers"), are simply frustrated that Apple isn't allowing them to abuse their users for extra dollars. These same "developers" who pretend to care so deeply about open platforms don't even distribute their software on Linux. The concern trolling about open platforms is a farce. Picking on epic games again - you can't play Fortnite on Linux. It's "open platforms for me, but not for thee" Forget the advertising angle, lets look at payments. Apple forces you to use their payment processor and they charge a larger fee. What does the consumer get? They get a single control panel for all their subscriptions that they can cancel at any time. "Developers" hate this - not because they want to charge you less, but so that they can make you jump through 50 hoops in order to cancel. If I have to choose between two evil corporations, Apple and the greater tech industry that shit on the web, I'm picking Apple. If I care about open platforms, I'll move to an open platform, not lobby the government for Apple to open theirs.
  - Barrin92 29d ago
    >, but so that they can make you jump through 50 hoops in order to cancel. again, doesn't apply in the EU. Consumer Rights Directive passed a few years ago stipulates that any subscription must be as easy to cancel as it is to sign up, and created a 'two click rule'. Practical example of this is Amazon, here in the EU it takes exactly two clicks, in a lot of other jurisdictions you have to jump through half a dozen pages. You might have to choose between two evil corporations, my point was I don't. Here we can open Apple up so they don't get to extract platform rent and I'm still not at the mercy of Tim Sweeney. Being governed by robber barons instead of your own government is an ideological choice, if you enjoy living like that fine but we don't. A closed platform can only ever be a feature if you're so disempowered that private companies are running circles around you, otherwise it's just anti-consumer and anti-developer behavior.
- techpression 29d ago
  We can? Last time I checked everyone and their mother is collecting all kinds of data for nefarious purposes. EU has a snowball's chance in hell keeping up, and when they eventually get around to issuing a fine it's so small and irrelevant compared to money made that it's business as usual.
boomlinde 29d ago
Anti-developer is anti-consumer because it creates a barrier to entry as a supplier in a market where consumers create the demand, but I suppose the main thesis behind calling it anti-consumer is that competition among suppliers is generally considered good for consumers for keeping prices and product/service quality in check.
wiseowise 29d ago
> We saw how developers used that "freedom" - now all almost all software runs in a remote server and is delivered through a sandbox (and even then developers try as hard as possible to poison that as well). Evil developers forcing poor users to download their applications. Guess we all to suffer with braindead supercomputers in our pockets, because granny gran installed hax to get free gems for a gacha (that she downloaded from Apple approved App Store).
- bryanrasmussen 29d ago
  >Evil developers forcing poor users to download their applications. Stupid users who have neglected to attain perfect and absolute information regarding all the things that the applications they install will do.
- nemothekid 29d ago
  >Guess we all to suffer with braindead supercomputers in our pockets Complete non-sequitur. You don't have to suffer, you can just buy a different platform. Android has had alternate stores for decades. This is concern trolling. If you cared about having an open platform, you could just not buy apple. But that's not what you care about - you want to be able to push your shitty software onto other people's supercomputers without Apple getting in the way.
  - wiseowise 29d ago
    > You don't have to suffer, you can just buy a different platform. Android has had alternate stores for decades. Because the only difference between Apple and Android crap is only software, of course? I won't fit into the message limit if I start listing issues that I have with Android garbage. > If you cared about having an open platform, you could just not buy apple. But that's not what you care about Where did I say anything about open platform? Are you hallucinating LLM or something? I just want to install whatever I write for myself without going through the hoops of weekly resigning and big brother approving what I do on a device that I OWN. > you want to be able to push your shitty software onto other people's supercomputers without Apple getting in the way. What are you even talking about, lmao!
krzyk 29d ago
> We saw how developers used that "freedom" - now all almost all software runs in a remote server and is delivered through a sandbox (and even then developers try as hard as possible to poison that as well). What are you talking about exactly? On linux I can run any software I want, and how is that bad?
- nemothekid 29d ago
  Your approach is fine, if that is something important to use then use linux. What I dislike is taking a platform where the sandbox is a feature, and crying you aren't allowed to shit in the sandbox.
  - krzyk 28d ago
    It depends. For some sandbox might be feature on that platform, but for others it might be a bug.
ryandrake 29d ago
Thank you. There is a huge difference between "developers being able to do anything they want to the user's system" and "users being able to do anything they want with their own system." I'm strongly against the former and strongly for the latter. App developers have shown time and time again that they will abuse every single resource on the user's system they can get their claws into. If they can get it, they will use APIs meant for accessibility and disabled users to remote-control your system. If they can get it, they will use location/GPS when their app has nothing to do with location. If they can get it, they will spam you with notifications and alerts. The USER needs to have control over these and the ability to stop abusive developers from running roughshod over their computers.
m463 29d ago
The laws apple must comply with apply to protection of consumers, so... anti-consumer.

Barrin92 1mo ago

>who desperately need to exercise their right to capture every and any piece of data the OS provides. thankfully the EU has extensive privacy regulations prohibiting developers from doing just that, so we can enjoy open platforms instead of being at the mercy of a private corporations protection racket as if it's the 19th century

graemep 29d ago
Are those regulations adequately enforced? Lots of smaller developers out of jurisdication, and lots of bigger ones treat it as a cost of doing business: the data is worth more than the fines.
nemothekid 29d ago
>open platforms instead of being at the mercy of a private corporations protection racket as if it's the 19th century But your gripe is not about open platforms. Your gripe is that Apple iOS is not an open platform. Those are two different things, there are open platforms out there. My complaint is that iOS as a closed platform is a feature, and Apple has been a good steward for that platform that has made it a stable computing platform for the general public. Corporations (cosplaying as "poor indie developers"), are simply frustrated that Apple isn't allowing them to abuse their users for extra dollars. These same "developers" who pretend to care so deeply about open platforms don't even distribute their software on Linux. The concern trolling about open platforms is a farce. Picking on epic games again - you can't play Fortnite on Linux. It's "open platforms for me, but not for thee" Forget the advertising angle, lets look at payments. Apple forces you to use their payment processor and they charge a larger fee. What does the consumer get? They get a single control panel for all their subscriptions that they can cancel at any time. "Developers" hate this - not because they want to charge you less, but so that they can make you jump through 50 hoops in order to cancel. If I have to choose between two evil corporations, Apple and the greater tech industry that shit on the web, I'm picking Apple. If I care about open platforms, I'll move to an open platform, not lobby the government for Apple to open theirs.
- Barrin92 29d ago
  >, but so that they can make you jump through 50 hoops in order to cancel. again, doesn't apply in the EU. Consumer Rights Directive passed a few years ago stipulates that any subscription must be as easy to cancel as it is to sign up, and created a 'two click rule'. Practical example of this is Amazon, here in the EU it takes exactly two clicks, in a lot of other jurisdictions you have to jump through half a dozen pages. You might have to choose between two evil corporations, my point was I don't. Here we can open Apple up so they don't get to extract platform rent and I'm still not at the mercy of Tim Sweeney. Being governed by robber barons instead of your own government is an ideological choice, if you enjoy living like that fine but we don't. A closed platform can only ever be a feature if you're so disempowered that private companies are running circles around you, otherwise it's just anti-consumer and anti-developer behavior.
techpression 29d ago
We can? Last time I checked everyone and their mother is collecting all kinds of data for nefarious purposes. EU has a snowball's chance in hell keeping up, and when they eventually get around to issuing a fine it's so small and irrelevant compared to money made that it's business as usual.

boomlinde 29d ago

Anti-developer is anti-consumer because it creates a barrier to entry as a supplier in a market where consumers create the demand, but I suppose the main thesis behind calling it anti-consumer is that competition among suppliers is generally considered good for consumers for keeping prices and product/service quality in check.

wiseowise 29d ago

> We saw how developers used that "freedom" - now all almost all software runs in a remote server and is delivered through a sandbox (and even then developers try as hard as possible to poison that as well). Evil developers forcing poor users to download their applications. Guess we all to suffer with braindead supercomputers in our pockets, because granny gran installed hax to get free gems for a gacha (that she downloaded from Apple approved App Store).

bryanrasmussen 29d ago
>Evil developers forcing poor users to download their applications. Stupid users who have neglected to attain perfect and absolute information regarding all the things that the applications they install will do.
nemothekid 29d ago
>Guess we all to suffer with braindead supercomputers in our pockets Complete non-sequitur. You don't have to suffer, you can just buy a different platform. Android has had alternate stores for decades. This is concern trolling. If you cared about having an open platform, you could just not buy apple. But that's not what you care about - you want to be able to push your shitty software onto other people's supercomputers without Apple getting in the way.
- wiseowise 29d ago
  > You don't have to suffer, you can just buy a different platform. Android has had alternate stores for decades. Because the only difference between Apple and Android crap is only software, of course? I won't fit into the message limit if I start listing issues that I have with Android garbage. > If you cared about having an open platform, you could just not buy apple. But that's not what you care about Where did I say anything about open platform? Are you hallucinating LLM or something? I just want to install whatever I write for myself without going through the hoops of weekly resigning and big brother approving what I do on a device that I OWN. > you want to be able to push your shitty software onto other people's supercomputers without Apple getting in the way. What are you even talking about, lmao!

krzyk 29d ago

nemothekid 29d ago
Your approach is fine, if that is something important to use then use linux. What I dislike is taking a platform where the sandbox is a feature, and crying you aren't allowed to shit in the sandbox.
- krzyk 28d ago
  It depends. For some sandbox might be feature on that platform, but for others it might be a bug.

ryandrake 29d ago

Thank you. There is a huge difference between "developers being able to do anything they want to the user's system" and "users being able to do anything they want with their own system." I'm strongly against the former and strongly for the latter. App developers have shown time and time again that they will abuse every single resource on the user's system they can get their claws into. If they can get it, they will use APIs meant for accessibility and disabled users to remote-control your system. If they can get it, they will use location/GPS when their app has nothing to do with location. If they can get it, they will spam you with notifications and alerts. The USER needs to have control over these and the ability to stop abusive developers from running roughshod over their computers.

m463 29d ago

The laws apple must comply with apply to protection of consumers, so... anti-consumer.