7 ms·

You can say that about a lot of things in life. Legalized gambling, for example. Tons of people ruin their lives with it and this creates big externalities for

by chongli 29d ago

You can say that about a lot of things in life. Legalized gambling, for example. Tons of people ruin their lives with it and this creates big externalities for society. But we tolerate it so that everyone has the freedom to gamble. Apple on the other hand offers a locked down product that many people want because they don’t trust themselves. I think a lot of people have short memories for all the hacking and spyware that plagued Windows users a couple decades ago. I think we also need to remember that Apple is not the government so people have alternatives to buying their devices. Personally, I think people should have the right to buy a locked down device. It’s not on Apple to provide open competitors to their product. And why should developers have a right to develop for the platform? Heck, I wanted the iPhone back when it didn’t even have 3rd party apps at all.

rstat1 29d ago
>>hacking and spyware that plagued Windows users a couple decades ago And that still plagues every computing platform now. Including Apple platforms. So the lockdown clearly didn’t completely solve that problem like a lot of people seem to claim
- ifwinterco 29d ago
  iOS is noticeably better for this though because it's more locked down, there is a real tradeoff there
user43928 29d ago
> Apple on the other hand offers a locked down product that many people want because they don’t trust themselves The idea that, for many people purchasing an iPhone, the inability to install apps from alternative stores or the web is a selling point seems rather questionable. On top of that this could easily be provided by an optional switch that enables you to enforce this on your own device if you so desire. It is a poor reason to request that all app distribution for everyone else also has to go through Apple and its terms, basically for your convenience.
- chongli 28d ago
  I’ve already given one reason why the switch is a bad idea. Another reason is that powerful third parties such as Meta and Google could force users to disable their own protections and give those apps full access to all data as a condition of installation. Ultimately, an option becomes a requirement and then the protection for users is totally gone.

by chongli 29d ago

rstat1 29d ago

>>hacking and spyware that plagued Windows users a couple decades ago And that still plagues every computing platform now. Including Apple platforms. So the lockdown clearly didn’t completely solve that problem like a lot of people seem to claim

ifwinterco 29d ago
iOS is noticeably better for this though because it's more locked down, there is a real tradeoff there

user43928 29d ago

> Apple on the other hand offers a locked down product that many people want because they don’t trust themselves The idea that, for many people purchasing an iPhone, the inability to install apps from alternative stores or the web is a selling point seems rather questionable. On top of that this could easily be provided by an optional switch that enables you to enforce this on your own device if you so desire. It is a poor reason to request that all app distribution for everyone else also has to go through Apple and its terms, basically for your convenience.

chongli 28d ago
I’ve already given one reason why the switch is a bad idea. Another reason is that powerful third parties such as Meta and Google could force users to disable their own protections and give those apps full access to all data as a condition of installation. Ultimately, an option becomes a requirement and then the protection for users is totally gone.