I admit they are better than Google on the privacy issue, but should we be grateful for having an alternative that abuses us in different ways?
PS: I own zero Apple devices (partly because of the reasons you have, not for the way you are misrepresenting those reasons).
Slowing down old phones without notice or permission wasn't the best response to aging batteries. Even Apple didn't deny it was wrong. They apologized, once they were caught.
And the MagSafe connector was not a common failure point.
Another reason: the multiplicity of ports and bunches of things that all use USB-A.
I don't know what criteria they actually use, but this is at best incredibly inconsistent. There's heaps of competing mail apps, calendars, camera apps, photo apps, weather apps, notes apps, reminders app, messaging apps on iOS, including a Google one in most of those categories.
https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/27/apple-is-growing-rotten-to...
Calling that "a bit too soon to forget" seems...problematic on several levels.
I think your clocks are just broken.
> Slowing down old phones without notice or permission wasn't the best response to aging batteries.
Sure, it wasn't handled well, but you said that they did it to force upgrades... That is patently incorrect in my opinion. Apple are far superior at keeping old devices updated than most actors in the Android world (as a comparison point).
> And the MagSafe connector was not a common failure point.
And your original post complained that "and sells more dongles by eliminating features and changing ports". What does replacing a proprietary magsafe connector with USB C have to do with Apple selling more dongles? There are now plenty of compatible third party options available in more than one category.
Regards app store policies: see sibling reply.
MagSafe was at once an example of a port changed (MagSafe 1 to 2) and a feature removed (replaced with USB) that didn't fit your explanation "removing a common failure point". Even Apple didn't try to claim that slowing down old phones was a well-designed compromise; instead, they apologized. And there are many examples of Apple removing apps for reasons other than "app quality/safety", for one such example, see my response to sibling reply.
These are not "other different issues", these are counterexamples. They may not be the issues you thought of when you read my first post but they were some of the issues I was thinking of.
Unexpected shutdowns vs. longer app launch times and other reductions in performance. a compromise.
But it's hard to trust that statement anyway. I'd be more likely to trust them if they'd reported that on their own, instead of hiding it for a year then issuing a PR statement when users proved it was happening.
And if that statement wasn't contradicted by their behavior in shutting down phones after the screen was replaced.
"First and foremost, we have never — and would never — do anything to intentionally shorten the life of any Apple product, or degrade the user experience to drive customer upgrades."
...
They forgot to mention the "unless the user tries to repair it" exception.
And if it was such a good, but misunderstood feature, why wasn't it touted as such in the first place, but denied initially, and then only acknowledged apologetically with the removal of such?
With the new Macook, however, I believe it was much lighter to the point that it would have pulled the laptop down with it upon someone tripping on the cord. It wasn't doing anything to benefit the user at that point. Because of this, they probably opted for a slimmer charging port (USB-C), and it went well with the growing use of USB-C in the industry.
I do wish they included more USB-C ports, however.
I do not know exactly the reason they opted for USB-C in the new MacBook Pro, however. I believe it would still be heavy enough for MagSafe to be effective. However at this point, USB-C is saturating the market and consolidation in their products may be a more important issue for Apple at this point.
What? This is not true at all. Source: I released an iOS app that used a non-apple third party to serve ads.
You should add "making more money" to the factors that went into this "well designed" approach. For example I don't see how not adding a MicroSD slot is nothing other than a method of forcing people into buying phones with larger internal storage (and making more money for Apple).
Your point about money would be better made if you just complained about the cost of larger internal storage, except then it would be obvious - Apple is profit motivated.
I can see your argument re profit in the past, but it is becoming less valid as the minimum flash memory size is increasing. I have just bought an ZTE with 32GB because that is all I need (32GB is the minimum you can get in a new iPhone.)
All these arguments that Apple is trying to "nickel and dime" their users is just tiring. Sure, they charge a lot, and they love profits, but that doesn't mean they are shitting on their users (like say cellular network providers do!) Edit: ironically it is probably because they charge so much for the device and it is so profitable that they don't need to chase every cent they could e.g. they don't provide payday loans to buy their phones!
Your functionality though, will be severely compromised. So the choices are:
1. Apple - hurts your wallet and your choice of apps (only the walled garden and nothing else). 2. Google - you're the product. not the phone. 3. Something else like the open source solution. You'll spend a lot of time here and will be restricted to the limited choice of apps on the the f-droid store.
So take your pic. I'm mostly in #2, with a billion or so others. I'm fully aware that me and my data are the product here, and whenever I start feeling that I made a deal with the devil, I simply tell myself that they can't know what's happening in my head. I then quickly shift focus and start thinking about something else. :P
To roughly quote another HN user who I don't recall, "Not everybody wants to sysadmin their phone".