I don’t think I present a false dichotomy. I shared my own opinion. I appreciate that others may have different point of view.
Can you explain why you believe that allowing access to the hardware, only after explicitly and deliberately enabling access via some sort of hardware switch or whatnot, in a way that does not alter the default experience in any measurable way, conflicts with your preferences?
I can understand liking the software that it comes with by default, I just don't understand how allowing a different OS to be installed, if you choose to install it, conflicts with anything.
I never said that. But if we are already discussing this. How do you know that opening the hardware doesn’t mean significantly dropping iPhone security stance? I don’t know, I’m asking. I’m fine to be convinced it’s possible but that would require a real technical analysis how such hardware switch can be implemented, without words like “maybe” or “possibly”.
But I have personally hacked Android phones before by exploiting a zero day on an early firmware of my device that has since been patched and it was a huge pain requiring physical access to the device and a computer with a USB cable.
And I know that iPhones still have the exact same flaw because Cydia still exists.
So why do you believe you are secure if someone comes into physical posession of your phone?
Why is this argument ever even brought up?
I'm all for Apple allowing third party operating systems. If some world government wants to force Apple to allow users to install Debian, Android or whatever onto their iPhone hardware, that's great. No downsides. Write the referendum and I'll vote in favour.
As for the more common refrain that developers should be allowed to distribute apps outside Apple's walled garden, that does negatively affect me in three ways:
1. Unless Apple is allowed to make side-loading at least as unfriendly as it is on Android, many apps I use today will stop being distributed through the App Store. Want the Gmail app? Download Play Store for iOS. Want Lightroom? Download Creative Cloud Store for iOS. And suddenly all of these apps are no longer subject to Apple's strict privacy/tracking policies. That sucks.
2. I provide tech help to a dozen family members. I can't control what they do. I've had enough of dealing with Windows XP machines with Comet Cursor and a dozen other bits of malware on them. These days I've moved the worst offenders to iPads and providing them with tech support is no longer a source of tension headaches. No fucking way I'm supporting anything that has even the slightest chance of kinking that armour. It doesn't matter what I say. These people will follow any instruction provided by Google or Epic to install whatever app they've heard about.
3. Maybe I want to develop my own device and I want to write libraries for others to write apps for the device. Why should I support governments forcing device makers to give those libraries away to others and not respect license terms? I'm all for people hacking into devices they own, but if I distribute something with a license, I want my license terms to be respected - just as someone releasing under AGPL wants that license respected.
That’s a lot of speculation without any data behind it.
We have the biggest OS in history of the world and what you’re describing is absolutely not the case there.
One of the biggest game developers with arguably the most popular game at the time tried to push for it and eventually returned back with tail between its legs.
That's not equivalent to the status quo on Android.
2. That's a you problem. Learn to say no.
3. You already have to adhere to lots of government regulations.
2. Your lack of empathy is noted. But thanks for acknowledging that what I described is a real problem.
3. There are government regulations, therefore there should be more government regulations. Is that an argument?
I like my iPhone the way it is.
If you don't like it, don't choose it. Surely Android isn't so terrible that you're having difficulty deciding between it and Apple's walled garden? Surely it's not THAT bad.
Let’s make deal, shall we? You’ll use Android for a year and at end of 2024 you’ll let me know?
> Or is Android not good enough for you?
No. And I’ve used it enough to not absurdly offer it as an alternative in a valid complaint.
Funny, since you can make the same argument for sideloading apps.
False, if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation and court order. Epic will sue Apple repeatedly until anything standing in the way of a seamless install of Epic Game Store is stripped from the process. A seamless sideloading/alt-store experience means apps I use today stop being distributed in the App Store. Why would Google distribute the gmail app in the App Store where they're unable to track user activity, when they could distribute it in the Play Store For iOS and not have to comply with Apple's pro-consumer privacy policies?
And what’s that?
> False, if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation and court order. Epic will sue Apple repeatedly until anything standing in the way of a seamless install of Epic Game Store is stripped from the process. A seamless sideloading/alt-store experience means apps I use today stop being distributed in the App Store.
Absolutely, we’ll end up a situation where checks notes Epic returned with tail between its legs to Play Store, despite your absurd claims.
> Why would Google distribute the gmail app in the App Store where they're unable to track user activity, when they could distribute it in the Play Store For iOS and not have to comply with Apple's pro-consumer privacy policies?
This is the reason Google pays 15 billion to be default search engine on iPhone, so that they’ll remove their already marginal apps (expect for maybe maps) from dominant store on absolutely fanatical ecosystem.
...if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation...
Epic lost because legislation isn't currently on their side.
Can you elaborate what you find naive, simplistic and fundamentally wrong? I just want to understand some of the considerations. Is it because you would use the unlocked features and ruin the ease of use for yourself?
If the iOS walled garden is torn down by legislation, the result won’t be akin to Android. It will break down the status quo that any app I want is available from the App Store, and subject to Apple’s rules.
The status quo with Android is Google wanting the appearance of being open, but without being a commercially viable channel. This is because it was their choice, not dictated to them by legislation.
One does not exclude another.