Comment on Apple executives ban Fortnight from the App store
AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca 1 month agoI am in the camp that there is a benefit to the managed store. Since moving family members to iOS devices the number of times they have loaded malware or asked me for help installing ANYTHING dropped to zero.
Should techies be able to side load if they want? Sure, should that be a primary install method? No.
Nope. No reason that you should pay $1000 for a device and not, at the very least, be able to exert administrative control over it.
We wouldn’t accept this from Microsoft.
Should side loading be discouraged and warned about? Yes. Should it be impossible? Maybe through “parental” controls or MDM, but absolutely not out-of-the-box.
This is a sane take, though I personally do generally tend towards understanding and even valuing the walled garden to some degree. But this is what I’ve always felt underneath it, you found the words.
A walled garden without an exit is just a pretty prison.
What’s more, Windows S Mode proved perfectly that you could offer the “safe” functionality that Apple claim they need to protect their customers, without fucking things up for people who wanted to take responsibility for vetting applications themselves.
“I frequently interface with idiots, so I don’t feel it would be safe for you to have full control over the hardware you own.”
Monopolies and trusts are never beneficial to anyone save those who control them.
There’s a lot of very techy people who’ve never had to do family tech support on this platform.
Yes, the fact that Mum can’t accidentally install a shitty browser toolbar is a feature.
There is a benefit. And you can continue using the first-party store if you want. There’s no benefit to not being able to use 3rd-party ones to anyone but Apple and their investors.
I can see benefits of such limitations for say a company-owned devices with cyber-security in mind. When we talk about open market of devices in an increasingly “digital” world I am against limitations with profit in mind. It’s like many things in life. When you want to do or use something you have to learn to use it, often by getting burned or otherwise making a mistake. You having to fix family devices has nothing to do with it. Anyway I have no stake in this, I would never buy an Apple device. Companies pushing for “infinite growth” with such policies will be left in the dust imo, but the billionares will just move on after milking everything dry.
FreeBooteR69@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
All bootloaders should be able to be unlocked and able to install the OS of your choice. Also you should be able to choose whatever app store you want. It is your hardware, you payed for it.
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 1 month ago
If you want a customizable phone, yes. If you want a secured phone, no.
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 1 month ago
Apple’s software is malware
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 1 month ago
How so?
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Except Google is trying to limit this on Android phones as well (e.g. with SafetyNet).
If manufacturers had their way, there wouldn’t be any phones for one side.
Zak@lemmy.world 1 month ago
There’s nothing stopping manufacturers from permanently locking the bootloader. Some do and others don’t suggesting that the industry does not have a universal preference.
I do think Google wants it to be inconvenient enough to run a version of Android they haven’t blessed as one’s main phone that it has no chance to become mainstream, but that’s about the prospect of an OEM not bundling Google’s apps and store, not hobbyists running custom builds. If that sounds like an attempt to use market power to exclude competitors in violation of fair trading laws in a multitude of jurisdictions, you might be on to something.