That’s the perfect analogy. I use an iPhone and an Xbox for the same reasons... I don’t want to dick around with them. I want them to be special purpose devices. While my PC I will twiddle with endlessly.

Anecdotally, that's why I use PCs (on Linux and Windows depending on the context) and an iPhone. I want my computer to be an open system where I'm not dependent on a single company for either hardware or software.

But I want my phone to just work reliably. I actually don't want it to be a full-fledged computer.

"I just want to make calls reliably with my phone. Don't want color displays and all in it".

"I just want my phone to make calls and send plain text messages reliably. Don't want videos and gifs and camera in it."

"I just want a smartphone to make calls, send sms, basic whatsapp and take average pictures. Don't want it to become a DSLR".

"I want my phone to just work reliably. I actually don't want it to be a full-fledged computer. "

Interesting you say that, because your phone is already much (, much) more powerful than the full-fledged computers from just a few years back. The only reason you don't want it to be like 'traditional' full fledged computers because it doesn't work great that way right now. Once it does, you'll not want your phone to become something else.

I'm not necessarily talking about performance but mostly about features.

For instance a lot of friends using Android phones are shocked about iOS lack of a global filesystem.

But to me, this absence is a feature, not a bug. Having every app sandboxed at the OS level is a great thing to limit what can go wrong. I explicitely don't want a global filesystem on iOS.

To be clear, I would hate a full computer without a global filesystem. But I'm really fine with a phone not having one.

(By the way Apple did take tiny steps towards a public filesystem on iOS and I'm not super happy about that)

So what’s the purpose of a “global filesystem” besides having a repository where you can store files and share them across applications? You’ve been able to use iCloud to do that and install third party storage providers that work across apps since iOS 8.

Just to clarify: It's not the GPL that is not allowed on the store, it's the GPL that forbids putting software licensed under it on the store.

Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store.

Why do you think Wesnoth is on iOS?

> Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store.

In this case, you're effectively dual-licensing your software.

That is not related to GPL, yes you can use a different license, that is not the point, the point is there are many libraries and programs under GPL that can't be used on restrictive stores and it is a shame.

GPL gives you rights, the store restricts your rights so is incompatible with GPL.

Yup, and this is the GPL working as intended. The store doesn't allow you to redistribute the software, you must get your software from Apple.

Seems to be the right thing long-term, though it prevents you having that piece of GPL software that you want today.

Sad to see pieces of software relicensing so they weren't affected by such a clause, all because of the lure of being in the Mac app store.

No, Apple has to observe regulations. If e.g. a bank wants to do business in the US there are (lots of) regulations. If there were the political will to 'open up' the now closed iOS mobile ecosystem, such laws could be written.

Your comment appears to be not related with my parent comment, are you posting related to my consoloe comparison?

What are the regulation you are referring?

Sorry, that I was not clear. I meant to answer to your 'Apple can do what they want' part.

Regarding console I'm happy with you to have a device like a console. On the other hand I don't like that such an important worldwide ecosystem is closed and in the hand of one company. Would Apple e.g. have restored certificates for a much smaller company than Google? (but this is getting a bit offtopic here)

What I mean by 'Apple can do what they want' was in the limits of the law, if EU or US laws will find Apple guilty I will be happy but I am not sure this will happen since we have the consoles that are also locked.

I also don't like good hardware becoming just bricks because you can't repair it or you can't install a different OS but mentioning this opinion here will cause it getting downvoted (yeah all my post about Apple and right to repair and publishing schematics got downvoted)

Was anybody ever in any doubt these Apple positions the phone as explicitly not an open computing platform?

It’s actually got more open than its original launch, but it is clearly sold as an appliance.

>Was anybody ever in any doubt these Apple positions the phone as explicitly not an open computing platform?

I don't think many people think about it, so it6 is not like people are tricked to think is an open computer but they are not even consider the implication. Does average iOS user know that at any moment Apple can brick his device, can remove stuff from his device, can install whatever they want, do they consider that in future this devices will be just briks without the software/cloud part(at least with consoles you may be able to use games on disks for now)

On this topic, the smart speakers and to a larger extent smart displays from Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant (and maybe even the fire TV and Chromecast) are very reliant on connection to the server to deliver anything of value.

I don't think people realize that it can just go away at any time. I'm sure the terms and conditions allow a clause which shows the company to shut down these services at any time without facing a requirement to buy back these (now useless) gadgets.

And this is different from Google how?

the funny thing is, IIRC, Google are the ones that have *actuallt8 done this.

Do you think that Apple servers will be up forever? That the app you bought today will be there for you to re-install in 20 years?

My point is that incidents show regular people the things that are usually "hidden" in big EULAs, is good to have such big incidents we can link to, like when someone tells ypou that is better to keep your data on Google servers since they have brilliant engineers you can link to incidents like the Google+ leaks to show that even Google can ignore security or make mistakes.

I don’t disagree, though I would say it’s an absurd point. I’m confident enough that Apple’s servers, hosted between GCP, AWS and Azure AFAIK, will outlast my current iPhone and my next few. Also that apps I bought even 10 years ago that are still of use and supported are available to me now.

The EULA that was breached here was an Enterprise agreement between Google and Apple. It will have been poured over by teams of lawyers. An individual at Google had decided, “fuck it, whats the worst that could happen?” and found out.

I’ve seen people frequently be accused of being “Apple apologist” on this site. What I’m reading is the exact opposite. Google are responsible for their actions, no-one else. As is constantly pointed out, there is an alternative to iPhone, where choice and “freedom” exist, but it comes at a non-financial cost.

I am happy with the Apple decision to force their EULAs for the reason more people can see now what is inside the EULAs.

Not all people change their device every 2 years, there should be no reason why you could not use (or give to someone else to continue using) a device(phone,tablet, TV, watch) until it just falls apart.

So let me get this straight - your take away from this is that Apple is bad because they could remove apps from your device, but Google is OK, even though the have actually removed apps and because reasons. We’re done here.

No, I am not on Google camp, Google did not respect the EULA, Apple was right to apply the EULA, so all was legal and fair as per the Apple and Google contract.

My point is that big EULAs are bad, not controlling your hardware is bad (no matter if is Apple,MS or Google), this incident makes it clear what rights you have with this kind of EULAs

That's debatable. While legitimate access has increased, one can make the argument that today's iPhones are much more locked down than their predecessors, some of which had unpatchable bugs in the early stages of their bootloaders that basically rendered Apple's protections useless.