> Apple's curation of the iOS environment is a FEATURE for me, not a bug. It leads to drastically increased stability and security, and means I don't have to sysadmin my telephone.

That's fine. So why shouldn't it be possible to install apps on iOS via Google Play or Amazon, and if you trust only Apple you could just not use those?

> Uh, no. Android phones are generally CHEAPER, so why does it take "money" to leave iOS?

Because it's not just the price of the phone, it's the cost of transitioning to a different ecosystem, which can easily be more than the entire price of the phone.

It could be possible, but I see no reason to compel it. If you want other stores, use a different platform.

> If you want other stores, use a different platform.

But that's the problem. They're forcing you to choose both together when it should be an independent variable.

App developers also don't get to choose which phone their customers have already bought.

That isn't a problem, though. You're not entitled to dictate terms to the vendor here in any sense other than "I'll buy that" or "I won't buy that."

Computer developers don't get to choose which computer their customers have, either.

Seriously, I have no idea why people get so salty about this.

> You're not entitled to dictate terms to the vendor here in any sense other than "I'll buy that" or "I won't buy that."

Society, as a collective, does reserve that right through anti-trust laws.

> Computer developers don't get to choose which computer their customers have, either.

Both Microsoft, and Steam monopoly powers have been called into question previously. Microsoft was specifically required to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows.

Antitrust laws are applicable when one company controls an entire market.

As has been noted exhaustively, Apple is a MINORITY player in the smartphone market. Antitrust doesn't enter into it.

MSFT, OTOH, absolutely WAS in a monopolistic position when the browser wars were raging, and was found to have abused that monopoly power. Apple isn't even CLOSE to that level of dominance, unless you define the market as "people who use Apple devices," which is transparently risible.

Out of curiosity, do you own any consoles?

Apple has lied to us to make us believe that in order to have a secure device, we have to allow them to hand review every app that goes into the store. This is a false dichotomy.

We can have alternate App Stores run by other trusted/neutral entities or app side loading or certificates and tools like gatekeeper for iOS. We can have an App Store where Apple does not censor things that don’t meet its curation preferences (like nudity, vape/weed apps and previously crypto). I don’t even understand consumers who defend apples right to make these choices on our behalf

> I'll fight whoever suggests this is a good model for the desktop, but on the phone it's EXACTLY what I want.

This should apply to mobile too. Keep our phones secure, but give us the freedom to make our own choices

They haven't lied. They've said that this is HOW they're keeping the platform secure. Perhaps there are other ways, but this is the path they've chosen.

>We can have alternate App Stores run by other trusted/neutral entities or app side loading or certificates and tools like gatekeeper for iOS.

You could, if Apple wanted. Apple doesn't want to. If you want that, use another platform.

I'm 100% fine with the phone being curated by the vendor in this way, largely because I trust Apple and Apple's motivations here. (I wouldn't trust Google in a similar situation, since their revenue is dependent on advertising and monetizing data about their users.)

But you get to choose who to trust and who not to. If you dont trust "3rd party app store" then dont use it. The whole point of monopoly (or monopsoly) powers and why they are bad isnt because of now, its because of tomorrow. You buy a device, fully trusting apple. Its your device, you own it, you trust apple. Tomorrow, you find out that company-you-dont-trust is a partner with apple, and the entire app store is potentially compromised because of it (according to your values). You now have no option to change you are stuck. Forced into their system which you no longer want. They changed and you dont have another option.

But there IS another option, so your argument falls apart.

Which is what? Use a different phone? Thats not always an option except maybe to the priveledged

> and means I don't have to sysadmin my telephone.

This is exactly why I've stuck with Apple for my phone. I don't upgrade every year and all that nonsense, but I prefer their ecosystem for just that reason.

I don't want to use my phone that much that I would want to load all kinds of different software onto it, especially if it compromises the privacy and security in any way.

I even consider the limited software a feature in that way.

The simplicity is what I like about it.