The capabilities that I paid for are what I got. I did not pay for a device that lets me install whatever app or widget I want. I paid for an iPhone knowing exactly what it was and wasn't capable of and I paid for that specifically because I know that Apple doesn't need to dedicate resources to anything other than my device. Taking that away changes the entire ecosystem and all the benefits presented by it.

Look at Macs vs. PCs. There are entire industries dedicated to fixing the problems presented by the amount of options available on a PC. I don't want that. I want a device that I know works to do the things I need it to do. If the day comes where I need to do something I can't, I'll need to find another device.

So, will you be happy if the government asks Apple to remove every messenger that allows encryption? That's what users in China get.

Also, it's nice that you mention Macs. On Macs, you can install any app bypassing the AppStore. As it should be on a proper computer, and iPhone IS a computer.

Have you seen what the average Mac user’s computer often looks like? It’s often a mess of five years old Adobe flash update messages, and adware like MacKeeper. I know because I’ve had to spend hours cleaning this trash up from machines belonging to friends and family. Meanwhile this has never been an issue on the iPhone.

The lack of UX-degrading software on the iPad is also the primary reason why I’ve been pushing my friends and family away from the Mac and onto the iPad. With the limited software ecosystem of the iPad, there’s far less things for them to screw up on the Mac.

Well, some people just love their chains. It is ok, I guess, their right to agree to bondage. But why do they insist that everyone else should be as enslaved as they are themselves?

And yes,I've seen Macs of average users. Never saw anything really wrong there. You are exaggerating the issue.

They're not enslaved. No one is forcing anyone to buy a Mac or an iPhone. As long as you have another option, your whole point is irrelevant.

This false argument is done to death by Apple apologists. Apple sells the device, but somehow feels itself entitled to control what the user can and can't do to it even after sale. It shouldn't be their business which apps a user wants to run on the device.

"This false argument"

Why don't you address it then? There is a world of more open software and hardware out there if you want that freedom. Why should everyone be subject to exactly the product you want?

It was addressed a lot of times before, but OK, I'll do it again.

You see, you too want the product I am describing, but you are too myopic to understand it. Maybe it is because you come from a better place than I, where the government does not actively censor app stores. Imagine, that some day Apple will remove the app you use, would you still say 'ok, I knew what product I bought'?

With iOS devices, you don't buy a product that can run a set of apps. You buy a product where the app you use may stop working any day, because some random moderator or executive at Apple will decide this way.

>You buy a product where the app you use may stop working any day

This has happened to me with more products than I can count on both the Mac and PC side and with nearly every mobile device I've ever used. Tons of apps on SymbianOS and Windows Mobile that worked on one device didn't work on the next device I bought. The current environment is a vast improvement on everything that came before it.

Maybe that's why you're being so condescending. We've lived through the evolution that got us here while you, quite clearly, think that open, by default, equals better simply because it's better for you as an individual. There are many, many people that view the iPhone environment and Apple's ecosystem as the better option. They're obviously all wrong.

You failed to address the argument.

In a market where both options exist why should one change to be like the one you prefer?

You failed to understand that there are no options for iPhone apps market, and users are open to all kinds of abuse: by Apple themselves and by authoritarian governments like in China or Russia. Now, I happen to live in an authoritarian country and I'm kinda more inclined to be not ok with the company that removes access to apps that fail to give up user data to government crooks.

You claim that users 'agree' to this when they buy Apple devices. But to what exactly that agree? That apple can take away any app they use, any time? Even the one that was perfectly available when buying the device?

The 'deal' you get with apple by buying their hardware can be altered at any time, so the only thing you can do is pray that they don't alter it any further.

Apple doesn't need me to carry water for them, but you're actually damaging the case for open hardware and software by carrying on like a porkchop because closed hardware and software is also available.

> You claim that users 'agree' to this when they buy Apple devices.

I claimed no such thing. Read my words directly and please don't put your own spin on them.

In a market where both options exist why should one change to be like the one you prefer?

Yeah. Just read this fresh news: "Google is apparently taking down all/most fediverse apps from the Play Store" [1]. To quote source:

"Google is apparently taking down all/most fediverse apps from google play on the grounds that that some servers in the fediverse engage in hate speech"

THIS is what you are so tirelessly advocating for

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24304275

I don't understand how that's any different than Google? China has a country-wide firewall too so, even if you have an Android phone, there's no way to get around that without breaking the law.

Also, what happens on a Mac has no bearing on what happens on the iPhone even if I made an analogy using the Mac. I need that type of access on my Mac. If they ever remove that, I'll need to find another option. That's not the case with the iPhone so your point is moot.

> I don't understand how that's any different than Google?

With Android, at least you can sideload the apps, and firewalls can be circumvented fairly easily. As for laws, well, not all laws are to be obeyed.

And on an iPhone, you can jailbreak and install apps too. At least in that case, you need technical knowledge and a willful understanding that you're voiding any kind of support.

Tell that to the people living in China.

No I don’t want any of that. I want the iPhone as-is.

You understand why others find it strange you don't and why they do though, right?

I think it’s strange that others (a small subset of people) want to take something great and ruin it. I understand that someone wants to tinker with their phone, but in that case that’s just not what an iPhone is for. It never has been.

You think that allowing another app store will ruin your iPhone?

That's incorrect. Just don't use it.

> Just don't use it

What's the argument here, why not just don't use an iPhone then? Why turn an iPhone into more of an Android? I have an iPhone because I don't want to be like an Android. It's a feature to me that this (and other possibilities, bad and good) is not possible, hence why I bought it.

Your essentially saying, you won't use hardware x because software y is available. Allowing me to use software y does not impact you.

Me choosing to use hardware x because software y is unavailable does not impact you either. You don't like iPhone or any "i" environment, don't use it.

You have to understand that to many of us it is very much a feature that it's not possible to sideload or allow more control of your device. It's not lack of a feature, it is a feature. Just as much as a feature to you is the ability to sideload or take more control. This is why I should buy an iPhone and you should not. My preferences are different than yours. I do not want you, myself, or others to have some of these abilities; not merely the option not to use them.

I very much like the iPhone because of design architecture differences over Android. It's not perfect but (imo) closer to perfect than Android. We live in a world with many options and not all must subscribe to the same paradigm.

Sorry because it's been jailbroken you are forced to use alternate stores on iOS. Or you could just not use it.

> I have an iPhone because I don't want to be like an Android.

But you don't have to have it be like Android.... All you have to do is not install other app sores.

The lack of ability to install other App Stores reduces fragmentation and potentially improves the overall user experience of the product.

If I wanted choice in App Stores I would buy an Android phone. I don't care about choice of App Stores and I prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps. Therefore, I bought an iOS device.

> I don't care about choice of App Stores and I prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps.

And you can have that. By not installing other app stores.

> reduces fragmentation

You don't have to fragment anything. Just only use the Apple App store.

> If I wanted choice in App Stores

You are not forced into choosing anything. All you have to do is not install other app stores, and you don't have to worry about choice.

> improves the overall user experience of the product.

You can have this improvement! If the Apple app store provides this value, then just only use the Apple app store.

All these points are moot as the main Appstore would be made much less valuable because it is assumed many major app players would diverge away. Even quoting the line, it was still largely glossed over:

> ...prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps.

What is consistent when every app player is part of a different app store? Suddenly Microsoft has their own, Google has their own, Epic Games as their own, etc.

No thank you.

> What is consistent

What is consistent would be your experience if you choose to only use the Apple App store. That experience would remain consistent.

> No thank you.

Then don't use those app stores?

If the conversation is about your rights, as an Apple user, then other people doing what they want with their own phones does not matter.

Someone can, right now, remove their app from the Apple app store, and nobody would claim that if they did they, then they are infringing on your rights as a user. So I am not sure why you would bring that up.

Nobody would claim that you are forced to do anything, if an app just removed themselves completely from an app store, so that is not relevant.

I don't understand this argument of pushing for change and if people don't like the change, well don't use it.

Why don't you just not use it then if you don't like it the way it is?

I think it's strange that you don't want me to have the product I want to have. Nobody is forcing you to buy an Apple product, and there are plenty of stellar alternative products from numerous other brands.

The main issue with iOS isn't really so much iOS itself but the secondary effects it has over the entire industry - after all it has been very clear that Microsoft is salivating over the prospect of being Apple v2.0 and having as much control over the PC ecosystem as Apple has over the iOS ecosystem.

Are you telling me there is no “Linux of mobile devices” out there? I’m struggling to recall but I feel like there have been many much more open devices _and_ OSs our there but it turns out consumers don’t care enough about those aspects to want that.

Well, Android is technically "Linux of mobile devices", though i guess you didn't mean that :-P.

But yes, the options are too few and things can go like apples - one bad Apple can spoil the bunch.

What is in the level on apple silicon?

I don't want Apple exploiting their vendor lock-in and robbing other companies of 30% sales of a digital only product, even if it doesn't personally impact me. That is not strange or hard to understand IMHO.

>Nobody is forcing you to buy an Apple product, and there are plenty of stellar alternative products from numerous other brands.

We want to fix things (even in companies that we otherwise might like) that we think are morally unacceptable. That's how progress is made.

You can advocate your own position too, nothing wrong with both of us doing so.