Or these developers value different things than you and they’re spending their time how they want to benefit from those different values.

More likely they're simply not considering what the future will inevitably hold.

I’m sorry but this is just elitist nonsense. It’s disappointing to me that so many here simply can’t conceive that some people don’t share their priorities, and make conscious choices that reflect their own priorities.

I don't care if the inevitable future of the Mac platform is more locked down. In fact I welcome it. Does it limit what I can do with my device? Of course. Do I lament some of the control I’ve already given up? Sure. But the trade off is a safer and smoother computing experience that allows me to focus more on what I want to achieve with what the platform does provide.

I spent some time on Linux, I got into hyper-customizing every minute detail, I swapped out third party RAM and even early adopted SSDs by mounting them in the optical drive bay. I built a PC tower from personally selected components. I triple booted Windows and Linux on my first Intel Mac with community built boot loaders well before Boot Camp was a thing.

I can’t imagine spending my time that way anymore. I learned a lot, but now I just wanna get stuff done. I like having some of the system out of reach. I like knowing that it’s readonly and I like the kind of hardware advances Apple’s vertical integration has enabled.

It’s okay if we value different things, and it’s okay if we make different compromises to experience them.

I don't understand, so you don't care and it's okay if he cares, but if he says that people not caring is part of the problem then he's an elitist? What is your argument here, that he has no grounds to point out the apathy toward the long-term impact of your decisions?

You go so far as to validate the things he's concerned about and reiterate that you just don't care about them. I don't see what's wrong with pointing out the inherent shortsightedness of that line of thinking.

>it’s disappointing to me that so many here simply can’t conceive that some people don’t share their priorities, and make conscious choices that reflect their own priorities.

Have you considered that those people understand basic human psychology and that they take issue with the exact priorities that they are speaking against?

> I don't understand, so you don't care and it's okay if he cares, but if he says that people not caring is part of the problem then he's an elitist? What is your argument here, that he has no grounds to point out the apathy toward the long-term impact of your decisions?

What problem? How do my decisions to prefer one computer platform have any impact on GP or you or anyone? Apple turning the entire Mac line into iPads can’t and won’t eliminate more open platforms that you or GP may prefer. There’s no future inflection point where Apple has locked down the Mac platform in a way that enables them to storm into your home and replace your Linux computer (or whatever) with a Mac.

It’s elitist because the suggestion is that my preference represents an inability to evaluate the impact it has on me. It has no meaningful impact on you. It would have no meaningful impact on you if I decided to eschew all computing technology and go live in a monastery.

> You go so far as to validate the things he's concerned about and reiterate that you just don't care about them. I don't see what's wrong with pointing out the inherent shortsightedness of that line of thinking.

I am allowed to have different preferences and priorities. It’s not shortsighted, I see the compromise I’m making and I’m satisfied with what it provides in return. And since it in no way harms you or GP, it’s not your business to tell me to change my preferences.

> Have you considered that those people understand basic human psychology and that they take issue with the exact priorities that they are speaking against?

Have you considered that taking issue with other people’s preferences and imposing your own is far more controlling than just accepting that some people like different things, even if their preferences are personally limiting in a way you’re not comfortable with for yourself?

Why it is so difficult to consider that your calculations of risk-vs-reward are not universal nor inherently correct? They likely did the math and found that the risk is worth the reward to them. Actual money in the hand now is worth more than theoretical money in the future and so on.

I think it's funny that you accuse someone of not considering the alternatives with the supporting argument that 'they probably considered the alternatives'. What makes you think a for-profit company is thinking about the long-term negative impacts of their business on the industry when that's rarely the case in a free market?

>Actual money in the hand now is worth more than theoretical money in the future and so on.

Exactly, short-term profit will almost always trump long-term problems. Is that so difficult to consider?

This is a discussion regarding third party developers who use the Apple platform. I honestly have no clue how your statements tie into that in any way.

Third party developers are typically for-profit, and your argument was that those developers are capable of factoring in the long-term impacts of their decisions over the short-term profits when in reality that is very frequently not the case.

>They likely did the math and found that the risk is worth the reward to them

GP is saying that they likely did not do the math or that they prioritized short-term gains over the long-term impacts of their decisions as for-profit entities typically do.

I'm not sure what there was to misunderstand about my original comment since I more or less said exactly that.

>GP is saying that they likely did not do the math or that they prioritized short-term gains over the long-term impacts of their decisions as for-profit entities typically do.

No, GP said they did not consider future impact, period. I said that entities can consider future impact and still choose short term profit (and that it is often rational to do so). I then pointed out that assuming someone else didn't do the math because their results are different than your results is egoistical.

Those things aren't mutually exclusive.

That's even worse. Accidentally disagreeing with my values would be one thing but doing it on purpose... beyond the pale!

I think they aren't wasting time and money. Look at the article's author -- they are investing time to earn money selling their product on this platform.

Also, your point about Mac future is pure speculation at this point, which contradicts public statements from Apple.

Apple contradicts public statements from Apple pretty consistently, they have a habit of saying they won't ever do something right up until they do it. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about those types of concerns because when/if Apple does go back on their public statements you won't have much recourse.

I used to live in that past, and you know what, it was great to be able to sell development tools to developers instead of being forced to work only with enterprise customers, the only ones left willing to pay for tools.

Who will think of Apple's revenues in these trying times?

Everyone gets to pay for their tools, in some form even if it means getting them n-hand out of some flea market, just in some software development circles for some strange reason we get a bunch of people that feel entitled to earning money without paying others for their work.

With this argument iOS should have never taken off. Yet it’s better than “open” Android standards. Thing is Apple rewired people to stop thinking about RAM and CPUs and made developers write software that works on 4 year old iPhone. Try that in Android or Windows. Yes there is a down side to it but as long as consumers can win with the outcome I personally think it should be fine.

I think the value of app stores is going to continue to diminish as web apps gains traction. Look at webapps like Figma; it's quite powerful.

Apple purposely doesn't implement standards that would make progressive web apps possible on their platforms, and they don't allow third party applications on their mobile platforms.

Can we retire this already? I have been hearing it for ten years at least. Or will it stick around like the "year of the Linux desktop"?

It’s no different than consoles, and many users and developers are okay with it. For those who are not, there are other options.

Why is that so difficult?

"there are other options."

Until the day when there aren't other options -- which isn't so difficult to understand, really.

Slippery slope, with all evidence pointing to the contrary. Apple will never have a monopoly, linux will always be an alternative.

Not on apple hardware however.

So... don't buy it? Unless you think it's the best hardware on the market at the best price point.

And what makes you so important that every hardware provider has to bend to your will? I can't run Shor's Algorithm on my Raspberry Pi, whose fault is that?

Then why don't you rail on Linux? If one day there won't be any other options left, why not aim that way? Presumably that's a worse betrayal

How will Apple take away your options? That's what's difficult to understand. Either the FOSS/DIY approach has merit and will continue to thrive, or it'll die because it becomes impractical, neither of those courses have anything to do with Apple trying to prevent Joe Bloggs becoming a node in a botnet.

EDIT:

> isn't so difficult to understand, really

You may be confusing "understand" with "imagine"

Alright. How will there be no other options one day?

As expected, no answer.

"It's no different than consoles" is a pretty strong statement to make unsupported. There are many differences. You can make a more direct comparison between say, an iPhone and a game console, but a general-purpose laptop or desktop has very many differences from a game console, and ought to.

> "It's no different than consoles" is a pretty strong statement to make unsupported. There are many differences.

Like what? ps5/xbox series x/ps4/xbox one are very sophisticated, comparable to a modern desktop PC, yet it's totally closed off. Consoles no longer resemble embedded devices like previous gens. Heck, even the original nes used the MOS 6502 chip, which was very popular in PCs in the early days.

Consoles exist as an exception rather than the rule. You should be able to run whatever you want on what is basically an x86/RDNA2 gaming PC.

The openness of the PC should be enforced legally across anything that can be reasonably construed to be one.

> The openness of the PC should be enforced legally

Oh fuck no.

If you want a PC you can get a PC. Stop trying to force your mediocrity-for-all BS on those who don’t want PCs.