How exactly would allowing a third party operating system on the device negatively impact your user experience?

Can you explain why you believe that allowing access to the hardware, only after explicitly and deliberately enabling access via some sort of hardware switch or whatnot, in a way that does not alter the default experience in any measurable way, conflicts with your preferences?

I can understand liking the software that it comes with by default, I just don't understand how allowing a different OS to be installed, if you choose to install it, conflicts with anything.

> Can you explain why you believe that

I never said that. But if we are already discussing this. How do you know that opening the hardware doesn’t mean significantly dropping iPhone security stance? I don’t know, I’m asking. I’m fine to be convinced it’s possible but that would require a real technical analysis how such hardware switch can be implemented, without words like “maybe” or “possibly”.

Because through experiance I've never heard of anyone or been myself ever hacked by a third party through the internet using an Android phone over my entire tech career. I've been using Android since 1.0.

But I have personally hacked Android phones before by exploiting a zero day on an early firmware of my device that has since been patched and it was a huge pain requiring physical access to the device and a computer with a USB cable.

And I know that iPhones still have the exact same flaw because Cydia still exists.

So why do you believe you are secure if someone comes into physical posession of your phone?

Why is this argument ever even brought up?

Cydia mostly only exists for devices before the iPhone X that are susceptible to the Checkra1n USB exploit. Past that, jailbreaks are few and far between, with the latest A12+ jailbreak being Dopamine for iOS 15 - 15.4.1, and that was only released in May of this year. There is no iOS 16 jailbreak except for on those iPhone X or earlier devices.

> How exactly would allowing a third party operating system on the device negatively impact your user experience?

I'm all for Apple allowing third party operating systems. If some world government wants to force Apple to allow users to install Debian, Android or whatever onto their iPhone hardware, that's great. No downsides. Write the referendum and I'll vote in favour.

As for the more common refrain that developers should be allowed to distribute apps outside Apple's walled garden, that does negatively affect me in three ways:

1. Unless Apple is allowed to make side-loading at least as unfriendly as it is on Android, many apps I use today will stop being distributed through the App Store. Want the Gmail app? Download Play Store for iOS. Want Lightroom? Download Creative Cloud Store for iOS. And suddenly all of these apps are no longer subject to Apple's strict privacy/tracking policies. That sucks.

2. I provide tech help to a dozen family members. I can't control what they do. I've had enough of dealing with Windows XP machines with Comet Cursor and a dozen other bits of malware on them. These days I've moved the worst offenders to iPads and providing them with tech support is no longer a source of tension headaches. No fucking way I'm supporting anything that has even the slightest chance of kinking that armour. It doesn't matter what I say. These people will follow any instruction provided by Google or Epic to install whatever app they've heard about.

3. Maybe I want to develop my own device and I want to write libraries for others to write apps for the device. Why should I support governments forcing device makers to give those libraries away to others and not respect license terms? I'm all for people hacking into devices they own, but if I distribute something with a license, I want my license terms to be respected - just as someone releasing under AGPL wants that license respected.

> 1. Unless Apple is allowed to make side-loading at least as unfriendly as it is on Android, many apps I use today will stop being distributed through the App Store. Want the Gmail app? Download Play Store for iOS. Want Lightroom? Download Creative Cloud Store for iOS. And suddenly all of these apps are no longer subject to Apple's strict privacy/tracking policies. That sucks.

That’s a lot of speculation without any data behind it.

We have the biggest OS in history of the world and what you’re describing is absolutely not the case there.

One of the biggest game developers with arguably the most popular game at the time tried to push for it and eventually returned back with tail between its legs.

Epic had their tail between their legs because the law wasn't on their side. The whole point is that if the law is modified, and these aspects of Apple's operating systems are designed by legislation, Epic would prevail in court. And there's no reason to think Apple could make side-loading onerous, because Epic will complain to the courts about anything that stands in the way of a seamless install of the Epic Games Store on an iPhone.

That's not equivalent to the status quo on Android.

1. That hasn't happened on Android. It won't happen on iOS.

2. That's a you problem. Learn to say no.

3. You already have to adhere to lots of government regulations.

1. You are right that it probably won't happen if Apple is only required to make side-loading technically possible but not seamless. But somehow I doubt that if Governments force Apple to permit side-loading by law, entities like Epic won't repeatedly abuse the courts to ensure Apple makes side-loading as seamless as possible. This is OS design by legislation and court order. Therefore the analogy to Android is obviously absurd and irrelevant.

2. Your lack of empathy is noted. But thanks for acknowledging that what I described is a real problem.

3. There are government regulations, therefore there should be more government regulations. Is that an argument?

I agree, and I find it frustrating that people assume that the only way you can make an argument in favour of Apple's walled garden is ignorance. No. I'm a software programmer by trade. I use Linux extensively. I automate my home with Home Assistant and ESPHome. I'm not an idiot who doesn't understand the "but you can just choose to stay in the walled garden" argument. I understand the argument. I think it's naive, overly simplistic and fundamentally wrong.

I like my iPhone the way it is.

If you don't like it, don't choose it. Surely Android isn't so terrible that you're having difficulty deciding between it and Apple's walled garden? Surely it's not THAT bad.

Your argument boils down to being selfish.

Sure, "I value my time" is technically selfish but it's not quite as "bad" selfish as you're implying.

If company makes a widget which doesn't perfectly align with your opinion about how widgets should work, I think it's selfish to think you are entitled to force them to change their widget to suit you.

> If you don't like it, don't choose it. Surely Android isn't so terrible that you're having difficulty deciding between it and Apple's walled garden? Surely it's not THAT bad.

Let’s make deal, shall we? You’ll use Android for a year and at end of 2024 you’ll let me know?

I like my iPhone the way it is.

Good for you. Maybe stop preaching what you won’t practice, then.

And likewise. Or is Android not good enough for you?

Likewise what? I do not project my Stockholm syndrome on others.

> Or is Android not good enough for you?

No. And I’ve used it enough to not absurdly offer it as an alternative in a valid complaint.

> If you don't like it, don't choose it.

Funny, since you can make the same argument for sideloading apps.

True, if Apple gets to decide how inconvenient sideloading is. They'd make it as seamless as it is on Android. In which case the outcome would be similar to Android.

False, if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation and court order. Epic will sue Apple repeatedly until anything standing in the way of a seamless install of Epic Game Store is stripped from the process. A seamless sideloading/alt-store experience means apps I use today stop being distributed in the App Store. Why would Google distribute the gmail app in the App Store where they're unable to track user activity, when they could distribute it in the Play Store For iOS and not have to comply with Apple's pro-consumer privacy policies?

> In which case the outcome would be similar to Android.

And what’s that?

> False, if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation and court order. Epic will sue Apple repeatedly until anything standing in the way of a seamless install of Epic Game Store is stripped from the process. A seamless sideloading/alt-store experience means apps I use today stop being distributed in the App Store.

Absolutely, we’ll end up a situation where checks notes Epic returned with tail between its legs to Play Store, despite your absurd claims.

> Why would Google distribute the gmail app in the App Store where they're unable to track user activity, when they could distribute it in the Play Store For iOS and not have to comply with Apple's pro-consumer privacy policies?

This is the reason Google pays 15 billion to be default search engine on iPhone, so that they’ll remove their already marginal apps (expect for maybe maps) from dominant store on absolutely fanatical ecosystem.

Again—

...if we're talking about Apple's hands being forced by legislation...

Epic lost because legislation isn't currently on their side.

We use iPhone for corporate business. There are obvious advantages of locked phones as there are with standardized OS compared to customized linux system. Sensible arguments that make a lot of stuff much easier. But none of these arguments apply to private usage, it applies to a third party wanting to configure the phone for you.

Can you elaborate what you find naive, simplistic and fundamentally wrong? I just want to understand some of the considerations. Is it because you would use the unlocked features and ruin the ease of use for yourself?

The walled garden forces app developers to comply with Apple’s consumer-friendly privacy restrictions. Many larger developers absolutely detest these, not least of which is Epic, whose campaign against Apple started months after Apple announced their crackdown on tracking. A crackdown which, if you recall, was universally commended by the Hacker News community.

If the iOS walled garden is torn down by legislation, the result won’t be akin to Android. It will break down the status quo that any app I want is available from the App Store, and subject to Apple’s rules.

The status quo with Android is Google wanting the appearance of being open, but without being a commercially viable channel. This is because it was their choice, not dictated to them by legislation.

> I don’t think I present a false dichotomy. I shared my own opinion.

One does not exclude another.