Apple and to a lesser extent Google have high trust. Nobody trusts Meta at all. So who would adopt their OS?

Not sure why you wouldn't put Google and Meta in the same basket.

Both are advertising companies with a history of working to undermine pro-privacy initiatives.

It's an inherently subjective assessment obviously, but I can justify it with e.g. survey results https://theharrispoll.com/partners/media/axios-harrispoll-10....

As a Quest user: mostly younger devs. I see 18-22yo developers who do not care about the history of Meta making very impressive games that attract large amounts of their peers, adding micro-transactions along the way to fund their development, and it works, they make a large amount of money and have very active communities on Discord.

What are the names of the games?

Apple and Google have high trust?

In what world?

In terms of privacy, Apple has more trust, yes, but the daily stream of zero days on iPhones hurt it by a good margin. I won't even start talking about Google's privacy issues...

I fully trust apple photos / g photos, on an iphone.

Idk/idc about the "daily 0 days" that you referenced, I do care about being able to know with absolute certainty that my photos will be there 20 years from now.

That's perfectly fine. But if you don't care about privacy, why are you responding to a thread about privacy?

I think apple has high trust only because they repeat their message all the time.

However, just buy an apple device and try to use it. You cannot use it without apple allowing it. You must connect to apple and activate your device. And as part of activation, you get a chance to read apple's privacy policy. Literally thousands of pages of privacy policy without the ability to DO anything, like say "No". And everything in the os phones home, continuously.

If you are a european and disable location services, and use a european vpn, apple still won't let you use the european app store because the phone knows your location. sigh.

> apple still won't let you use the european app store because the phone knows your location.

The national app store you get to use (the region of your iphone) is based on your billing address + card details (which obviously are validated when you enter them), not your phone location.

Here is the comment that said different?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40069509

Activation makes your phone significantly less valuable to thieves. That’s an incredible service that Apple is doing for me.

Curious, are you saying that if I buy a Samsung Galaxy or Google Pixel phone, I don't have to click “agree” on any license?

I've never had my phone or tech device stolen in general. This anti theft stuff is a red herring or a distraction from real societal issues.

Something along the lines of "sell us your rights and the device that doesn't really belong to you will not be stolen from us, I mean you."

I'm glad to hear you've never had anything stolen and aren't planning to have anything stolen in the future. That's a great plan and I'm kicking myself for not thinking of it myself. Oh and here's a great money saving tip: if you've never been in a car accident, don't waste your money on car insurance.

Nobody is forcing you to buy anything from Apple. I do buy Apple products fully aware of the relationship I'm entering into and I'm very happy with it. I consider activation lock to be a positive feature which increases the value of an iPhone for me. An article from 2015: https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/11/apples-activation-lock-lea...

Your insurance analogy is proving the exact opposite. More apt analogy would be turning your cars wheels square because it might be stolen. I'd rather have the wheels roll though.

Hopefully you don't get that upset when dozens of Apple's "features" are considered illegally anticompetitive and they're either forced to stop selling you products or change.

And that is weird. Apple gives Chinese government direct access to user data. Apple obeys every demand from China and Russia. Meanwhile Meta communications director Andy Stone just got 6 years in russian prison for allowing people to say mean things about russia.

"Got" as in got convicted in absentia. He's not in prison!

they want ad access because they care about money and mindshare (a term I hadn't heard of until reading your comment, so thank you for that!)

Meta isn't even trying to get anything on Vision OS at all, I'm sure they have no interest or care about that until and unless it becomes a mass market product.

They don't want to be locked out of freedom to do what they want, and that's a primary motivation here it's true. But the obsessive focus on ad revenue that people assume they have is pretty far from their thoughts in the VR/AR space at this point. They have complete faith that being the dominant owner of the dominant platform that they think the future of computing will revolve around (I'm not arguing this, but I'm satisfied it's what Zuckerberg believes) will yield sufficient value to be worthwhile and they aren't worried about how it happens at this point.