iOS is not close to a monopoly. People are perfectly free to have Android devices and side load apps on to them. It is curious that the campaigning focuses so strongly on destroying the high trust part that exists and not on promoting a trusted setup on Android.
It's perfectly reasonable for the default setting of a phone to forbid sideloading apps. And anyone who doesn't want to can leave it that way. That's the 'option of safety'.
https://www.fortnite.com/mobile/android/new-device?lang=en-U...
Why? Because historically, iOS has been the more profitable platform for mobile developers by a large margin. The payoff for building and maintaining an alternative app store for Android only is questionable, but improves significantly if the store can exist on iOS too.
Sheesh...
And people who do not like "unsafe" technology are perfectly free to not use it at all.
If you make something idiot-proof, they will simply provide a better idiot.
Not if legislators make it illegal to sell an alternative…
Hell, when she is scammed, Apple apologists will tell her it's not really that bad, and to get off Apple's case about it...
Gruber:
> Instead, the scam LassPass app tries to steer you to creating a “pro” account subscription for $2/month, $10/year, or a $50 lifetime purchase. Those are actually low prices for a scam app — a lot of scammy apps try to charge like $10/week.
(emphasis mine)
Lucky people, I guess? They could have been scammed for more?
He also claims, without any way to know, that "it doesn't look like this was made to steal LastPass credentials".
The whole article is very much a "yeah it sucks and shouldn't happen, but this is no big deal, really, why are you getting all up in Apple's face about it?" vibe.
Huh? No one's forcing them to install F-Droid for crying out loud. If you want what Apple does, then use Apple's store.
The solution to the grandmother scenarios is to have a trusted relative that works closely with them, who they trust to copilot or handle completely all business dealings. If that's not possible, then they're at risk whether they have an iphone or android.
Put tight controls in place. You can make it extremely difficult to bypass. You could have a recovery mode like Android and bury the setting in there. I think that makes it sufficiently hard that you don't have to worry about a grandma being tricked into rebooting her phone while holding down a specific button combination and then navigating through a bunch of arcane menus without touch controls to enable side loading. But its enough that someone that is technically inclined and who wants that control over their device can have it.
This is not a good argument. Yes things aren't perfect in many areas of technology, but that doesn't mean we should give up.
The better version of this argument acknowledges that there are tradeoffs: allowing side loading may introduce risk but the risk is low relative to the other risks users face and the benefits outweigh the costs.
If it’s bad and it can be done it will be done, and at scale.
I have been tracking my data use and last year it was only 70GB. And I have trimmed a bit more out of that since, especially on the podcast side which was the bulk of the data. It is getting to the point where I might just use my photo data plan which now has 120GB a year as it is more than enough.
Japanese Android phones bought from carriers are fucking horrible because they have modifications both from the manufacturer (eg: Sony, Samsung) and the carrier.
I wonder if this is partially why Japan is among the few markets led by iOS rather than Android. I hate iOS, but Android from Japanese carriers is such a hellscape it might just be worth tolerating the former.
Maybe in the US/West when you bought prebuilt form the likes of Dell. But in my home of EE, most PCs we had for sale in shops were locally assembled with no OS, or just vanilla OEM Windows installed (sometimes even pirated).
Crap installed by default on PCs is not something I ever encountered where I live.
Maybe it's an EU thing that stopped all the preloaded crap, no idea.
This happened because no OEM license = cheaper. These days I don't think it matters anymore, because probably the OEM license is much cheaper than it was back then.
1. Format a flash drive with two partitions 2. Burn the Windows installer ISO to the first partition 3. Download all the drivers to the second partition 4. Flash the BIOS with the latest version 5. Ensure you are NOT connected to the Internet and boot flash drive 6. Install Windows, disallow the metrics they let you opt-out 7. Creating a local account works because offline 8. Install drivers avoid add-on software from manufacturer 9. Edit local group policy - enable "Turn off Microsoft Consumer Experience" 9a. Alternatively, edit the Registry, DisableWindowsConsumerFeatures in HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\CloudContent 10. Connect Internet, check for updates reboot a few times 11. Open Microsoft Store and uninstall any junk apps (stubs) 12. Install whatever other software you desire 13. Configure your update settings so it is less annoying
Creating a local account is basic sense (no, not common sense; we aren't common people), and not connecting to the internet during install is recommended but not a hard requirement.
Installing drivers while avoiding their bloatware is, again, basic sense.
Disabling "Microsoft Consumer Experience" does nothing as far as I've experienced (and it shouldn't, the setting is only effective on Windows 11 Enterprise and Education); I never modify that setting myself.
On the other hand, I turn off Automatic Updates (automatic Windows Update) and Microsoft Store's ability to automatically download and update programs via the Group Policies. This is probably what you want if Disney+ keeps bothering you.
This all said, if you're getting pestered by third-party crapware you are probably using Windows 11 Home. Just pay up for a Professional license and save your time and nerves. The cheaper price of Home licenses is offset by third-party crapware.
What on earth. This is stockholm syndrome in a nutshell.
Personally I use the community of version of Arch i3, not going to check the source on that, but will trust that community might keep an eye on anything nefarious.
Doesn't seem like Linux is completely immune from that either(i.e. XZ Utils).
But the build is amazingly stable and fast, and I will have to take it good faith that they didn't do anything that would harm me.
I can at least track down the author in various communities and seems to be semi-open about their identity. There is a forum thread any concerns I can bring up with the person responsible.
They are also taking donations. I would hope that exposes them to some liability and financial trail if they are found doing something illegal.
https://www.teamos.xyz/threads/windows-x-lite-optimum-11-24h...
It does not, I've been working with fresh installs a lot this year for one reason or another and no fresh Windows 11 Professional installation has had third-party crapware pre-installed. That includes an install I just did a few days ago using an ISO downloaded straight from Microsoft.
Windows 11 Home probably does have them, though.
Don't know if that is still true today.
Honestly, I think this situation is worse for consumers than anything Apple is doing. Technically you have more choice with Windows and Android but it can be difficult for the average consumer to make an informed decision because the device manufacture cram so much stuff onto these devices without your knowledge.
https://9to5google.com/2024/03/06/japan-google-pixel-sales-i...
Subsidies are also stil the wild wild west, with the regulators teppidly trying to do something about it but with no real change in sight. Buying from a carriers will reduce the real phone price up to a quarter depending on how you do it, and the carrier will have buy backs to sweeten the deal further, so you'll be eating what the carrier feeds you.
And that's all compound with the same phone supporting different network bands depending on where they're sold, and resale value plumetting because of that (even if you carrier unlock the phone, it won't support all of other carriers' network bands)
The iPhone winning so big is in no small part thanks to Apple not getting in bed with the carriers.
No, power users rarely influenced mainstream adoption of any tech. Apple and the rest didn't become trillion dolar corps by catering to power users. Power users are niche and very picky market not worth catering to if you want to make it big.
What made the "WIntel/IBM" PC gain majority mainstream market share was that is was all open(not to be confused with open source) which allowed everyone, not just power users, but regular users too, and also any HW vendor and SW developer to decide what HW and SW they can develop and sell to users, and what users can install on their system, without the consent or added 30% tax from the original vendor or manufacturer of the system.
It was basically an open bazaar and a cost race to the bottom, where the free market decided the winners and losers based on consumer preference, but there was no global authority to say "I'm not gonna allow your SW/HW to run on the platform we developed". Microsoft or Intel couldn't gatekeep what you installed or ran on the Intel/Windows platform.
Sure, the PC platform had it's own set of issues due to overabundance of cheap low quality HW/SW that caused poor UX, and anti-trust issues from the Windows and Intel monopolies, but it was overall a net benefit due to the open playing field. Can you imagine 3dfx, ATI and Nvidia GPUs not being allowed to run on the PC platform because Intel had a closed PCI standard that only worked with their own GPUs?
The answer to that will be different for different customers, or potential customers. A lot of iPhone customers like me are quite happy with the devices more or less as they are. The vast majority of people complaining about iPhones aren't iPhone customers. Frankly I don't really see why I should care what they think.
I'm more sympathetic to actual iPhone customers, or former customers that left, but looking at the numbers satisfaction levels with iPhones are through the roof. This is a teeny tiny proportion of customers. The case for Apple harming the interests of customers directly is super thin.
The other main dimension to this is Apple's commercial relations with other companies, mainly app store developers. I'm sympathetic to the idea that such relationships should be regulated to at least some extent. I'm glad controls on links to external payment options are being opened up, and there's pressure towards more equitable revenue structures. I think this is the main area Apple's control of the platform is open to abuse, but IMHO that doesn't extend to third party app stores. The current app store should be properly regulated, I think third party stores are a complete distraction. They'll never take off, and are probably going to be a worse experience for users.
I tend to agree that the focus on "3rd party app stores" is stupid, I'd much rather we force computer vendors to have unlockable bootloader's and focus on consumer rights legislation, ensuring people can own the things they buy.
Given that a very large number of these people buy Samsung products of all companies, the idea that they’re avoiding Apple on ethical grounds seems somewhat unlikely.
It's anything but dead simple. (And I went from Android to Apple back in 2020 and back to Android in 2021. It sucked, both ways.)
Yep, which is unlikely to coincide with the latest screwover from their platform of choice, giving them much less motivation to switch at that time. But you're right, the expense only prevents some people from switching.
> app passwords are the same between platforms
Until they're not. Heck, I've encountered apps that didn't support any way of transferring your progress across platforms, although the example I can think of (Clash of Clans, or maybe Clash Royale) fixed that many years ago. But there's still plenty of instances where I needed to add another login method to my account because some methods just weren't supported on the other platform.
Meanwhile if you keep using the same platform odds are you'll just be logged in because it will either be in iCloud or your Google account.
> the average user only uses about a half dozen apps
I doubt that very much. I guess maybe the average user is old people who still only use their phone for calling, texting, and maybe directions? Yeah you're right it doesn't affect them too much. Other than remembering to turn off iMessage if they switch away from Apple.
Get real.
If all Apple cared about is making money, would they have spent upwards of 10 Billion+ on an Apple Car only to cancel it later. At its height, Vision Pro R&D cost 2 billion per quarter, yes you read that correctly, almost 25% of their yearly net profits went into development of Vision Pro Alone. Does this sound like gouging the customer to line their executive pockets to you?
If Apple executives had lined their pockets, then why is the top Apple Executive only worth 2 Billion when Apple is worth close to 3 Trillion, that is less than 0.1% of Apple’s valuation. Apple’s top executive does not even make it to the world’s top 100 by wealth. Does that not make you think?
>Does this sound like gouging the customer to line their executive pockets to you?
Yes, it does, when they lobby to fight against right-to-repair. Yes, it does, when they price gouge the customer on storage upgrades. Yes, it does, when they hide defects in their products and push people to buy new products. Yes, it does, when they use child labor.
“Storage upgrades” are shallow thinking compared to reliable unified memory at GPU speed -- again across a billion devices.
Both of these benefit more consumers more, and more of the device lifetime, than the rarely applicable supposed harms you cite.
They were price gouging even before unified memory so your argument doesn’t really hold water. I am sorry.
I’m so confused, your reasoning is just dumb.
Please explain how putting money into R/D has anything to do with gouging customers?
Is it because companies that tend to be more purely oriented on extracting profits often don’t put money into product R/D? So then therefore companies that do are not price gouging customers?
So how much money a company spends on researching a product suddenly makes that product have any real value? And if that value turns out less than profitable you think the business is basically a charity?
Like yes I’ll gladly go back to Reddit to be rid of this faux expert bullshit y’all got going on.
Only worth 2 billion?
I find it amazing how so many adults are still just children with more numbers.
I'm not sure where you got this information. The Android Marketplace arrived with version 1.0 of Android on the T-Mobile G1. Side loading has been available since the very beginning.
What you describe more closely resembles what iPhone did, except that it was never a given that Apple's carrier partners were going to be able to ship their own user facing software on the device.
Operators and OEMs can absolutely customize Android and it was more allowed in the beginning than now. As a way to reduce fragmentation and gain more control over the platform, Google started attaching more and more stipulations to allowing it's suite of software (including Marketplace, now known as Google Play) to be included on handsets.
Was there ever a case of a mobile operator launching their own software store on Android? Certainly OEMs did it, with the Samsung app store being the most prominent. Genuinely curious here, as others do note that (see the Japanese handsets post) OEMs have and even still do a bunch of customization and pre installed apps.
I was working in mobile games at the time and ended up working with Google on the Play Store launch, among other things.
But what I mentioned was not some big secret. Everyone knew Android was supposed to be the response to google having to keep stashes of j2me devices in drawers, which is ironically what everyone ended up needing to do with Android devices.
People have memory holed just what a shock the iphone caused, not just technically but strategically, and how it altered who has the power over distribution. The whole industry (google included) did not see this coming because of the power of the carriers.
It was still a better situation. An Android app might need tweaks but at least you're dealing with the same SDK/API (maybe with proprietary extensions?)
Those J2ME phones felt like you needed to start from basically scratch for each phone model.
> I was working in mobile games at the time and ended up working with Google on the Play Store launch, among other things.
Well, mobile games are distributed via ads, not the "stores."
I don't know. This distribution, network effects story. It's sort of, whatever. People were using chat apps then, and people are using chat apps now. The iOS App Store and Google Play are such shit shows, they are glorified installation wizards for 99.9% of people. Whether you have to install-wizard via sideloading or via a deep link or whatever, it's not super material nor revolutionary. I think this comes from conflating Steam with the App Store, ultimately Steam is a real, bonafide store, and the mobile app stores are more like technical restrictions that someone is using to take a 30% cut of revenues. Which is what everyone is saying anyway.
This was also the case for Palm smartphones. Since they were an amalgam of a Palm PDA and a cell phone, they kept the app model of Palm PDAs. IIRC, you could even transfer apps from one Palm PDA to another through their infrared port, or through Bluetooth if both were fancy ones.
I remember everyone scoffing at the "lol you can't type on it" dramatically missing this point.
Even back then, people were exactly clear on those two things being the true revolution of the iPhone.
I believe Verizon launched their own app store at one point. It was called V Cast.
A quick search led me here: https://www.pcworld.com/article/498393/verizons_android_app_...
Just something else I was thinking about with Android. I love the Android OS but Google’s implementation is far and away the best version and while you could technically run Android with just the bare necessities and without google apps, it may as well be unusable. So, google has “technically” made it available without their services but the juice isn’t worth the squeeze to get it working how you want it.
Nonetheless, the very first phone that shipped with Android on it was the T-Mobile G1 (also branded as the HTC Dream).
> Just something else I was thinking about with Android. I love the Android OS but Google’s implementation is far and away the best version and while you could technically run Android with just the bare necessities and without google apps, it may as well be unusable. So, google has “technically” made it available without their services but the juice isn’t worth the squeeze to get it working how you want it.
Yes, it's unfortunate that AOSP is a shell that is missing so much-- it's more an OS framework than a complete OS at this point.
In fact, the original iPhone couldn't even receive MMS messages; rather, the carrier's gateway composed a URL which you opened in Safari to view the picture.
People quickly forget the original 1st gen iPhone was, despite laying the foundation for some great technologies, hot garbage. Apple was still a computer company then, and it showed, as iPhone was a "pocket Mac" with some ancillary phone functions that occasionally worked.
It arrived one year later, in 2008:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple)
> People quickly forget the original 1st gen iPhone was, despite laying the foundation for some great technologies, hot garbage.
"Hot garbage" by what metric? Other phones introduced in 2007:
* https://mowned.com/top-mobile-devices/2007
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mobile_phones_introdu...
The Nokia N95 or RIM Curve 8320 were ranked higher by some folks:
* https://www.mobilegazette.com/2007-review-07x12x12.htm
* https://web.archive.org/web/20071214112358/http://reviews.cn...
I want to say that this was deliberate. The iPhone was a new product that needed the general population to adapt, and mental models around its use. An App Store at launch would have been hot garbage. Touch apps at that point were shittacular PocketPC apps.
The HTML5/Web Apps recommended by Jobs were also deliberate in order to get developers to move toward formatting sites for mobile.
This was 5D Chess.
The problem with this is that Apple is also a developer trying to sell you things. I would feel better if Apple's goals and the user's goals were aligned all the time instead of just some of the time.
Admittedly, Apple's real priority is just to make money on every transaction that occurs upon an idevice.
Apple makes hardware enabled platform experiences for end users who don't want to tweak and people who value their own time more than money. That's a big reason Apple causes so much resentment -- not everyone can value time over money.
It's also resented by devs who don't understand or value what a hardware enabled platform experience for end users can mean to their income if they grok it.
Is it? I have been buying apple products for over 20 years now, and like most people here make a lot more money than the people who behold an iPhone as a status symbol lol.
I still see Apple's desire to get a kickback for every transaction on an iPhone nefarious nickel and diming, and I see their "ecosystem" as deliberate vendor lock-in - and I think that "ecosystem" actually holds Apple's OSes back in terms of innovation.
I regularly disagree with Apple's choices. Not all of em? I was ok with the vision pro - not buying one, but sometimes you need to experiment with things like that. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I have to all-or-nothing it.
Per all the smug "just get an android phone" comments, I DID. I have a galaxy fold 4 and an iPhone 13 sitting on my desk. Yea, I can afford to do silly stuff like that, and I'm a goofy nerd that likes trying different things. I don't have a steadfast attachment to one platform - another reason I find the "ecosystem" stuff obnoxious.
Likewise, automatic photo syncing with onedrive works better on android than it does on iOS (although this may be a configuration thing).
But when it comes to smartwatches, I do really like my Apple Watch. The problem is, Apple Watches only work with Apple iPhones. And Apple iPhones only work really well with Apple Watches because Apple doesn't allow anyone else to do half the things that Apple iOS can do with Apple Watches. And frankly, none of those things that Apple does as "vertical integration" are special or unique - it's just obnoxious vendor lock-in. They could have made a good smartwatch API and vetted smartwatch vendors the same way they vet apps. But no. We get Apple Watches or a shit experience on 3rd party watches.
The "don't like it? buy something else" attitude is obnoxious as hell. Apple could do better with iOS (and with their Macs). I don't know why some people can't accept that.
So then Apple is just as bad as the other developers, and instead users should be able to use their own property to bypass any sort of Apple fees.
Problem solved. Let the user decide if they want to refuse to pay the Apple fee, and buy on alternative app stores.
Culturally the phone company (and the descendant cellular operators) were very much of this philosophical outlook.
This page goes into particulars about the historically closed nature of the phone system and the cases that led to the eventual opening of bring your own equipment (Hush-a-phone, Carterfone etc):
Ah yes, but Apple can /s
The real lesson is that Apple can't be trusted either, and the best thing you can do is allow the user to choose who to trust.
Android was initially designed so that operators could customise it. The idea was apps were developed (and sold) only by operators, and everything else would be via the browser. If you had used a Nokia device in the EU in 2005 and then the exact same model in the customised form released on a US carrier you'd understand why this was such a terrible idea. The exclusion of carriers from being able to make modifications to the phone was, and remains, an active feature for end users.
People keep having to learn that developers cannot be trusted either, someone somewhere will always trend towards the very worst thing they can do, and you need look no further than this forum for the levels of avarice which have overrun the tech industry. The EU regulators live in a parallel universe where they're all dependent on WhatsApp as they've never truly internalised that there is no such thing as a free lunch and that people see them as easy marks.