Hacker News Reader

Comment by seppel | Hacker News Reader

> And no, as a user, I don't want Chrome on iOS.

Then don't install it. Seems to be quite simple.

Then don't buy an iPhone. Seems to be quite simple ;)

This argument really holds no water to my eye because the average consumer is subject almost solely to paid adverts and maybe a little knowledge about tidbits like this rather than any deep knowledge about the platform or Apple - the information asymmetry is hook, line, and sinker in apples favour so there is almost no inherent protection for the consumer in this regard when compared to (say) even an Android phone, or better a PC

You know what you get when buying an iPhone. Your argument stems from you believing you know more about the preferences of the average consumer than himself. Why should Apple be forced to offer a specific product? Don't like it, don't buy it. There are plenty of alternatives out there.

> the information asymmetry is hook, line, and sinker in apples favour

Boohoo, I really feel sorry for companies like Google (5th richest company in the world, and whose Android runs on ~80% of smartphones) and Samsung (23% market share last quarter compared to Apple's 21%). It's too bad the information asymmetry doesn't protect them.

The problem is buying an iphone means i should be able to do whatever i want with it later on, including install additional software, such as browsers. Unlocked iOS versions do exists, and alternate app store like cydia exist as well, but it’s relying on people hacking security measures which shouldn’t be there in the first place.

“The problem is buying an iphone means i should be able to do whatever i want with it later on, including install additional software”

That’s an opinion. Apple has another one, and, AFAIK, doesn’t advertise that as a feature of their product.

Some people argue Apple shouldn’t be allowed to sell such a product, but I don’t know of legal precedents for that (could be my lack of knowledge in this, of course)

Certainly, the same situation exists for game consoles and, to a lesser extent because nobody can install additional software on them, cars, toasters, etc. (Cars may be even more similar. Tesla doesn’t give you the means to run your own self driving software on the hardware you bought, do they?)

Why should you be able to do whatever you want on it? This doesn't apply to many other products.

It does actually, in the context of personal usage. The vast majority of products have no such "after-purchase" restrictions.

Why should a company have the right to restrict what I do with a device throughout its life at such a level, unless I am actively harming them? Should they be able to remove features? Brick devices? How far should that level of control go?

That mindset is going to be the death of general purpose computing within the general public.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com