Hacker News Reader

Comment by _benton | Hacker News Reader

No, because that requires the development and maintenance of two different operating systems, the cost of which is then passed to the consumer (me).

View on HN

In this case I hope you have sympathy when I state that I dislike when Apple charges 30% on transactions (but also apps), because this cost is also passed to the consumer: me.

And I 100% guarantee that the piece of this 30% pie is way bigger than the effort it would require them to divert their development like you're suggesting.

EDIT: Oh, and I also bet their lawyer bill for fighting this is bigger than that too. :)

Not really, you can chose to purchase other devices with more favourable payment agreements. It's about having that choice, versus not having the ability to purchase a device with a higher level of security.

No. I prefer to contribute to companies and causes trying to make Apple to be forced to open up. I am 100% ok with limiting your choice.

And if the argument has become about security, as others have said, Jailbreak has repeatedly relied on security issues, so the security problems have always been there.

I dont think anyone is arguing you shouldn't be allowed to pay 1000% markups on payment processing to Apple if you'd like to.

But making the argument that Apple is the only company to solve secure payments on the internet is silly.

You've been tricked into thinking that Apple phones are higher security because Apple has taken away your freedom. Apple's ecosystem is neither necessary nor sufficient to provide you with security.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com