Again a comparison that doesn't make sense - also employers pay you whereas when you buy an iOS device you pay for it. So not only you give Apple your money but also you give up control to them.
> I don't believe any of the "I paid for it so it's mine" arguments out there really pass muster until you also create your own (not jailbroken) software stack.
If I understand correctly, you argue that users don't "own" the device because Apple sells it as a whole stack or because they write the iOS and license it to users. My point is that even with licensed OS users should be free to do whatever they want on the device. When I buy an iPhone, the iOS is already installed so I assume I have also bought the right to use it (like Mac OS?). It doesn't matter whether the OS that comes with the device is written by the hardware manufacturer or not; hence the Microsoft analogy and that's why i disagree with you.
Now when it comes to the subject of App Store, someone has pointed out correctly that App Store is a distribution channel and Windows or iOS is an operating system. It was not my comparison. Here I do agree that Apple has every right to charge developers for any amount they want, or the right to deny any app they don't see fit in the App Store. However Apple don't allow any other channels on their system. That is still in their right to do so, but it will raise some issues when the iPhone/iPod Touch reaches a certain market share.
The difference is that it's voluntary. Apple has competitors. If they are too strict with their policies, developers will get angry, customers will get angry and eventually both will switch to a competitor.
Apple has a strong interest in finding the right compromise between control, convenience and diversity.
The choice is in the technology you use when you build an application for a user. You don't get a choice what platform you build your apps for, you already have your customers, and they already have their phones. If you're a business for which the technology provided by Apple is not a key part of the product, then you're being forced to pay for technology you're trying your hardest not to use but are obligated to by policy.
If I build a Flutter app for checking bus times, what am I paying Apple for? I'm already deliberately avoiding their badly documented frameworks. Apple don't own the buses, they don't own the internet, they should not be claiming ownership of the users phones.
But Apple knows that there are many reasons why a user who may choose Apple where they make decisions for their dollars, is also a user who is stuck in other ecosystems in other context.
Of course, I'm talking about, for example, work environments where you may be stuck with a Windows PC, or have to use a corporate-owned Android device for your phone...
Except Apple clearly owns its users, not the other way around. They get money from you for everything you do with their devices (music, vids, books, ads, even purchases of anything now), AND get money from the sellers to let them just talk to you.
"If you can't freely do anything on the device you own, you're the one owned."
As if Apple was some government provided service that you are entitled to because you pay taxes. It's not. It's a for-profit company of which you are not a board member. If you want F-droid, use Android. If you want App Store, use iPhone. If you want both at the same time, well, buy both phones then. People who want a Ferrari and a minivan don't ask Ferrari to make minivans, they buy both, because both together is ridiculous.
From what I've seen and experienced that is not true. Apple support is great and help me always, Apple store is great and I always get treated nicely. So I guess they care about me and my experience which translates into the platform they have built for ME - the user. I doubt they built a platform for the sake of building something.
As for Apple owning the user - elaborate pls. I don't see how they try to even own me. I made an educated decision to use that software and hardware BECAUSE of things like ApplePay, SignIn, App Store, etc.
It's not like Apple provides their platform and then if you don't want to use it then fine, you're on your own. They are actively hostile towards you doing something else.
If I leap off your analogy, which again doesn't really work, it's as if they throw tomatoes from their steakhouse as you go towards the pancake house.
As past threads on this topic have shown, iPhone users prefer Apple be the controller of the device than the device owner itself. It is somehow understandable, but it is position I've often seen espoused.
Wait, so you shouldn't have rights to a device you paid for?
Yeah, you're not going to sell me on this line of bullshit. The amount of money you pay for an apple is a fucking purchase. So why do they maintain control of it? Eh?
I bought an Apple device. Did not sign up to be anyone else’s payday. I want Apple to improve their devices. Don’t care if anyone else benefits from it.
Really frustrating to live in a country that wants forced socialization if their is opportunity to make money off me, but otherwise I’m just a cost center.
In no way does my use of an Apple device act as an open door for anyone else.
I’m not interested in technology to help some coder feed himself but because tech is fun and intellectually interesting.
reply