Falling Out of Love with Apple, Part 3: Content and Censorship

https://hardware.substack.com/p/falling-out-of-love-with-apple-part3

by zherbert • 6 years ago

321 254 6 years ago

hardware.substack.com

jolux• 6 years ago

Saying that Apple banned Epic for "fighting back" is definitely twisting the truth a bit. Epic released a behind-the-scenes software update in direct contravention of the App Store rules, which they knew was going to get them banned.

smnrchrds2• 6 years ago

I would consider Epic's action the corporate equivalent of civil disobedience, which is a form of protest. Fighting back seems an apt description for such a protest.

ddingus• 6 years ago

I agree. While it is all still playing out, it does appear Epic made a mark on things sufficient to change the discussion.

chongli• 6 years ago

It’s like civil disobedience but it’s backed by profit motive rather than human rights. That makes it much less of a clear cut moral victory.

During these discussions a lot of people on HN have come forward and expressed their support for Apple’s walled garden. They like that Apple keeps malware out. Should Epic win and the iPhone be fixed wide open, that could change the situation dramatically.

Of course, I think Epic would be happy if they won a special exemption for their own marketplace but with the status quo remaining for everyone else.

donkeyd7• 6 years ago

The term being correct doesn't take away that they weren't banned for fighting back. They were banned for breaking rules that were clear beforehand.

mehrdadn2• 6 years ago

My layman understanding was Epic had to do this to be able to legally challenge Apple in court (to demonstrate damages or whatever). That's not quite the same as (covertly) breaching your contract hoping you get away without getting caught, which is the impression you're giving.

Assuming that's accurate, then I'm not sure what else one would expect them to do—not do something that gets them banned, then have their case thrown out immediately because they can't (say) demonstrate damages? Did they have any other realistic options besides just shutting up and putting up with the situation (which they have been doing this whole time)?

threeseed3• 6 years ago

If you're going to make a claim about a pending case and you're not a lawyer then you really need to provide a source. Because based on what the judge has said to date [1] your understanding does not seem accurate.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/29/21493096/epic-apple-antit...

Despegar2• 6 years ago

My layman understanding was Epic had to do this to be able to legally challenge Apple in court

This is obviously false because there are other antitrust cases against Apple pending.

webwielder2• 6 years ago

Framing your technology choices as a romance might not be the healthiest lens to make decisions through in the first place.

fnord77• 6 years ago

Sir, this is hackernews.

bluescrn• 6 years ago

The ‘sexiness’ of the hardware can seriously distort people’s opinions of Apple.

An attractive enough person or product can get away with things that others couldn’t...

fnordprefect• 6 years ago

This all comes down to the statement near the end: "I believe Apple should simply refuse to cooperate with oppressive governments"

Which is another way of saying "I believe Apple should either not operate in certain countries, or should try to operate in those countries in defiance of the laws of those countries."

The beef is primarily with the government. Companies are stuck in the middle -- either operate in compliance with local laws (even if they believe those laws are wrong) or don't operate there at all (since the third option of operating in contravention of local laws doesn't usually last long, and has painful consequences).

It would be interesting to know what the people who live in the countries think -- would they prefer not to have Apple products (or any other company's products) unavailable to them?

AnthonyMouse4• 6 years ago

Which is another way of saying "I believe Apple should either not operate in certain countries, or should try to operate in those countries in defiance of the laws of those countries."

That's true, but it doesn't mean your beef is only with the governments, in exactly the same way that IBM's collusion during WWII can't be pinned solely on the German government. They can choose not to do business in that country, or to be as subversive as they can until they get kicked out. Not doing so is a choice.

And that choice has implications for the company in other countries, when they become dependent on the countries they do business in, which then start making demands of the company's behavior globally.

threeseed3• 6 years ago

In this case it is largely an issue for governments.

Because what Apple is doing is not immoral or unethical but completely standard business practice. Every company who runs a marketplace sets its terms and distorts competition to benefit them.

In this case the author et al are arguing that Apple should be regulated differently and forced to operate a "level playing field" marketplace.

soperj• 6 years ago

That's true, but it doesn't mean your beef is only with the governments, in exactly the same way that IBM's collusion during WWII can't be pinned solely on the German government. They can choose not to do business in that country, or to be as subversive as they can until they get kicked out. Not doing so is a choice.

Same with South Africa and IBM during apartheid.

unishark3• 6 years ago

I think the point is when it comes to censorship, taking the high road of refusing to collude with the government and ceasing to operate in the country (whether willingly or by non-compliance leading to being banned yourself) has ultimately the same effect as following the law. The communication which the govt wants to censor gets censored.

grishka• 6 years ago

Apple could have avoided this entire issue by not forcefully inserting itself between the app developers and their users.

sudosysgen2• 6 years ago

The solution is incredibly simple.

Allow the iPhone to be fully unlocked, which makes it possible to install any software.

Then, Apple isn't in the position to apply the censorship to begin with, and it can both allow for a way to install these apps, and follow local rules.

It's not some issue that everyone else has to contend with. You can buy a Pixel or an LG in China and install anything you want on it. It's only Apple that has this issue.

theshrike793• 6 years ago

Allow the iPhone to be fully unlocked, which makes it possible to install any software.

There isn't a disclaimer in the world that would make this worth it. If someone bricks their phone with a dodgy app after "fully unlocking", they WILL be going after Apple, not the app developer.

I consider the locked nature of Apple devices a feature and an useful at that.

AntiImperialist• 6 years ago

Except for the prescedent set by the Nuremberg trials.

strogonoff• 6 years ago

I know that if Apple did not offer products in some of the countries I live(d), many more citizens would be using spyware-loaded phones—because they don’t have the skills or dedication to use a PinePhone (or even to clear their Android devices of preinstalled malware and maintain them in that state), because it’s infeasible for them to purchase an Apple device overseas, or because they just don’t know better—which would lower the bar for propaganda and censorship, ensuring people with inconvenient opinions are fewer and farther between.

It seems highly unlikely that oppressive governments would be compelled to stop being such if Apple decided to withdraw from their countries’ markets. Yes, it is profitable to allow and tax Apple’s sales, but by my reckoning not nearly enough to pursue through a fundamental shift in political climate. (Yes, some citizens will wonder what happened, but considering Apple’s minor market share and domestic media’s capability to spin the story in favour of the leading party, public opinion would hardly be a factor either.)

To allude to an essay I read recently, a withdrawal in this context would be somewhat akin to Apple acting like Star Trek Federation (first do no harm, avoid mistakes at all costs), while remaining engaged, preserving the opportunity to enact a positive change laterally through non-obvious implications of attractive technology with superior security, would be them acting more like Culture.

rendall• 6 years ago

Aside, OT: Cool username, fnordprefect. It's so clever I wish I had thought of it.

Siira2• 6 years ago

Apple doesn’t lawfully sell in Iran; Its products are still ubiquitous in the upper middle class.

infinityplus1• 6 years ago

Money trumps everything. Everything done under the name of "we're are a privacy respecting company. We care about our users." is just a facade. Apple will sell you out in a heart beat if the law orders them to help them oppress their own citizens.

I wonder how do these people sleep at night knowing what they are supporting under the mask of company. What will their children think? "I'm so proud that my dad/mom contributed to a company which silently supported oppressive and genocidal government's and helped make the world a worse place to live for the people".

But let's go and buy iPhones and Macs and let them know we fully support their actions.

Lutger2• 6 years ago

Sleeping at night is invariably achieved by dehumanizing the exploited. Chinese lives don't matter much, they are not Americans. Commies live on scraps. Such acts of othering make it easy to circumvent your conscience, this is the foundation of all war and crimes against humanity.

Then, of course, there are also the real bastards, those without conscience, who couldn't care less. They also don't care about American lives, or even their friends or family for that matter. The dumb ones end up in jail and the smart bastards end up running a company.

The rest of us just goes along with what everybody else does, we are too busy anyway to really reflect on our behavior. Need to buy more presents for the holidays!

throwawaysea• 6 years ago

Complaints about Apple’s censorship shouldn’t be limited to just foreign governments, which is a myopic and self-serving stance I often see in posts like this. It’s important to demand transparent free speech policies across the board for everyone. Like other big tech companies, Apple also censors content that doesn’t align with their progressive biases. They’ve banned numerous conservative apps from their App Store, and have threatened to ban others (example: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/tech-tyranny-apple-...). They’ve also engaged in the cultural wars more directly by doing things like replacing the gun emoji with the squirt gun emoji (https://blog.emojipedia.org/apple-and-the-gun-emoji/). At this rate I will be unsurprised when Apple decides to start blocking certain websites across their devices for wrongspeak.

Lutger2• 6 years ago

If by conservative you mean antisemitism, white supremacy, far out conspiracy, racism and hate speech: then yes they banned 'conservative' platforms.

That's trying to make a cultural war of broadly accepted, democratic values. It got nothing to do with progressive politics.

If you want to go full libertarian and demand Apple to give freedom to all these medieval hate platforms, you'll have to allow IS and the Al Qaidas of this world their jihadism videos too.

raylad• 6 years ago

There's also this:

U.S. congresswoman calls out Nike, Apple and Coca-Cola for lobbying against Uighur labour bills

Jennifer Wexton says companies are publicly condemning forced labour and privately trying to water down bills

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-wednesday...

The companies principally who are lobbying ... to have changes to your bills, are Apple, Nike, Coca-Cola [and] the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. What are they trying to do? What changes do they want to make to your laws?

Well, I don't know, because they haven't come to me to try to make changes to my piece of legislation, but the word is that they're trying to water down some of the enforcement provisions while publicly proclaiming that they are very much against and condemning forced labour. They're going behind the scenes and trying to change the law.

If they're against it, if they say that this is not in their interest, then why would they want to change your bills?

Because it's going to impact their supply chains and make it harder for them to profit off of this forced labour.

Which means that they're using the forced labour?

If they're not using it, it wouldn't be a problem. But, you know, it appears that they are using it. And if they are auditing their supply chains the way they're supposed to, this legislation wouldn't be an issue.

ascagnel_2• 6 years ago

Per the New York Times [0]:

According to a document viewed by The New York Times, Apple’s suggested edits to the bill included extending some deadlines for compliance, releasing certain information about supply chains to congressional committees rather than to the public, and requiring Chinese entities to be “designated by the United States government” as helping to surveil or detain Muslim minority groups in Xinjiang.

It’s definitely suspicious that lobbying is being done in secret, but I can’t think of many cases where any lobbying is done in the open.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/29/business/economy/nike-coc...

Hokusai4• 6 years ago

Many good points in the article. And the starting point is brilliant: > Extract more revenue from your existing customers

That is the only way forward for a company so used to growth. pressure on its current customers is only going up to buy new services and pay more for the old ones. Old strategies that new tools and a device that is with you 24/7 bring to new abusive levels.

john_minsk• 6 years ago

I just paid for 12 months worth of Skype subscription which I have used for just 2 calls back in January.

I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

Once I subscribed to New York times. The newspaper that was advertised to me for years in all Hollywood movies as a place where honesty and freedom are of highest priority. I had to spend an hour on a phone with their representatives to cancel it refusing to accept discount or a free subscription.

I don't trust many other companies. Especially if all my interactions with them are virtual and they are not specialized in information technology. At least big tech is quite rich to afford to think about users.

Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there: pay for utilities, for your phone etc. I want more progress here. I want to be able to see all my fees upfront in a clear format. I want to know my credit score. I want to be able to take this credit score to different organizations. etc. etc.

Big hope that fin tech will blow it up, but unfortunately start ups didn't deliver. There are some successful ones, but I think finance is too regulated for them to have a shot at a serious scale. Apple and Google have a shot at that and they will create a road for smaller companies.

The situation in Belarus is bad. And believe me I know. I was concerned as well about my device security. But to be honest at the end of the day it can't be Apple's problem. Belarussian government must be replaced by Belarussian people and Apple has nothing to do with that. And on top of that - what choice do I have. Android devices in Russia are preinstalled with Russian software while Apple's aren't. That's more important sign for me.

qz22• 6 years ago

Spot on. Managing subscriptions is a shit show generally. Doing it in one place is the right thing for the end user.

pmontra2• 6 years ago

I agree but I don't want that place to be tightly tied with the maker of my phone. I want to be able to change phone and not loose anything. Phones are commodities to me. Who makes them is as important as the brand of gas I put in my car. Browser, mail client, WhatsApp, camera, maps, banking apps are about all I need. The subscription management service should be a third party.

tommilukkarinen2• 6 years ago

Right, this is the network effect behind it. There is never before experienced convenience as you buy your apps, movies, books and songs from one place, which is in your pocket. Then there's the other store for all tangible things (Amazon). The list goes on, MS for business apps, Facebook for social media. Google for information?

Hokusai4• 6 years ago

I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store

What about defining a standard subscription protocol that allows any company to offer subscription management, and allow consumers to change their subscription manager if they are not happy?

Putting all your eggs in one nest because you currently like it is a very risky gamble.

Banking has worked with standards for decades that allow interoperability and competition.

But to be honest at the end of the day it can't be Apple's problem.

That's why the trust in one company should be very limited. As a non USA consumer, I will prefer some one else managing my data.

Gravityloss• 6 years ago

I understand similar fragmentation exists in payments for electric car charging. You need lots of cards, accounts, qr codes, sms and calls. This makes all the technological progress with billions poured into it not very useful, if you can't trust that you can charge on a road trip.

Someone could make a single app that would handle all that for you.

chaostheory• 6 years ago

You have a point, but that standard protocol doesn’t exist yet to even be implemented. Even then, is it a strict standard that everyone will follow to a T, or is it one where every company will have their own special interpretation?

Unfortunately, people need something that works right now.

pfranz• 6 years ago

A similar thing happened to me years ago. I was a monthly contributor to This American Life. I switched credit cards and wanted to update my payment, but they had changed their website or something and there was, as far as I could tell, no way to change or cancel or any "account" page or "login" system. I couldn't even find support or a phone number. I think I sent email to a generic account and waited a week. After not hearing back I canceled the credit card.

I tried to stick to PayPal to manage subscriptions for a few years since it was centralized and I could change payments or cancel. Patreon seems to have taken over a lot of this--but it's even more niche.

Big hope that fin tech will blow it up, but unfortunately start ups didn't deliver.

I just can't imagine the ROI needed to satisfy VC funding...especially without it becoming shady or predatory itself. Or, like you said, the regulations involved for a self-funded startup. I think the other aspect is that big companies aren't motivated to play ball. Yodlee is probably the biggest player and has had spottier integration as companies have added 2fa and other security measures. Very few have gone as far as adding tokens to support 3rd parties like Yodlee.

Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there

I suspect if something does happen (I'm not particularly confident) it will be a spinoff from a bank like how Allstate and Discover Card were spinoffs of Sears or Kingsford Charcoal from Ford Motor. Do companies do this anymore?

Razengan• 6 years ago

I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

This.

I just got screwed out of money by Couchsurfing when they started throwing a full-screen extortion prompt that prevents you from using the app or website at all so you can’t even delete your account until you cough up the dough.

They are using their own payment processing system. If they used the standard In-App Purchases, Apple could have given me a refund on the spot and hopefully booted them off the store for this bait and switch tactic.

Apple has always refunded me without question and I am willing to bet that most complaints about the App Store are from those entities that Apple protects users from.

webmobdev16• 6 years ago

I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

You do so only because you believe have no choice as you know that your democracy is so crippled that you don't expect them to protect your rights as a consumer any more!

Where as many Europeans and Asians, who also enjoy democratic rights, will tell you openly that we would prefer that our democratically elected government protect our consumer rights through regulations that bind all corporates to behave themselves.

tshaddox2• 6 years ago

Well, okay, it may be the case that our democracy is so crippled that it can’t protect basic consumer rights. But even so, what are we supposed to do? Quit our jobs, abandon our livelihoods, and take to the streets until our government decides we’re too much trouble and hands over power to a more consumer-friendly replacement government? Or just continue to want to use subscriptions through Apple where possible?

rglullis16• 6 years ago

This idea is one of my favorite tells to find out the level of alienation of people regarding their own governments.

The top 10 conglomerates from South Korea amount to more than half their GDP. This level of centralization alone should tell you how the regulations are enacted to protect the corporations, not the people.

If Germany (and more generally Brussels) was actually serious about environmental regulations, VW and all the German car makers would be exterminated after Dieselgate. Instead they got one or two scapegoats for VW (and no, the CEO being ousted and still receiving a generous retirement package does not count) and made it clear that the regulations are there just to give the people the illusion of control.

"For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law" -- this is what your democratically elected government is giving you.

gigatexal3• 6 years ago

Not to speak for the op but for me it’s not that I’m lacking choice it’s that I want to use the first party solution because it works better. For me, it’s like a programming language with one canonical way to do something. It makes things so much easier. Easier to read. Easier to reason about. I just use the Apple version for things because 9/10 times it works flawlessly.

jevgeni• 6 years ago

First of all, as a European, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Try cancelling your mobile contract in Germany early.

Secondly, I might want to buy/subscribe to things that come from companies outside of EU.

cannabis_sam• 6 years ago

Democracy is crippled by corporate power and economic ideology, there’s no belief involved (except on the part of the economists).

kochthesecond• 6 years ago

At least big tech is quite rich to afford to think about users.

Sadly, this is reality. It is very hard to prioritize in most places living on thin margins.

gigatexal3• 6 years ago

Same. Apple makes killing a subscription super easy.

ignoramous• 6 years ago

Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there: pay for utilities, for your phone etc. I want more progress here. I want to be able to see all my fees upfront in a clear format. I want to know my credit score. I want to be able to take this credit score to different organizations. etc. etc.

Brace for impact: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ronshevlin/2020/11/30/google-pl...

Closi4• 6 years ago

Most of this we have had in the UK for years (e.g. Monzo).

__jf__• 6 years ago

The NYT experience is indeed the fastest way for a company to lose trust. It took me 3 tries to cancel. First rep said: yep cancelled all done. Except it wasnt: renewed at a discount. The 2nd rep: said sorry sorry and produced a chat transcript where I supposedly said thanks for the new discount, k thx bye (I didn’t). Said it was cancelled now. Surprise: it wasnt. Third rep got it done. For real this time. Still disappointed at how this played out.

simonh2• 6 years ago

Indeed, I'm fed up with people criticising Apple because it refuses to instruct it's employees to criminalise themselves. Nobody expects any other companies to do this. It's bizzare to me how distorted a moral framework can be that people blame a company for obeying bad laws, as if breaking laws and criminalising employees was an acceptable and moral way to run a business.

Sure a company can fight governments in court, if that option is available, but if it isn't or if that approach runs out, that's the end of the line. At the end of the day it's the governments and laws that need to change.

vetinari• 6 years ago

people criticising Apple because it refuses to instruct it's employees to criminalise themselves.

That's not what they criticize.

They criticize Apple because Apple positioned itself to be the sole actor capable of enforcing such a bad laws. That they do it, surprised nobody.

In this case, if they were not capable of destroying Telegram on iOS platform, their request would have no teeth and even the governments would not ask Apple to do it in the first place.

yoz-y• 6 years ago

Isn't there some sort of hack with subscriptions in the US where you can change your address to California and they have to offer you an electronic solution for cancelling?

m-p-3• 6 years ago

Personally I don't want all my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay, I want a system that all banks supports where I can manage my recurring payments/subscriptions, in which I can generate virtual, revocable credit cards to which I can set custom limits and track my expenses.

I can do it for my emails, why not for my payment systems?

mrweasel2• 6 years ago

Not exactly what you're looking for, but I talked to a developer of a solution that integrates with online banking and recognizes subscriptions and allow you to cancel them directly from your online banking thingy.

Only downside is that it's the banks that has to do the integration. I can't really figure out how they deal with the actual unsubscribing bit. The subscriptions people are most likely to want to cancel has to be those who with the worst unsubscribe process.

scrozart• 6 years ago

Not sure how long ago you cancelled your NYT sub, but it took me 5 minutes yesterday.

sjs3822• 6 years ago

Once I subscribed to New York times. The newspaper that was advertised to me for years in all Hollywood movies as a place where honesty and freedom are of highest priority. I had to spend an hour on a phone with their representatives to cancel it refusing to accept discount or a free subscription.

SAME. Somewhere deep in my comment history here, I tell the story of trying to cancel NYT, and needing to do it three times, because I kept getting charged. Ughhhhh.

lern_too_spel8• 6 years ago

I had the same problem and contacted my state representative and my congressperson. This has since been fixed by regulation in California, and by having to follow California's laws, most companies' subscription services have been fixed for everybody.

totalZero3• 6 years ago

I want to know my credit score.

Several banks and credit cards offer FICO score information. The information is likely there for you, but you may have to accept some data sharing terms and conditions in order to access it.

https://www.chase.com/personal/credit-cards/chase-credit-jou...

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/credit-cards/features-ben...

https://www.wellsfargo.com/goals-credit/smarter-credit/credi...

https://www.bankofamerica.com/credit-cards/free-fico-credit-...

dependsontheq2• 6 years ago

I never in my life bought that amount of software compared to the App Store, it’s convenient and mostly safe. Apple paid revenue in the store is two times higher than Googles. I think this is directly correlated with convenience and safety.

sneak3• 6 years ago

It's also impossible to use (even for free apps) without IDing yourself, and your travel history (via IP geolocation), to Apple.

The convenience comes at a cost.

dependsontheq2• 6 years ago

On the user side without question, but ion the developer side this enormous convenience for the user is worth much more than 30 percent. This is not Marketing this 50% of your sales funnel.

zepto7• 6 years ago

It’s true that you must identify yourself to download any app from the App Store.

But you continue to repeat this outright lie about Apple receiving your travel history.

There is no evidence for it, and this has been repeatedly pointed out to you.

We know if you opt in to certain services they send an anonymized location.

That’s all we know. The part about your travel history being sent is 100% made up by you.

yuriko_boyko• 6 years ago

That has to do with more freeware on android too. Android apps lean heavily towards free or freemium.

mdoms• 6 years ago

It's really not normal to be "in love" with a corporation to begin with....

chadcmulligan• 6 years ago

It's more a religion or cult according to neuroscience https://www.cnet.com/news/scientists-apple-makes-your-brain-...

lqet• 6 years ago

Religion is a touchy subject. Oddly enough, as I have come to discover in these pages, so is Apple.

This has also been my experience. I know people with whom I just avoid talking about Apple. Personally I just accept that Apple is their religion (some of them have Apple bumper stickers) and that religion is something deeply personal.

laurent92• 6 years ago

I always find it funny when people describe the beliefs of middle-ages as bigoted, believing God more than Galileo (or so the legend says) when clearly today, some masses clearly believe in states being the originator of public good, and some corporations being worth worshipping.

Civilizations have evolved, but humans still be humans ;)

MaxBarraclough2• 6 years ago

I agree it's rather silly for an adult to have a strong emotional attachment to a corporation. I can understand a child feeling that way about the company behind their favourite products, but it seems unbecoming in adults. The best example might be Apple 'fanboys'. (I don't know of a gender-neutral term here. Fanboy implies an excess of appreciation, but fan means something weaker.)

I don't see that it has much to do with religion though. It's only silly because of the specifics of what a corporation is - a somewhat amoral body of capital, very roughly speaking - but it's not always silly to be attached to an institution. There's nothing religious about supporting the Against Malaria Foundation, or the EFF, or (here in the UK) the National Health Service.

encom• 6 years ago

The whole cultue of Apple is so weird, and kind of appalling. Just the fact that their press conferences are broadcast, and they're held in front of an audience that applaud everything the presenter says, and laughs at his jokes. People "live blog" it, like some bizarre court stenographer. And 1.000 threads are posted on HN about Apple keybords having been made even worse. Again.

It's not healthy.

netsharc• 6 years ago

I remember seeing a video of a Musk presentation. It was like that too, but Musk was so awkward and charmless, it was so cringe-enducing.

deergomoo• 6 years ago

That’s some selective consideration right there. Every large consumer tech company broadcasts their press conferences, because it’s of interest both to fans of the products and industry pundits.

Samsung broadcast their phone events every year. As do Google. Microsoft and Sony are very happy to get on stage to tell you about their new consoles. Tesla have got a new car to tell you about too.

Surely you can see why some people might be interested?

enqk• 6 years ago

I call them mass, because that’s what they are. I watch even them intentionally because the comical onslaught of positive words and colors does have a mood enhancing effect

totalZero3• 6 years ago

I suppose the alternative would be a press conference that is broadcast to nobody, presented before an audience that remains entirely silent, and covered by no news outlets or tech blogs.

That doesn't seem like a fair thing to expect from a consumer technology company.

tshaddox2• 6 years ago

Aren’t you just equivocating on the phrase “in love” though? In this context it just means a strong preference for products manufactured by a certain firm in a certain industry, which isn’t particularly abnormal.

dxdm• 6 years ago

"Falling out of love" still implies the kind of love you also fall into, I think. "Falling in love" has not yet been banalized to some mean some generic positive emotion like the word live itself unfortunately has.

I'm sad about the latter because we apparently lost the word to simply express this profound emotion without context.

skc• 6 years ago

I think most corporates would kill to garner the sort of emotional attachment Apple creates with it's customers.

matwood2• 6 years ago

I have used Apple products for years and like them. I've tried competing products and they never worked as well as a complete package. Sure, they might have had a feature or two that was better by some metric, but overall Apple stuff works well for my use case. Does this mean I'm in love with Apple? I don't think so, but for now they work.

Love and hate are also pretty similar emotions. I find both the people who love Apple and hate Apple to be...odd. I really don't understand either. It's a company, either use their products or don't.

harry84• 6 years ago

...either use their products or don't.

This is where the hate comes from: It is frequently not a choice that one is able make, to not use their products. "You're at work, you must use $this." Is one of thousands of examples where your preference is made utterly irrelevant.

Also this is where the love comes from.

When forced to use something else and you hate it because your dislike of it is supercharged by that coercion, and you would much prefer to use this other product you might decide you love this other product and even evangelise it to increase your chance of being able to exercise your preference.

The idea that we use choose our use of, and knowledge of, operating systems by our own free will is a little fanciful. X billion smart phone users and 99+% of them freely choose 1 of 2. "It's your choice" doesn't make sense as soon as you look at it from that perspective. At best, exercising your preference comes with a non-trivial cost. At worst, you have no choice.

If it were easy to decide to use something else, something different whenever you felt like it the evangilism and ire would be more like it is for fast-food chains or clothing manufacturers. ie A little more fringe than we're seeing in computing.

tannhaeuser• 6 years ago

Yet the term "love" is used three times on the HN home page as I write this.

tommilukkarinen2• 6 years ago

Apple is already $2 trillion? If we think it as a bad company, is it too late, is it already too big to stop?

donkeyd7• 6 years ago

Please don't stop them, I really don't want to be forced to buy an Android phone.

fsflover• 6 years ago

You don't have to: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5

intellix2• 6 years ago

I think at this point Apple are just laughing at their customer base and testing how much they can get away with

gigatexal3• 6 years ago

Nope they’re counting my dollar bills. They keep putting out amazing hardware: AirPods, iPhones, M1 Macs, etc., I’ll keep bending around their software (which I love 99% of the time) and their control of the experience which I think is what makes everything work so cohesively.

We just bought a new MacBook Air with the M1 and my wife will use it until it dies so if it’s anything like our other Apple laptops could be 7 years or so.

intellix2• 6 years ago

My MBP 2013 lasted until 2019 which is amazing considering all of my prior laptops only lasted around 1 year. The same can't be said about the ones with any variation of the butterfly keyboard.

My keyboard is pristine on the 2013 and after only 6 months of my 2019 they're already wearing away. I think it's to make it feel old and worn so I'll buy another.

jasoneckert• 6 years ago

While there are many reasons to fall out of love with Apple, including those discussed in this blog post, many people will simply not do so.

Apple has always had an unusual and often unhealthy relationship with their customers, which has garnished Apple fans with labels such as "Cult of Mac members" - Ch.3 through 5 of this satirical book actually analyzes why that is: https://github.com/jasoneckert/CultOfMac

fierarul2• 6 years ago

I'd estimate that the more one rationalises this the less likely to actually switch away from Apple.

It's actually quite simple: let things run their course. When the iPhone becomes too lousy, don't buy another iPhone. When the Apple Watch gets broken, don't buy another Apple Watch. When the laptop won't work, get something else.

Step by step you realise all the Apple gear you have is just broken or old stuff.

bitexploder• 6 years ago

I am in that boat after some painful experiences with my 2018 Macbook Pro. Battery bloated and wrecked the keyboard and touchpad. That combined with the OS continued to go be "iOSified" I am out. Back to Linux for me. The phone... that is harder, Android phones just aren't as good as iPhones, and that is okay. The quality of both Macbooks and MacOS have been in decline for some time now and it is quite disappointing. Even simple things that used to just work like migration assistant required me to deal with errors in the process and it was not simple.

fierarul2• 6 years ago

Embrace the crappiness and call it stoicism.

My Xiaomi phone is nowhere near the iPhone but it does provide 95% at 20% prices. The smart band is no Apple Watch but it was $20.

The Lenovo is no head turner but it is 16 threads at 30% the price and the display is decent.

Just as Apple evolved so did the rest of the world.

swiley• 6 years ago

Get off these closed platforms now while you still can. The more time you wait and the more of your life you integrate the harder it gets.

d1amonds2• 6 years ago

As a passionate Apple hater their new chips didn't make me go 180 but I'm certainly looking over my shoulder. I'm not going to lock myself into any prison but the idea it could be cosy enough to sign up is entirely new to me.

ubermonkey4• 6 years ago

Honestly, the arguments in this series of posts are not strong. I laughed out loud when I got to his complaints about Apple's headphone chips and the ease of pairing they allow -- and how it's somehow unfair that Apple, having developed this competitive advantage, is refusing to share it with other companies.

What IS it about Apple that makes a certain class of tech geek feel like they have to dislike them in such a public and performative way?

duhi88• 6 years ago

They're not the underdog anymore, they're very profitable, they make lukewarm claims for headlines that fall apart under scrutiny (the kind of scrutiny that tech geeks are all about), and in recent history have acted pretty badly towards developers.

All that said, after building a Linux machine for development and general client work, I consider Macs the best option out there. Everything from being able to copy 2FA codes from my phone and pasting on my computer, to colored tags and smart folders in Finder make my work easier. Also, Bluetooth is just a breeze under macOS.

f1refly2• 6 years ago

Hate to be that guy, but I copy paste clipboard contents across devices with kde connect. It's so reliable that I tried doing it when fixing my mum's computer without realizing it's not a magic built in thing that computers just do for some reason.

lern_too_spel8• 6 years ago

On Android, I can transparently use a third party messaging service that also delivers phone calls and messages to my computers. I don't even need my phone with me to do what rendezvous does. This just isn't possible on iOS due to its restrictions on APIs available to third parties.

Shivetya• 6 years ago

Sadly many are very anti success here when it comes to corporations. It is all okay when you are the underdog but when you become top tier suddenly everyone piles on to nitpick

you can read stories throughout the history of HN and see where a company was being heralded for what they were doing only to be criticized later on for the same or similar.

We will never have a world where every company is equally successful and rarely does one company stay at the top for very long. Apple has been at the top of the "their" game for a relatively short amount of time considering how long they have been around. Same with other companies

JMTQp8lwXL• 6 years ago

And, on the converse side, why is there a class of tech geek that always strongly defends Apple in the comments? No matter how strong or weak the original criticism is, the top comment basically laughs it out of the room. It is never taken seriously. Could we not equally characterize the defenses as 'public and performative' as well, and if not, why not?

In either case, I agree with you people generally have strong feelings about Apple, relative to other companies. The existence of one side brings out the other more (compared to a baseline where more people have no opinion or are neutral).

varispeed2• 6 years ago

It's usually people who feel sour about spending their savings on Apple product and want to justify it so hard, they'll try to shut down anyone with even a hint of criticism for that product. They just cannot feel they might be in the wrong. It's actually an effective litmus test for one's personality and you can more easily filter out your circle based on how well people take such criticism.

yepthatsreality2• 6 years ago

What IS it about Apple that makes a certain class of tech geek feel like they have to dislike them in such a public and performative way?

Ask yourself the reverse too while you're at it:

What IS it about Apple that makes a certain class of tech geek feel like they have to like them in such a public and performative way?

ubermonkey4• 6 years ago

I see the former CONSTANTLY here. I never see the latter.

wayneftw3• 6 years ago

What IS it about Apple...?

I guess you haven't been around for the past 20-30 years? They're part of a culture war that they helped create surrounding Mac vs PC, iOS vs Android.

Steve Jobs even created these types of wars in-house. (e.g. the new Mac team vs everybody else - see The Pirates of Silicon Valley) Business is war.

People choose sides and they must defend their choice out of pride. It's like Ford vs Chevy.

Beyond that - Apple is very much against putting general computing freedom in the hands of users especially in iOS but also definitely in macOS. Lots of people hate a tyrant and don't want to work with them and will try to convince people who don't care about that to join them. And of course there are people who disagree.

So that's basically where you get all the anti/pro Apple argumentation.

ubermonkey4• 6 years ago

Wow. Most of what you wrote would have to improve to be considered merely wrong.

modo_mario3• 6 years ago

What IS it about Apple that makes a certain class of tech geek feel like they have to dislike them in such a public and performative way?

Well in this case some of the reasons seem to be anticompetitive behaviour.

Tech geeks like to use their general purpose machines where they have a choice to pick their preferred tools and programs rather than feel like they're being pushed to get trapped in a walled garden of everything [company x] that comes to exist by said company exploiting monopsonies and leveraging it's platform control to slowly increase it's clout and push out competitors.

Yes the same can apply to Microsoft or the like in other/similar cases.

totalZero3• 6 years ago

The counterargument is that Apple is not at fault for its own success, and it would be anti-competitive to hamstring Apple simply because its ecosystem is profitable. The company clearly does not have market control in personal computing hardware, and competes with Samsung and others in the mobile device market, so what exactly is the reason that Apple can't try to convert its platform into a conduit for services revenue?

ok_coo• 6 years ago

Because of their behavior. A recent example is their actions around (not) allowing cloud gaming on their platform.

xCloud and Stadia have been trying to get iOS apps setup and Apple keeps stopping the apps. Apple does not have their own cloud gaming platform. They have been hypocritical about what apps and behavior they do or don't allow on their iOS platform.

Cloud gaming is just one recent example, is this behavior not worth of antitrust?

CharlesW• 6 years ago

xCloud and Stadia have been trying to get iOS apps setup and Apple keeps stopping the apps.

Apple did indeed do that before they had guidelines that could accommodate this new streaming app distribution model. But now they do.[1]

These companies can choose other platforms if the iOS platform experience doesn't meet their needs, OR choose to support an iOS-compatible web distribution experience.[2]

[1] "Apple’s new App Store guidelines carve out loopholes for xCloud, Stadia, and other apps that Apple had blocked": https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/11/21432695/apple-new-app-st...

[2] "Microsoft is bringing xCloud to iOS via the web": https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/8/21508706/microsoft-xcloud...

mrandish2• 6 years ago

Personally, I don't generally choose Apple products for my own use because I tend to prioritize customization, flexibility, cost and a wider range of choices over simplicity, ubiquity, consistency and aesthetics. However, I concede that Apple makes some outstanding hardware and is generally an innovative, well-run company and the world is better for having the company in it. There are many users and use cases for which Apple's offerings are an excellent fit (including my own mother).

Most of my personal usage concerns are around the software and content areas where the user types and use cases Apple tends to prioritize aren't a good fit for my needs. For example, the focus in iOS on content consumption and app-snacking vs flexible content authoring and application depth (speaking-broadly here, as there are certainly notable counter-examples).

From a meta-perspective, as a long-time software-centric serial entrepreneur, I feel the long-term, net impacts on the market of Apple's app and content business models is, at-best, mixed for third-party developers. It can be excellent for very large developers with established brands and/or customer bases as well as the single-digit percentage of app developers that score a mega-hit. It can also be a good deal for small part-time devs that just want to get started quickly and don't necessarily need to count on consistent long-term revenue to make a house payment or employee payroll.

The app store model introduced a different set of trade-offs for developers because Apple retains certain significant value components for themselves such as the direct customer relationship, finely-grained control of distribution, some promotion avenues, margins and available business models. They also force certain requirements on developers. I agree that some of these requirements are also net benefits for users (eg privacy, compatibility, etc). However, they are also differentiators for Apple's offerings and enablers of Apple's extraordinary business model success.

Unlike some others, I don't believe Apple is guilty of being a monopoly (as defined by regulatory agencies) and don't see Apple's strategy as even especially predatory or deceptive. Sure, it's boldly aggressive and perhaps lopsided in Apple's favor, at least as compared to the Wintel proposition before it. But it's not fundamentally immoral, unethical or illegal. Certainly, the net effects and trade-offs of the app store value proposition to developers (and users) should be well-understood by now. If it's not a good fit, developers (or customers) should evaluate alternatives and respond appropriately depending on their preferences, context, requirements and priorities.

Finally, I think the difference between my viewpoint and that of Apple's biggest fans or harshest critics is more a matter of subjective value-judgements and perspective than objective right vs wrong. For example, I'm probably influenced by personally benefiting from valuation increases based on having durable customer relationships and diverse distribution channels.

vfclists• 6 years ago

Develop for the Pinephone or Librem

zherbert• 6 years ago

Wow, honored our post is so upvoted and discussed! In case anyone wants to read the prior posts in our series, links below!

Part 1: Software and Services https://hardware.substack.com/p/falling-out-of-love-with-app...

Part 1.5: macOS Privacy Scandal and App Store Policy https://hardware.substack.com/p/falling-out-of-love-with-app...

Part 2: Hardware and Accessories https://hardware.substack.com/p/falling-out-of-love-with-app...

specialist• 6 years ago

From the OC:

"Censorship: Apple manages a global set of App Stores and cooperates with law enforcement in each jurisdiction in which it operates. ..."

Okay. We agree. What's the fix?

This censorship food fight is at least two problems.

#1 Which rule of law applies to international companies?

This is foreign policy. Just like trade agreements, treaties.

USA flagged corporations like Google, Apple, Facebook need a federal solution. Just like shipping, banking, and so forth. These corporations cannot act unilaterally, nor should they be expected to.

I have no idea what an international treaty covering speech and privacy would look like. Please share any and all ideas.

#2 Need for fair and impartial court system, legitimate enforcement.

FAANGs cannot be governments onto themselves. If my app gets rejected, there must be a separate fair and impartial court system to hear my appeal and adjudicate. If an impersonator takes my profile, I need legitimate enforcement to restore my property rights. If a FAANG closes my accounts, I must have the right to sue for damages.

Again: Enough complaining about unfair, arbitrary behavior. We get it.

Start proposing solutions.

novok• 6 years ago

You remove the master key nature that they have over their services and devices and let people manage their own master keys. I.e. let other app store happen, do not require apple to be the sole dispenser of keys, let side loading happen, etc.

That removes a lot of profit from their %30 cut although, so they are directly incentivized to prevent that from happening

nbzso• 6 years ago

Silence. This is my comment. Waiting for legislative solution agains big tech in a financial depression is a pipe dream. So...I vote with my money. No more Apple tax for me.

musicale• 6 years ago

I believe Apple should simply refuse to cooperate with oppressive governments – but this is an unlikely scenario, as they have extremely close ties and dependence to China, a current perpetrator of genocide against the Uyghurs.

I could imagine Apple eventually moving its supply chain out of China, but it seems unlikely that they would be willing to be blocked from China's marketplace as Google services are. I wonder where Pixel phones and Chromebooks are manufactured, and where their components are sourced?

I would also like to see Apple refuse to cooperate with authoritarian governments, but I don't see that happening sadly.

Falling Out of Love with Apple, Part 3: Content and Censorship

Related Stories