Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I personally dislike it, but I don't think it's monopolistic behavior. macOS's market share is comparatively pretty low and you can install windows or linux on your mac if you choose to.



"Install another OS" is not an acceptable solution, it smacks of technophile arrogance. Try giving that advice to any senior owning a Mac, wondering why their favorite (unsigned) app doesn't launch after updating their Mac OS.

Apple's entire marketing strategy revolves around customer empathy, but their actions don't


As I said, I dislike apples decision, but involving government agencies and suggesting a monopoly implies that there are no viable alternatives and that’s simply not true. You can just not buy macs anymore and refuse the update.


But you’re okay with giving that same “senior owning Mac” the responsibility of choosing which apps to trust? How has this worked out for the last 30+ years?


It has worked mostly fine for OS X during that period, not so much for Windows though. The blame for thelatter is squarely on Microsoft for having had terrible security defaults and a confusing UI.


Isn’t that exactly what Apple is doing - good default security that won’t affect most users? What software is granny using that isn’t actively supported and not already coming from a trusted developer who isn’t already signing their software to avoid the work around for running unsigned software?

But, no security defaults with either Mac, Linux, or Windows stops an app that has user level access from having access to all of the user’s documents - except for apps that are either in the App Store or voluntarily sandbox themselves.


It's billion devices and millions of users. Monopoly or not it affects large number of users


Affects large number of people is not the same thing as those people having no viable alternatives. Utilities are often monopolies, and arguably Microsoft was in the 90s, but a company with like < 50% of desktop market share?


You've put significant effort in defining monoply classification or suggesting workarounds, instead of calling Apple out on unethical behavior. Maybe it's better for Apple's customers for Apple to show some empathy, and not unfairly lock down their hardware. Macs have been secure enough without this new lockdown, so any argument made for security seems like a cover for their true greed


Lol, a couple sentences about a well defined notion (monopoly) is not a “significant effort”


Viable alternative or not it still affects large number of users. Millions is not a small amount.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: