Apple provides convenience and simplicity at the price of freedom. If those align with your value priorities then you're going to like Apple. It's really as simple as that.
The fact that different people have different value priorities means there will always be multiple competitors filling those different market segments. That's why I see this Apple/Android/Linux/Windows "debate" as silly. Different people are going to make different choices based off their preferences and priorities. There's no sense in being a fan boi and defending your personal choice at all costs.
Freedom of what? Apple is not really restricting anything, it simply doesn't provide alternative ways to do stuff and I am yet to hear for someone getting in trouble for finding their way in their iDevice.
As for the running apps, you don't even need to hack or reverse engineer anything. You can compile, sign, load and run any code you want on even the most walled iDevice, iPhone.
That's simply not true. For example, you're not allowed to install a different OS on an iPhone. You're always restricted to using the APIs that apple exposes to developers.
BTW, without taking the reverse engineering path, you can install any software on iOS by getting a developer account. The code signing happens locally, Apple wouldn't know if you are installing a torrent client or anything else. Yes it's paid if you like having the app all the time, but the phone itself is also paid. Simply incorporate that into the cost of ownership price, if it's too expensive then don't use it.
There are plenty of alternatives out there.
The boat-loader is locked down, without an exploit, you can't unlock it. No legitimate reverse engineering is going to grant you access to a low level signing key.
That is a restriction on "whatever I want" and quite a few other things.
Then do that. I don’t see why Apple should be obligated to help with that though.
If this doesn’t work for you, simply buy something else.
Lets pretend an oracle handed me a fully functioning version of Android 5.1 (the best looking version of Android) for the iPhone $whateverIsCurrent. Installation is fully automated and works 100% of the time. All I have to do is plug-in my iphone to a Mac, paste in the signing key, and hit okay.
I am no closer then to installing an altOS then I am now. I can't install it without getting my hands on the signing key. Which means, hacking or corporate espionage. One is probably illegal in some countries and the other is definitely illegal in most country.
For the record, I don't care if I run iOS or anything else. A phone is a phone is a phone. But a few comments up, the claim was made that Apple isn't stopping owner's from doing anything and that simply isn't true. It is using software to place the weight of the law against the user.
People are framing the argument against App Store as if they are blocking people from installing software into the devices they bought. Probably this attracts more sympathy but the reality is different, what Apple restricts is the access to its software distribution platform. That's why it's not the users that are pissed off but the developers.
Apple is not selling the right to install software to your iDevice, that's the developers who sell the right to install the software they created. Apple sells the right to distribute software to the devices they make, it's called Apple Developer Program and that's the one that costs money and has restrictions.
Since very many other people have vastly different experiences, we can conclude that the author is either very lucky, or that the author does encounter problems, but forget them immediately or don’t consider them “problems”. I.e. that the author has confirmation bias.
> Since very many other people have vastly different experiences, we can conclude that the author is either very lucky, or that the author does encounter problems, but forget them immediately or don’t consider them “problems”. I.e. that the author has confirmation bias.
Now you say that "hardware companies are almost universally bad at making software, and this should also apply to Apple".
Who's biased now?
Considering my experience with myriad of Apple devices, Android, Linux, Windows and whatever tens and tens of gadgets I owned, I could oppose that although most hardware companies are supposed to be bad at making software, this seems not influencing Apple.
We are all biased to some extent and this should come as no surprise.
My point is: yes it's problematic that Apple prevents any browser diversity on iOS(by not allowing other browser engines than Webkit), however their behaviour is also keeping chromium's dominance in check. Neither of these two things are good, but I think I prefer the acceptable evil of Apple.
The main point I wanted to express is that we are (more and more) forced to choose some evil that we MUST accept because there are no alternatives or because alternatives are even worse. And this is sad.
There are quite specific systemic problems brought upon society by the indomitable ascent of large multinational corporations and corporate capitalism.
One of the most egregious, is the reduction of power a single person has in relation to the larger corporate structures they become reliant upon. This about some of the arguments used against Apple today .. almost all relate to the concentration of power this single, unelected legal entity has.
This is a problem for society now. Without something happening to change the rise of corporate capitalism, the problems posed will only become more difficult to solve.
Apple is not the problem; it actually just evidence that should be used to solve it. A symptom of a capitalism system that needs to be improved for the good of society.
It's definitely not an acceptable evil, when examined through this lens.