1) More spam on Android by far
2) Spotify not blocked
There’s a bit of religion happening in both directions. iOS has, objectively, fewer problems than Android in these regards and part of that are the policies.
I don't get spam on my phone (well, SMS spam sometimes but that has nothing to do with the OS) and nobody I know does. Also, I keep hearing on HN that iOS doesn't split notifications into channels and you can't block just the ad notifications. Unlike on Android where I block the ads for Uber Eats, the only application that wants to spam me (but doesn't, since I can just disable ads).
I think this would be a better argument if Apple wasn't so careless with what they accept on the App Store. There are scam apps, apps which try to trick users into accepting subscriptions, tonnes and tonnes of "casino for children" games, games which clearly try to trick children into spending their parents' money, etc.
If you think "app store spam" is a real thing, you've spent way too much time on app store.
I install apps that I need -- news, banking, podcast, email, Uber etc, usually from well known companies. A small amount of apps are lesser known but they have good reviews.
I don't think there is any fundamental difference from the Apple app store. Maybe do a check of yourself first.
> There’s a bit of religion happening in both directions. iOS has, objectively, fewer problems than Android in these regards and part of that are the policies.
When you say "objectively" I assume that this is something that has been measured and that there are reliable sources for this statement?
I would be really surprised. Anytime when I’ve searched for a feature (like DLNA sharing), and not for a specific app, I’ve got only very shitty spam apps in both stores. Even when I search for specific app, like GTA, the results deteriorate very quickly, in both stores.
The moment there are more than a very minimal / virtually non existing amount of spam and scam, it doesn't matter who has more, whatever control are in place don't work, at least not to the extant of "you must make massive concession to your rights on your own device to ensure we can do that".
That is my point of view, and to each their own I assume.
As for Spotify, yes technically it's not blocked, probably because they know that's a line they can't cross.
> iOS has, objectively, fewer problems than Android in these regards
You really need to outline clearly what "regards" you mean in that front, and objectively implies fact backed. I would disagree with that statement as-is.
I mean a lot of it just doesn’t apply. Google was caught paying off Samsung to encourage them not to put alternate app stores on their devices. Squashing competition where it should exist.
Apple makes the devices, so they aren’t making others squash competition. They’re exactly what they say.
Apple made deals to set the default search engine and the default maps app, and rejected other app stores. As bad as Google is, Apple is even worse, setting worse terms for deals and rejecting other deals outright to favor their own products.
If you know that putting four wheels on a car works better than putting three wheels on a car, that doesn't make you biased against three wheels. It makes you biased towards better results.
We know that "thought diversity" on a team, which can take many forms, has a short term drawback (team gelling doesn't go as fast) and long term advantages (more ideas, better ideas, better resilience, etc etc).
Is there any evidence that gender is a primary determinant of "thought diversity"? I'd expect other factors, including age, upbringing, ethnicity, etc. have much more of an impact on diversity. A woman and a man who grew up in the same suburbs, went to the same school, have studied the same, etc. probably have very similar ideas on most topics than two men (or women for that matter) who have completely different upbringing.
If thought diversity is what matters, a much better determinant is probably geographical distribution in upbringing and unique educational paths and unique previous employments (all of which can just as easily be estimated by a resume as gender).
Diversity is good, but diversity for diversity's sake is not good. I think teams should be made based on merit, and if then the team is also diverse, all the more better. Although important, imo making diversity the most important criteria seems a bit misguided and somewhat idealistic although on paper and in principle it seems to be coming from a good place.
I love Pi, but I'm not on the market for asking it to act like Hitler or talk about relating to Mother Teresa or not.
The ability to say "Hey what's happened in the OpenAI saga in the last 8 hours" or "How did <my sports team> do last night" and get a voice response while I'm walking my dog is the sort of thing I care about.
reply