• 0 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 13th, 2024

help-circle









  • Look, the difference is in the language. One company hasn’t “done it”, the industry as a whole moves, sometimes cooperatively other times in a tug of war.

    As the commenter above mentioned, Apple was in a unique position of being able to leverage all the work done in the phone and tablet spaces to push for an ARM laptop. This helped other manufacturers which already showed an interest in doing the same.

    On the other hand, with the lock in mechanisms apple has in their products they also stifles competition and innovation in other areas.

    They can both help push and hinder innovation. Just like any company. It’s not about hating or loving a corporate entity.






  • Your first point is fair, and I’m not really sure if it’s just the technology maturing or a symptom of stifled innovation. Personally, I think there are still innovations to be made in this space, even big ones. But it’s not just Apple’s fault. The duopoly of iOS and Android has completely cornered the international market, new players have almost no chance, and the 30% cut app developers have to give Apple or Google puts them at a big disadvantage. I think a shakeup in the phone market would be very good for consumers.

    iPhones seem to have better battery life.

    I just have annecdotal evidence from people I know with iPhones (and mine, too, though it has been a while). It seemed to me, at least, that Apple phones tend to slow down quite a bit after a few years, and they start having battery problems. Some people I know seem to have gotten lucky with the battery thing, others not so much. But if it works well for you, then great!

    More importantly, the “garden” is not the problem. If someone chooses to, they should be able to only use Apple products, download only Apps from the Appstore, and trust Apple with their data. It is the “walled” part of the deal which is the problem. Once inside, there should be an out. That is what the DOJ and the EU are trying to accomplish.


  • I think if we are going to support the idea of an open web, we need to be consistent about it. Federation should be possible with threads and blusky. One of the main advantages of federation is that it is interoperable.

    But we have to be careful. When you have an agent as powerful as Facebook/Meta at the table, it only takes a few missteps for the fediverse to crumble. I don’t think Mark Zuckerberg has had a sudden change of heart, the success of the fediverse is not his goal.

    There need to be clear requirements for a platform to be allowed to federate. Basic rules like not manipulating engagement metrics and respecting the protocol. But we need to think as a community about where we draw the line.

    Personally, I think user mentions from thread users opening the threads application is a huge violation. This behavior is not expected, and is only meant to suck people into their ecosystem. It shouldn’t be accepted.

    It’ll be a long road fam, but I think it’s worth it for a better Web.


  • I’m always impressed how far corporations managed to convince people to be loyal to them. Not saying it’s a person’s fault, I used to fall pretty badly for corporate bullshit myself.

    The whole “walled garden” concept is inherently anti-consumer. Have you ever asked yourself why there hasn’t been any real innovation in the phone/smartwatch fields for years now. Or why phones aren’t cheap to fix anymore. Or why battery life gets so bad after two or so years that most people are forced to buy a new one.

    Things don’t have to be this way. We can have well designed products that work together without all the lock in.