[stale2002]

> If we don’t like how they operate, we buy a competitor who does what we want.

I agree that there are some other "free market solutions" that could work.

The example that I gave, which would absolutely be a free market solution, would be if Fortnite, and other major companies, like facebook, banded together to build easy to use jailbreaking software, and to use their companies to try and convince a large critical mass of people to jailbreak their phone.

That could work. But I am worried about the government intervention, that Apple would try to engage in, to stop this free market solution, via lawsuits that they would inevitably use against this free market answer.

But lots of companies, acting together, to help everyone jailbreak their phone, so that, hopely half, or a large amount of users, now are in a position where they can easily install other app stores, would be a reasonably free market way of solving all of this.

When there is enough critical mass of users doing this, those major companies could then remove/ban their app from the Apple app store, so that basically everyone else has to follow along as well, and then basically everyone is outside of Apple's control.

[tmp231]

If they would band together, why not just make a new phone? Going after jail breaking apple devices would be fruitless since apple could release a new firmware to block your OS. I wish they wouldn’t, but the market solution would be for people to stop buying apple devices.

[stale2002]

> If they would band together, why not just make a new phone?

Because it is much easier to write jailbreaking software, than it is to build an entirely new phone.

> since apple could release a new firmware to block your OS

People have been jailbreaking phones for years. That is always the game of cat and mouse. And people have continue to get around it, even though they don't have large amount of resources, like big companies would.

But, furthermore, if there is a large enough userbase, that is jailbreaking their phone, then it would cause Apple a large amount of economic damage, if they decide to screw over this critical mass of users.

If 30% of Apple's users, would get their phone bricked after an Apple update, then Apple would probably be cautious about doing that.

But I guess it is hypothetically possible that Apple would be willing to brick 30% of their customers phones (if that was the critical mass). That would certainly hurt their customer friendly image though, and it would cause Apple billions of dollars in damages.

> but the market solution would be for people

Putting lots of resources into jailbreaking phones, and convincing a lot of users to do it, such that it would cause Apple a lot of damage, if they stopped it, is also a free market solution.

That is a free market solution that is much easier to do, than building a new phone.

[tmp231]

As long as it doesn’t break the contract you signed when buying the device, go for it.

[stale2002]

> As long as it doesn’t break the contract

The contract that would be enforced by aggressive government regulation?

Yeah no. I thought you did not like government regulation, and supported people's ability to do what they want with things that they own? And in this case, such a contract, is enforced by government regulation, and we should work to invalidate it, if it prevents people from doing what they want with the phone that they bought.

Thats the point. I support the free market solution here, and apparently you want to use the government, to take away people's ability to do what they want, with their own phone, if you think that such a contract should prevent this.

I want to get rid of Apple's ability to use the government, to stop people from doing what they want with their own phone. The government regulations that prevent people from doing this is the problem.

[tmp231]

I certainly support contract law. What I don’t want is coercion. They make a device, offer it to you with a contract, and you can say yes or no.

You make a recommendation for how they run their platform, they can say yes or no. You can go or you can stay.

It’s that simple.

But I think we’ve run this well dry.

[josephcsible]

> offer it to you with a contract

If I walk in to Best Buy and get an iPhone, I'm not signing any contract with Apple. All I'm agreeing to is "I give Best Buy money, and Best Buy gives me this physical product." The reason we're upset with Apple is that they're imposing terms on us as if we signed a contract with them, but we didn't.