[saagarjha]

I mean, yes, this change makes them more money. But Apple is weird, because they are actually able to convince themselves that they're doing this for a good reason, and if you follow them closely you can almost see their central argument: when it comes to security, they trust nobody but themselves, not even the user they sell the device to. It's kind of a strange mindset, but if you look at it under that lens a lot of the concerns about sideloading and repairs make sense from their perspective ("we don't trust the user to do the right thing for their devices").

How does this look like from the outside? I think there are genuinely a lot of people who actually agree with this. Actually, I think almost everyone agrees with this to some extent: people only have a limited amount of effort they can spend managing different parts of their life. The conflict occurs for the parts where people do feel like they can make better decisions than Apple, but they can't because Apple won't let them. For most people, going to an Apple Store or AASP to get a repair is generally fine and saves them hassle. But for the people who are willing to save money to go elsewhere, or do their own repairs, it really sucks.

[someguydave]

it would be easier to stomach “apple owns the device not the loser customer” if there was a single major oem who was focused only on producing customer-owned devices

[fsflover]

https://puri.sm/products

[someguydave]

yeah man do they have data sheets and programming guides for every chip? are they gonna get interoperability with US cell providers?

[fsflover]

https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Cellul...

[someguydave]

“ It can be debated whether the Librem 5 should be called "free hardware" or "open hardware" since most of the complexity of a smartphone lies within the individual components which are not open hardware. The Librem 5 is free/open hardware in the sense that anyone can take the schematics and legally produce their own versions of the phone, but it isn't free/open hardware in the sense that people can't access the source files for the SoC, cellular modem, WiFi/Bluetooth, GNSS, USB controller, etc., so most of the functionality is hidden.”

[dreamcompiler]

Let's examine your premise: Apple acts in the best interest of the customer. In this light FaceID is a bug, not a feature. If somebody wants to get into your phone they don't even need to beat you up; they just have to restrain you, take your phone, point it at your face, and they're in.

With a decent password, the adversary has to at least use a rubber hose. More important, cops can't legally use a rubber hose but they can damn well take your phone and point it at your face with no repercussions.

[saagarjha]

The premise here is that half of the users don’t set a passcode at all unless you make it easy for them to authenticate to their phone.

[Cosmin_C]

> when it comes to security, they trust nobody but themselves, not even the user they sell the device to. It's kind of a strange mindset

It is a strange mindset until you remember that obvious phishing attempts are still crippling organisations and so does ransomware and social engineering.

Relevant: https://youtu.be/kkCwFkOZoOY