[alephnan]

Why should Apple be obligated to make their hardware open? You have the option of not buying Apple products. Apple is not forcing anyone to buy their products. Apple is a private company. The vast majority of their customers don’t need to worry about compiling their own software. Apple is selling a product for the average consumer. Arguably, Apple doesn’t want hardcore users like yourself as a user. Hardcore users are nit picky and complain a lot. They are not selling raw hackable hardware. If that was a sufficiently compelling market , another player would have provided comparable hardware/software/platform already. What we have is a few niche Linux hardware makers, but they aren’t reaching the scale of Apple because I guess the business is not a Scalable.

[kaba0]

Because it is a really expensive device I own, it is not apple’s business to decide what I am allowed to do with it after purchase. As far as I know I don’t rent it — even though they would prefer such a business model.

Also, come on - this “you have a choice for another device” is just such a stupid “argument”. There are 2 tradeoffs to choose from, period. And there will likely not be another for a very long time, as the main reason Windows Phone couldn’t gain traction is that mobile app developers had more than enough work to support 2 markets.

[5560675260]

Same way as Apple isn't obligated to make their hardware open we're not obligated to abstain from criticism.

[lern_too_spel]

This is a forum for technologists who are often interested in this functionality. Many have fallen for Apple's shiny marketing, and they have every right to complain if they feel they have been hoodwinked. It helps other people make better purchasing decisions.

[alephnan]

> Many have fallen for Apple's shiny marketing

Has Apple marketed iOS as a self-hosting software development device ?

> This is a forum for technologists who are often interested in this functionality

Are people who are interested in functionality seriously expecting Apple to be the most “functional”? Isn’t that the whole schpiel of Linux, open source, where everything is customizable? Why are people seeking out Apple then? This same forum frequently complains about Apple’s pricing and does comparative pricing for similar, or rather analogous, commodity hardware. If things were really comparable and substitutable that easy, then all else being equal people would be happy with the cheaper option instead of being upset that Apple doesn’t provide x, y, z.

People are desiring Apple’s hardware, form factor, quality and design. The R&D in these areas are funded by the preferences of average consumer, and the pro/semi-pro media creatives. It feels like a sense of entitlement that Apple’s R&D / strategy in building sleek consumer products that made Apple the most valuable company should now focus specifically on developers, who may not make ROI sense.

Opening up the platform for such things that running arbitrary code poses security risks, but controlling that risks makes the user interface / preferences more complex. That’s the strategy that Google / Android took. But if this approach was superior, why are these same technologists fawning over Apple then ?

[lern_too_spel]

> Has Apple marketed iOS as a self-hosting software development device ?

Apple has marketed iPhone as an everything device. "There's an app for that."

> But if this approach was superior, why are these same technologists fawning over Apple then ?

People feel a psychological need to justify their expensive purchases. On some axes, Apple's hardware is superior to alternatives. On pretty much all axes, Apple's software is inferior. People understandably want the best of all worlds, but in practice, they have to make compromises. If they find that they do not like the compromises they have made, they understandably will complain. Complaining about what is wrong with each device incentivizes companies to make them better, and criticizing people for complaining is not helpful.

[alephnan]

> Complaining about what is wrong with each device incentivizes companies to make them better

Not really. Financial incentives incentivizes companies to make devices “better”. Additionally, adding more complexity and adding low level hooks for developers is likely to make things worst for the majority of users.

[lern_too_spel]

>Financial incentives incentivizes companies to make devices “better”.

Financial incentives follow from people complaining about devices prompting other people not to buy them.

> Additionally, adding more complexity and adding low level hooks for developers is likely to make things worst for the majority of users.

Who is asking for more complexity? The additional complexity of iOS comes from giving Apple special APIs that nobody else is allowed to use.

[kaba0]

There is nothing not already implemented needed for compilers other than AppStore pulling the trigger on already working apps.

[kaba0]

Running arbitrary Turing-complete programs that output Y from X is not customizability. I’m not asking to change the lock screen.

They have more than capable enough processors for that, it’s not some happy meal menu present that can only run a single stupid game.