Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ApolloFortyNine 900 days ago
The literal most obvious start is apple, who doesn't allow users to even install another app store, or even an unapproved app at all.

After that sure, they can try to go after Google.
1 comments
isodev 900 days ago
Why is suddenly “able to install another App Store” a thing or even a necessity?

I think this entire situation has been blown out of proportion. There are a few “loud” voices lobbying for stuff that are of no consequence or just false.

link
error503 900 days ago
It seems like a fundamental right that I should have full control of a device which I own outright.

That control, over something I paid for and ostensibly 'own' will be used against me, as in the case of App Store cuts and digital payments. Why should that be allowed? If I own it, it is mine, and control over its technology should be mine as well.

link
isodev 900 days ago
So you’re saying Apple should put a sticker on the box saying it’s a device designed to operate with a specific OS? Then you can make an informed decision and purchase something else?
link
error503 899 days ago
No, I'm saying they should be forced to give me access to run the code I want to run on the device I bought from them.

Ford can't geofence my Bronco to only drive to stores that pay them off, why should Apple be allowed to enforce what I can run on my iPhone?

link
m463 900 days ago
you can't even secure your own device. You have no ability to see what is running, what it is talking to, or prevent the communication in or out.
link
isodev 900 days ago
That would be really nice to have in general. I don’t think an antitrust action is helpful to achieve it though.

Why not some legislation instead? For example, I have a friend who likes to tinker and they would love to be able to “own” their Tesla car, or Samsung smart TV (both also currently running as a black box of sorts… with even less security and transparency than iOS).

link