[gjsman-1000]

I’m not that pessimistic. The world ebbs and flows.

There was a time when if you wanted an app, it had to be for Windows. It needed to be digitally signed (for good reason) not long later. Good luck moving it to any other platform. Also, good luck getting past corporate IT departments.

Then, the internet got better. Anyone could make a program that ran on any device. Later, we need pseudo-signing for that too, but it was nowhere near as intensive to get.

Desktop computers have never been a free for all. It ebbs and flows. Less freedom on system apps, greater freedom for web apps is the new vogue.

Let’s also not forget the motivation for this - people learned to be terrified of installing software. Remember Windows 10 and 11 S mode? Microsoft claims 60% of users never leave that mode to install even one app outside the Microsoft Store. That’s how much the “Normie” has learned to fear programs, and I think that there’s some blame to be had there. We desired freedom at the expense of the normal user. The normal user has rebelled and rejected freedom voluntarily.

The “Normie” user is perfectly content with a walled garden and a big tech company “securing” their experience. They’ve had their taste of freedom with Windows in the 90s and 2000s and fear it immensely. Blue screens, viruses, clunky software, broken updates, unreliable - but free. Unlike iPhone: Automatic updates, no crashes, viruses almost nonexistent, reliable and simple. Not technically free, but it feels free enough. We don’t really have anyone but ourselves (tech enthusiasts in general) to blame.

I can’t overstate this enough: We want freedom? We need to break the well-earned cultural stereotype that freedom equals a terrible experience.

[31337Logic]

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm old enough to remember the exact "free for all" on desktop computers that you claim never existed.

Take your "walled gardens" and stuff it. Not everyone wishes to be boxed in that way.

[gjsman-1000]

> Take your "walled gardens" and stuff it. Not everyone wishes to be boxed in that way.

Yes, everyone on Hacker News doesn’t want to be boxed in this way.

In the real world, literally nobody gives a darn about Apple having an iOS monopoly. They love their iPhones, they hate their laptops. Why is that?

[salawat]

They don't effing know and most people don't have the mental stack or attention span to make it through an explanation of the factors/consequences involved.

Believe me, I've tried hard to get things boiled down for the layman. We're at a point we're literally speaking languages that have no commonly relatable interpersonal equivalent.

[pauby]

> They love their iPhones, they hate their laptops.

Feels like unsubstantiated generalisation.

Source(s)?

[486sx33]

I would say, most anyone involved in tech since pre 2008 feels this way, not only everyone to HN.

As a friend of mine says “oh no you’re confused, this is MY phone…” and then mutters to himself, whose phone is this anyway?

[cesarb]

> There was a time when if you wanted an app, it had to be for Windows. [...] Desktop computers have never been a free for all.

You're not going back far enough (as shown by your statement mentioning only Windows). Back in the MS-DOS days, there was no technical block to doing whatever you wanted with your system. It's no coincidence that Linux originated in these days; the openness of PC clones running one of the DOS variants (MS-DOS wasn't the only one) allowed for the full replacement of the operating system with nearly zero effort. You didn't even have to change the boot sector; a DOS program (LOADLIN.EXE) could completely switch the currently running operating system.

Things are much more locked down in desktop computers nowadays, and the only reason they aren't completely locked down is that Linux had already become popular enough to convince Microsoft to allow for a backdoor (actually a pair of backdoors: signing by Microsoft for popular distributions, and manual disabling for less popular distributions and development).

> [...] people learned to be terrified of installing software. [...] Microsoft claims 60% of users never leave that mode to install even one app outside the Microsoft Store. That’s how much the “Normie” has learned to fear programs, [...]

Is it fear, or is it just convenience? If everything you want or need at that moment is on whatever software store you have (be it the Microsoft Store or Steam or something else), there's not much incentive to look beyond it. It's like what's been said about video streaming providers: once every show you wanted was on a single streaming provider, there was not much incentive anymore to look around on seedy corners of the web for movies, but once that convenience is no longer available (because said provider no longer has the media you want), people once again look for alternatives.

(As an aside, think about the reason "developer mode" in more recent Android versions is hidden behind a secret knock on a disused corner at the bottom of the settings application: if it weren't a hidden setting, "normal users" would enable it. The same with bypassing some security warning pages in the desktop Chrome browser. If "normal users" really feared freedom, they would stay away from these options without the need to hide them.)

[Dalewyn]

It's much more simple: Normal people (read: not us) buy computers to accomplish a given task, computers are merely tools; a computer and a can opener are exactly the same thing. If the computer serves its user's purpose, that's all that matters.

That is to say: Normal people couldn't care less about fleedumb and rible. Normal people care about getting shit done; presently, locked down smartphones get shit done better than any other computational device for normal people.

[betaby]

I also buy computers and phones to accomplish task. Those task are, however, way more diverse than task people you are referring to are willing to accomplish.