[andreime]

Apple fights hard to not allow users to install from other sources on devices they own, so they can charge rent from developers, then complains when some apps that are too big for them to control are installed from the sole app store.

The solution is pretty simple, let people use the devices they own as they want; allow multiple app stores; allow people to download binaries and install on their devices.

[tambourine_man]

Or, let people choose the other platform that already allows them just that.

What some people may not understand is that a large percentage of Apple customers are buying iPhones because of those restrictions and not in spite of them.

[jerojero]

This has always been such a funny argument to me. The "some" is carrying some much weight. Yeah there's a couple vocal apple users in hacker news that think a closed ecosystem is good, more private and secure, they trust Apple and they indeed have chosen the iPhone for this reason.

But more likely than not, people choose iPhone because everyone has an iPhone. People choose iPhone because when both parents have iPhones they buy their kids iPhones and then when their kids grow into young adults, well, they're already invested in the ecosystem to such a degree that it's impossible to get out.

More likely than not, they choose iPhone because iPhones are just what people think about when they think smartphone. Because Samsung phones seem "complicated".

I really doubt people even care about privacy and security. I mean, sure, if you ask them if they care they will say yes; because that's how polls work, no one wants to say they don't care and be judged. But if you were to ask people "why iPhone" I'd say the answer will be more on the lines of "because iPhone".

The modern world is made on marketing and Apple is the best company in the world at it.

[tambourine_man]

> Because Samsung phones seem "complicated".

Exactly. And why is it so?

[lapcat]

> What some people may not understand is that a large percentage of Apple customers are buying iPhones because of those restrictions and not in spite of them.

Citation needed. Do you have polls or other consumer research to back this claim?

[tambourine_man]

I have 70% of Android global market share. It offers more choices of devices, price points and a less restrictive OS.

There's almost nothing you can do on an iPhone that you can't on an Android. Conversely, there are plenty of things that the more open Android platform allows that iOS doesn't.

And yet, despite all of that, some people still prefer to buy iPhones. I think it's their choice to make.

[ghusto]

I didn't buy an iPhone because of the "security" that the restrictions give me, and I suspect few others who jumped ship from Android to iPhone did either.

I switched because the iPhone does what I need it to do, and then gets out of the way. It works as I need it to with my Mac, and is for the most part intuitive and well thought out. I would prefer it if I could install what I wanted from where I wanted, but it's a price I'm willing to pay. And no, allowing me to do so would not undermine any of the value I've pointed out.

I bought an iPhone _despite_ the restrictions, not because of them.

[tambourine_man]

> allowing me to do so would not undermine any of the value I've pointed out.

That’s a hard claim to make. The “just works”, “gets out of your way”, nature is very much helped by a closed and restrictive ecosystem.

[addicted]

This can clearly be shown to be false.

People said the exact same thing for decades for why they preferred Macs over Windows.

The Mac was an extremely open ecosystem.

That did not stop it from “just work”ing or “getting out of your way”.

[lapcat]

> There's almost nothing you can do on an iPhone that you can't on an Android.

1. This is false. There are plenty of features and apps (including my own apps!) that are exclusive to iPhone. iMessage and iCloud for example.

2. Products are not simply lists of features. There's also something important called design.

3. Don't forget vendor hardware support, software support, and resale value.

I can say, from a personal perspective, that I didn't buy an iPhone because it's vendor locked. I bought an iPhone because I'm a Mac user and developer, so I was already in the Apple ecosystem.

I suspect that there are a lot of people who buy an iPhone simply because their family and/or friends have iPhones already.

[tambourine_man]

Regarding 1, there are plenty of alternatives to iMessage and iCloud. They are even interoperable to some degree.

Essencial apps were made for Windows only back in 95-2005. Your only choice was emulation and there were no alternatives. It’s a completely different picture today.

2 and 3 are not relevant to monopoly claims.

[lapcat]

> Regarding 1, there are plenty of alternatives to iMessage and iCloud

So? The alternatives to iMessage and iCloud are different from them in a number of ways, just like iOS and Android are different in a number of ways. They're not identical alternatives.

> 2 and 3 are not relevant to monopoly claims.

We're not discussing monopoly claims. We're discussing why people buy iPhones.

[consp]

> resale value

Even with the insane idiotic second hand Apple device prices, the refurbish shops are still going broke every time they show up, so I doubt it as good as people say.

[addicted]

Any evidence it’s because they prefer being prevented from installing certain apps they can get on Android?

IOW, is there any evidence that if the apps that are currently unavailable on iOS became available on iOS, iPhone sales would drop?

[tambourine_man]

If you ask a user if they want to be prevented from installing an app, they'll most likely reply “no”, of course. If, however, they wake up and their phone is not behaving as usual due to borderline malware app they inadvertently installed, most people would be pissed. The age old freedom/responsibility tension.

To my surprise, many people had a similar questioning like you did in this thread, so it's probably not as obvious as I imagined.

[andreime]

I've heard this over and over and my follow-up question is never answered... What would change for those users? This is about ownership of your device, if you're OK with Apple's walled garden - that they apparently can change on any whims - nothing will be shoved down your throat.

Please answer.

[tambourine_man]

There are side effects to allowing third-party stores, or giving up on restrictions. It's a trade-off. There are advantage to both choices. I thought this was pretty obvious in my post.

If Apple was the only viable platform, then absolutely, I don't want to live in a world where I can't hack with my devices. But when you have Android, I think it's actually better for the user that a more locked down platform also exists. It's a different model to choose from.

[andreime]

You didn't answer. You didn't even come close.

Also, "There are side effects to allowing third-party stores" - what is this bs??? Do I need to link to Steve Jobs presenting the iPhone saying iOS is based on MacOS? Have you use installed software on your Mac from outside the App Store?

[wavemode]

> What some people may not understand is that a large percentage of Apple customers are buying iPhones because of those restrictions and not in spite of them.

Huh?? This is an extraordinary claim, given the plain fact that if someone really doesn't want apps from 3rd-party stores on their device, they could just, you know... not install any...?