[frizlab]

As the “tech guy” in the family things might change actually.

(One of) the reasons why I like the walled garden is how it simplifies everything troubleshooting-wise. I have a few quirks to know, the rest is because of hardware failure and that’s it.

My peer not being tech-savvy might install stupid things from stupid places and it might be a problem.

The way it’s done it’s unlikely, but still it just complexify things for next to no reasons in my book. (Yes 30% is a lot; I personally don’t care, though I do recognize I’m a good position and I can afford not to–but then again, the most vocal about the 30% are not the most unwealthy…)

[klaustopher]

That's also solveable. For android you need to enable deep inside of the settings to allow 3rd party installs. Nobody is preventing Apple to do something like this. Or that you can create a profile that disables that setting that you can install on your familys devices. Nothing in the DMA prevents this.

Just because it makes your life easier as the family tech support is a pretty selfish reason to hope for a very good pro-consumer law to fail.

[frizlab]

The way it’s going I’m actually pretty sure if they did that they’d get reprimanded…

Also it makes my life annoying when I open Safari and am presented w/ what can be told as the worst pop-up ever and have to spend literally minutes dismissing it for something I neither wanted nor needed. It’s the cookie banner all over again.

Does not seem like a lot, but as a developer I use devices in a factory configuration a lot, and it’s just as annoying as it’s useless.

Basically it’s the cookie banner again. Served no-one (at least definitely not the consumers), but annoyed a lot.

As for the “those that want to use their 1000€ device differently than you now have the chance to,” well……… nobody forced them to buy a 1000€ device did they?? They knew of the limitations; they had to, or they’re very dumb.

The law is not pro-consumer contrary to people say, it’s anti-garden, which is definitely not the same, and I’ll die on this hill.

[ghusto]

Nearly no sites comply with the cookie-banner law, if they did, you wouldn't mind it.

It essentially says "Tell the user you're tracking them, give them a button to click not allow you to do that". If sites actually did that, I honestly couldn't care less about the extra second it would take to click "No, fuck off".

[_v7gu]

> Basically it’s the cookie banner again. Served no-one (at least definitely not the consumers), but annoyed a lot.

Oh no, you have to be given the option to not permit your data to be shared with ~1000 different partners with "legitimate" interests. Honestly, the only thing that is wrong with GDPR is that it came out too late.

[frizlab]

90% of the websites today use google analytics which is not GDPR compliant, and yet nothing happens.

Ironically Apple did more for privacy than GDPR ever did, and was able to enforce it… by having a walled garden!

[isodev]

> yet nothing happens

Every time you dismiss a "we care for your privacy" banner, you're being made aware that your data is shared with hundreds or thousands of data brokers with "legitimate interest". The fact that vendors prefer to make your experience miserable rather than give up tracking is another example of "malicious compliance".

What happens is that you now have the right to request a copy of the personal information a site has collected and ask them to delete it. You can also sue them if they don't fulfil your request. You're welcome to exercise your rights as an EU citizen at any time.

[latexr]

> and yet nothing happens.

Not true.

https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-win-first-major-fine-eu-1-million-us...

[user_7832]

> Also it makes my life annoying when I open Safari and am presented w/ what can be told as the worst pop-up ever and have to spend literally minutes dismissing it for something I neither wanted nor needed. It’s the cookie banner all over again.

Know what's cool? Firefox on android supports ublock origin. There are some chromium forks too with desktop extension support (on android). Funny what an open(er) market and easy of installing apps does, huh?

[frizlab]

I have ads and pop up blockers already? What are you on about??

[_aavaa_]

People (myself included) say the same thing about why they buy their tech illiterate relatives macOS computers. And it works. And guess what, it works despite Apple not getting a cut of every everything.

[skydhash]

My girlfriend only install the handful of apps she wants both on her Mac and her iPhone and doesn't go back to the app store. She just put things on auto update. Most people don't fiddle with their computing device. And if installation steps are confusing, she just asked me to do it. I guess that's why Microsoft are enabling so many things on Windows as most users won't enable them by themselves.

[_aavaa_]

That's neither here nor there for whether Apple has the right to insert themselves into every transaction on their platform and gets to decide which apps are allowed to exist.

And let's not kid ourself: Microsoft is enabling (and re-enabling and re-enabling and re-enabling) so many things because they are slowly turning their OS into spyware to make more money, not because they care at all about their users.

I'll re-iterate Cory Doctorow's quote: "Anytime someone puts a lock on something you own, against your wishes, and doesn't give you the key, they're not doing it for your benefit".

[frizlab]

Apple does not put a lock on anything we own. They sell something locked and people buy it.

It’s absolutely not the same; they were clear from day 1.

[dariosalvi78]

It's perfectly reasonable to create even more walled gardens than the Apple walled garden, once you open up for different markets. That's the beauty of choice.

[rchaud]

> My peer not being tech-savvy might install stupid things from stupid places and it might be a problem.

Yes, and they may also respond to phishing emails served up by the Mail app. Do your peers consider you responsible for fixing that too?