[kcplate]

I was talking about iOS so yes, I missed that the conversation was about Mac. Shame on me. In a sense the use case for a Mac is less ubiquitous than a smartphone, so the need for vetting may not be as great because users of the device don’t perceive the apps running on it as the device itself.

However, I stand firm in my argument about why the iPhone is locked down and why it’s a good thing. Even if you spread into other smartphone manufacturers like Samsung, you still find similar attempts to control the lay users ability to install unvetted apps on the devices. It may even be more important for them to do that too since they don’t fully control the OS on their devices.

> That's another made up number of yours, with a similarly made up qualifier

Obvious it was made up and obviously it was set as an intentionally low bar for software quality because who would argue (especially on HN) that 100% of available software out there is bug free, but if you want to believe that all available software is 100% safe to use, I encourage you to download and install everything you come across no matter whether the device is a smartphone, a Mac, or any other device you use and rely upon. I am sure you will be fine.

[eviks]

> you still find similar attempts to control

Sure, though it doesn't mean what you want it to mean since you just ignore the $$$ elephant in the room that explains the desire for more control. For the same reason, you "stand firm" in ignorance as to "why the iPhone is locked down"

> Obvious it was made up

Glad you realise that.

> intentionally low bar

Intentionally appearing like one

> if you want to believe ... software is 100% safe to use

Again with your fantasies. I believe the justification should be grounded in reality, both in terms of the % estimate as well as in terms of the severity (so no, "bug free" is irrelevant, you need severe billions-afecting bugs that can only be eliminated by hard-forcing the app store, which you can't have since the reality doesn't align with you).

And as to your standing firm in your argument "why it’s a good thing", well, you don't really have an argument, just a desire for one with made up stats and corporate motivations

[kcplate]

Alrighty, so I guess what we have learned that apparently some number at 100% or perhaps less of all software is apparently released bug free. However, we don’t know for sure “the perhaps less”, despite all of the numerous historical examples of shit software being released that has wrecked havoc that we or others have experienced. And since we don’t know that precise number we are not allowed to state any estimate no matter how modest that is below that 100% of software perfection. Therefore, a device manufacturer would never need or should do anything that attempts to protect the consumer and their market share by protecting the device’s perceived reliability by preventing buggy software from being installed, because buggy software doesn’t exist.

Thanks for the education in the importance of precision and the rejection of experience in determining reality. I’ll ignore my decades of having to clean up all the messes that apparently non-existent buggy shit software managed to do to novice and lay users who willy-nilly installed it…or maybe didn’t install it, since it was imaginary.

By the way…before you respond again you might read up a bit on situational irony. You seemed to have missed it on my prior comment…and this one is dripping with it.

[eviks]

Your drips don't land because you can't make up a valid argument, ignore what I said and resort back to your fantasy land again fighting your imaginary 100%s and do-nothings

[kcplate]

Yeah that’s it. I am in awe of your reality.