I would imagine that there is a version that can run on Android, the researcher is likely sharing the issue about the iOS version because it’s an easy way to make noise about what’s going on.
2 Likes
But the other stuff really doesn’t work as good.
2 Likes
I’d wager it’s more of this than anything. This is why I think subjective rules around things like “usefulness” can be really lousy (I understand why they are there, but they can also be problematic).
1 Like
yeah, iphone’s only slightly better than a fisher price phone toy
Apple has been, for the most part(games about sweatshops or reference apps for drone warfare seem to be beyond the pale of sanitized discourse) predictable about caving when someone can apply enough publicity to a shabby decision.
Which is all well and good for those who can; but doesn’t do much for anyone else.
3 Likes
Well, that’s because software freedom is not the industry gold standard, which it should be.
What I don’t get is the insistence that convenience > freedom. “He who abjures freedom in order to gain convenience shall have neither!” - as exemplified by too many stories to cite here.
1 Like
All Apple device owners are sleeper agents. Clearly you haven’t read the EULA /s
1 Like
If it’s available on GitHub, then I can use Xcode to compile and install it myself.
EDIT: Apparently, it is available under TestFlight if you want to be a “beta tester” for the app, and the rejection was because the human reviewer thought the app was a scam. It’s actually worth reading the whole article.
1 Like
I dunno, it‘s kind of a simplistic view, and one that Apple capitilized on, there are far too many programmers who blame users for not being bright enough to understand the millions of options available. Software peeps too often don‘t understand the wealth of knowledge they have that non software peeps don‘t have. They get sneered at when they think they can install everything and someone says, well, didn‘t you read the source code? Free software isn‘t necessarily good software, and it takes heaps of experience to tell the difference.
The concepts of software freedom and software quality are orthogonal. Free software may be good or bad, proprietary software may be good or bad. There are trends though. In terms of operating systems, nothing beats GNU/Linux in the form of Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora etc. It’s like being able to download a Boeing 747 for free (and with the four freedoms too).
On the other hand, Apple invested a lot in user experience, and as fas as I can tell (not having actually ever used any of their products) they’ve achieved a lot! The price, of course, being that no code can run on an iDevice without being thoroughly scrutinized and approved by Apple first, and that you can’t have anything as simple as a Python prompt on your iPhone, because Simon Says (or Steve Says, rather).
The thing is, though, that Richard Stallman, with all his idiosyncracies and mannerisms, is basically right: Releasing software under a non-free license is NEVER morally defensible. It’s a scam, an exercise in control. WHAT, are you telling me that I can’t actually get to know what my computer is doing right now because I bought your piece of shit software? You know, I think I’m just gonna uninstall it right now, the sooner the better. Hyperbole? Well, they are telling people they can’t have an app that detects net neutrality violations. QED.
1 Like
Ok, seriously: if it’s not convenient, then why would I bother carrying and paying monthly for this device? I think it’s ok to prefer convenience. It’s literally the first thing I look for in a device like an iphone. (Then there needs to be an Otter Box for it. That’s critical.)
There is no “abjuration” of freedom here. Why would anyone even say that?
If I wanted real freedom, I wouldn’t bother with these devices at all—I didn’t grow up with them, I don’t want them to be regarded as essential. That’s money I could spend on games for the Switch. But, I gotta adult sometimes, so here I am.
Confer:
You’re right, they did say that—at first, but then it got fixed. It’d be nice if it wasn’t an issue to begin with, but it looks to me more like an issue of miscommunication than freedom.
2 Likes
To the surprise of no one, there’s no conspiracy, no bad intent, just poorly communicated red tape that’s the result of having to evaluate a billion crappy apps and ones that say they can do things that they do not.
3 Likes
This is due to the human factor in approving, methinks. We develop biases for known actors, and are suspicious of newcomers. Apple does see itself as the main bulwark against scammy apps and trojans, so I do not hold that against them. I seem to recall that it was AT&T’s fears of having the iPhone spreading viruses that inspired the App Store in the first place.
1 Like
Welcome to 1995.
And yes, I think you are right. Unfortunately, the options are not there if you want to use something like a smartphone for example.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
