Agreed it shouldn't be illegal, but Apple (or any hardware / software maker) should be allowed to do everything in their power to make this extremely inconvenient by putting in hardware blocks, bricking logic, updating their software regularly with new obfuscation techniques, etc. and also, voiding the warranty if there is evidence of tampering with hardware or software.
I understand where you’re coming from and would be ok if it were easy (or even possible) for the community to build an alternative device but that doesn’t appear to be the case.
The technical and social reality that giving apple the freedom to configure the majority of devices in the US is extremely unpleasant. Enough that it makes me question the principles driving the philosophy that allowed this (in particular, the legality of closed software.)
> if it were easy (or even possible) for the community to build an alternative device but that doesn’t appear to be the case.
One of the main roadblocks is intellectual property law. If IP didn't exist, there would be all sorts of iPhone clones with modified versions of iOS.
I'm OK with closed source software being legal, prohibiting closed source would be tyrannical. What I'm not OK is with software patents, copyright, anti-hardware-hacking laws, etc.
The same reason you have to have a car pass emissions in some states.
We can't deny the security that apple provides over other providers. Part of that is the closed garden - it SHOULD BE a product. The market should provide alternatives.
The only people that benefit from this are big companies - small software devs will have their apps devalued by this move, and the people will just get ripped off more when Epic wins and raises their dumb scam Vbucks to 10$.
You can easily argue the walled garden is for their user's common good, which it is. Less malware, safer experience, easier to use for less technically savvy people.
> Apple saying that I'm not allowed to step outside their walled garden on a device I own is restricting my freedom.
Only if there is no remediation - there is. Buy an android and quit moaning. "Freedoms." Laughable. Belarus is shooting people and you're mad because you can't force a company to do what you want when the free market can easily solve the problem.
You could argue that Microsoft bundling IE was 'for their user's common good' just the same. It was certainly nice and convenient, and made Windows easier to use. And it wasn't restricting anyone's freedom, because they could just use Unix instead.
Except none of those things are the point of antitrust law. But I guess who cares anyway, when genocide is always worse than these things, so we shouldn't care about them?
