• cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I have no idea why so many of those commenters are anti consumer rights. Android proves that it’s not a security issue. Why are they so brain broken that they are actively against opening up their walled garden, like it compromise their apple product purchases in some way.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      43
      ·
      8 months ago

      I definitely like my computers (including my phone) being open to me, and I love having f-droid on Android.

      Even so, I think there’s a genuine case for security of a walled garden, even though I prefer the alternative.

      Having the option to install 3rd party is another attack surface, and gives a chance for the market - or authoritarian control - to to veer towards not being vetted by that walled garden.

      I.e. if a popular enough developer chooses not to publish through the app store, you either accept their personal guarantees or refuse to use that software. If your job or school decides not to… then what can you do, even if your school is not competent to keep up to date the security of their lowest-bidder bespoke app store?

      But if you can’t side-load, there is no option, which makes them use Apple’s one with its protection.

      I agree, that hasn’t turned out that way on Android… except for phones that don’t support Google Play. I hope it never does…

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Having the option to install 3rd party is another attack surface, and gives a chance for the market - or authoritarian control - to to veer towards not being vetted by that walled garden.

        Authoritarians are always going to be prefer authoritarian app stores where any app that threatens them can be swifty removed.

        Authoritarians rule in part via suppression of information. All governments can mandate that specific things be or not be installed on devices, it’s typically only authoritarians that are afraid of unknown things being installed on devices.

        • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          You’re forgetting that authorities don’t always work together. Authority sometimes threatens authority.

          • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s true that Apple can swing their weight around in some markets. However, in places where the government is able to govern as they wish, e.g. China, the CCP gets their way every time in the end… And that’s pretty much how it goes with private companies vs governments. You either play by their rules or you seize to be a business in their jurisdiction.

      • systemglitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I wish I could simply tell you that you are ignorant and you would think for a moment and recognize it. It’s not my crusade to educate you, and people don’t like realizing they are wrong, but now it’s out there for you to see, perhaps there is hope.

    • evlogii@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m an anti-Apple advocate and an Android user. And I’m against this law. What good does it bring? These are Apple’s devices; let them do whatever they want with them. Don’t like how Apple does business? Buy another brand. Advocate against Apple. Suggest alternatives. But do not force them to do things how you like. It’s just toxic. I believe that the most anti-consumer thing is when governments try to decide what customers want or need. I hate it when they take me for an idiot (I might often be, but let me make my mistakes and learn from them).

      • Skates@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        8 months ago

        These are Apple’s devices

        But that’s the thing - they aren’t. Not once they’re bought. At that point, they’re my device, or your device.

        Surely you can see how having a single supplier can be a bad thing, right? That supplier has no incentive to deliver quality. Why would they?

        If you want to start baking cookies and sell them, you need to beat several bakers in your town and several companies in the rest of the country if you ever want to be successful and profitable. This is because there are already several well-established suppliers who have proven they make great cookies - why would anyone buy from you?

        On the other hand if you’re the only one selling - you can reduce cocoa content in half to save costs, you can replace quality ingredients with cheaper versions for the same reason, you can increase prices as much as you want - the cookie-seeking customer will still buy, because there are no other options.

        Sure, you can also be the best baker in the world. You can put love and care into every cookie that leaves your shop. You can care about customers and make sure they get the best stuff, because you have a monopoly and you can enforce that view.

        But in reality, what actually happens is that those decisions don’t belong to you. They belong to the soulless company that only has one purpose: maximize profits. And you can be the best person ever, but if you’re working for a publicly traded company you’re at the mercy of shareholders.

        Why would you want this? Forget about apple, why would you want this in any field?

        • evlogii@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          But that’s the thing - they aren’t. Not once they’re bought. At that point, they’re my device, or your device.

          Well, you may want it to be completely yours, but in fact, there are many things that you can’t and sometimes don’t want to control on your phone. But Apple never claimed that you can control everything. Apple never advertised their phones as having many application stores; quite the opposite, actually. You don’t expect a satellite connection from a phone that doesn’t have it; you don’t expect a phone without water resistance to work underwater. I understand if some product does not meet your expectations, you’re frustrated, but in this case, you received exactly what you asked for. Want something else? Buy from another company. Why force this company to do things your way?

          Surely you can see how having a single supplier can be a bad thing, right? That supplier has no incentive to deliver quality. Why would they?

          Of course, I can see that having a single supplier can and will cause many issues. The problem for me is that I don’t believe in monopolies. Monopolies are very unstable. Firstly, for a monopoly to form, a few things with low probability should happen: in your analogy, there should be no other cookie provider (neither now nor in the foreseeable future), and customers should be willing to buy cookies that I produce at any cost. In reality, there’s always someone else who’s willing to (or at least can) produce more cookies, and customers are not complete idiots. If I increase the price or lower the quality beyond their limit, very quickly I will be left with full warehouses and a bad reputation and go bankrupt. Secondly, you always have a choice. Present me with a situation, and I will tell you which choices you have (they all may be bad, but whatever they are, they are options). In the case of Apple, there are obviously plenty of choices. They’re not the only company producing smartphones. And even on their phones, there’s Cydia. So, what monopoly does Apple have? Well, they’re the only corporation that can produce iPhones. Should we allow other companies to produce iPhones in this case?

      • groupofcrows@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        8 months ago

        Bill Gates would love you. Microsoft used its position to kill of Netscape. Could you imagine how rich they would be if they could strong arm everyone into only using their products?

        • Skates@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          To be honest, if Microsoft didn’t give a shit about anti-trust laws and if they just let Apple die instead of investing in them, we wouldn’t have Apple today. Which - to be clear: would be a great thing.

          Maybe we should actually all strive to be more monopoly-oriented, the laws be damned.

      • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because Apple and Android are a duopoly and virtually a global one. And you throw all the pro-consumer laws at monopolies and duopolies, to strip them of any leverage they might have over consumers

        • evlogii@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          But why though? I’m serious. People willingly want to be customers of this. They know that *polies are going to have leverage on them and still buy their product. Why should we say, ‘No, we’re not going to let you do that’? Or maybe you think that people are just not informed enough and don’t understand the consequences of their actions? Then maybe we should educate them instead of trying to control?

      • CucumberFetish@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        In this case, the government isn’t forcing the customer to do anything at all. If you don’t care about it, then absolutely nothing will change for you. The only thing it does is provide more options for people who want more options.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      59
      ·
      8 months ago

      For me, security is really the only question here. If you want to, you can find a way to sideload things. But once you have an entire app store out there, suddenly a whole new avenue of attack has appeared that didn’t exist prior.

      • cum@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Android already has had this for many years and it is not an issue. We don’t need to deal with hypotheticals here, Android has put these things into practice for a long time already, and it’s a non issue.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          46
          ·
          8 months ago

          LOL this is not a hypothetical. there are already bad apps in the regular app store. now you have two.

          also Android has nothing on the security posture of Apple.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            36
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            So you admit having a walled garden doesn’t protect you from malicious apps, but you still want on to…protect you from malicious apps?

            • stoly@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              31
              ·
              8 months ago

              I just want you to envision a moment where the opportunity for two bad things happening is worse than one.

              Honestly I really don’t get the anger here except that everyone has decided that opening the floodgates is the only way forward.

              • wearling0600@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                8 months ago

                So then… continue using exclusively Apple’s store then?

                If you consider Apple to be the gold standard for security, you have just keep going as you are.

                I don’t see how giving other people the freedom to choose infringes on your security.

                • Pluckerpluck@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  No you fool! Don’t you see that because Wish exists buying from Best Buy is also a scam?!

                  Honestly I don’t get people like this. Are they trying to protect other people? I’ve never seen it framed that way, but it’s the only reasonable explanation.

              • Ruinam@lemmy.wtf
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                8 months ago

                You really need to explain this to me. Assuming apple provides a security benefit, then the same benefit still exist if you do not use the sideloading, except for apps that do not want to get checked by apple. But you only want apps that are secure also that are checked. How is the ability to get (maybe) less secure apps a danger to you, given thst you will still use the app store.

    • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      59
      ·
      8 months ago

      except it is a security issue for those not tech savvy I had to enable parental controls on some family members phones cause they enabled side loading somehow and managed to royally fuck up their phone

      • cum@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not really, it’s not much of an issue on Android. iOS will probably do the same, but on Android if you sideload an app that could be malicious, the Play Store has play protect and scans malicious apks like an anti virus. But also phones are much better sandboxed and secured then desktop, so their security against malicious software is much stronger.

      • Pluckerpluck@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        While not impossible, you have to try fairly hard to fuck up your phone like this. I’d be actively impressed if your story is true (particularly as you used the plural), and if so I’d like to know what they were specifically trying to install that fucked up their phones.

        It’s just statistically more likely they downloaded a malicious app from the Play Store than had any chaos side loading.

        • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The plural is I just do it now cause i don’t wanna have to deal with it again and I don’t trust them but it was a obvious scam they clicked on and guy over a phone talked her through it

  • OrangeCorvus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    Reading the comments from that article is a prime example of how a cult functions.

    In reality this will have a 0,002% impact. Most phone users are tech-illiterate and have no idea how to use their devices. You expect these people to go to a different store? On Android you can have other app stores, why don’t you have? Because Play Store is default and all app developers want to be where most users are, not on a 3-4% user share store.

    It will most likely be background noise in the first months and everyone will go back to the App Store. The only people that will use an alternate store will most likely be the same ones that use F-droid, so 0,002% of the users.

    But hey, it’s better to scream how this whole thing is making their devices less secure, because Apple told them so.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s always about the minority. Just because something fits 99% should not mean this is the only thing in existence, when other ways do not disturb. And one not fulfilled minority there, one not fulfilled there and soon we realise that almost everyone fit in some unfulfilled minority that is not dealed with.

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Many Android manufacturers actually have either their own store, or an app that acts as an interface to the Google Play Store. These are installed by default, and subtly pushed over the vanilla Play Store. So I’m guessing millions of users do end up using them.

    • TurboLag@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think that’s exactly the problem. The real user benefit will be very small, but in order to enable those changes, functionality will be implemented on everyone’s phones to support sideloading. In my eyes, this increseas the attack surface against iPhones. Time and time again alt stores have been used to distribute fake apps and malware on Android, and the victims are often those users who haven’t asked for sideloading and are unlikely to use it intentionally.

      Yes, maybe this will enable an F-droid equivalent on iPhone and it will be great to have direct access to open-source apps. But is this niche addition worth potentially reducing the security of all iPhones? I’m not convinced.

      • dXq9dwg4zt@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        The real user benefit will be very small

        Time and time again alt stores have been used to distribute fake apps and malware on Android, and the victims are often those users who haven’t asked for sideloading and are unlikely to use it intentionally.

        Can you offer any evidence to back up either of these claims?

      • thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        But here’s the thing - side loading, even on android, is an opt-in feature. The user has to actively go out of their way to sideload an app. Even if an app tries to do it behind your back, you must first enable its ability to do so.

        Yes, this doesn’t exist when ADB is involved, but in that case you have to go out of your way to enable USB debugging (and be stupid enough to plug your phone into someone else’s computer). The vast majority of iPhones will never have sideloading enabled by their users. The EU isn’t grabbing their balls and saying that all users must have it enabled by default, otherwise they’d be going after Android too.

        • TurboLag@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Sure, I get that. The issue is that as soon as you introduce the ability to install apps from outside the App Store, it becomes possible to trick unsuspecting users into clicking buttons they don’t understand. By designing a web page to look like an actual Apple page, a malicious party could convince users to “opt in” to outside sources, in a similar way in which phishing websites harvest users’ online banking credentials. Currently, this kind of attack is entirely impossible on iPhone.

          • RedwoodAnarchy@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 months ago

            Doesn’t this argument essentially boil down to “people are stupid and we should take away their freedoms to protect them from themselves”? I’m not going to say that most people would make use of being able to install 3rd party apps, or even that it won’t give malware more chances to get people. But people can get themselves hurt or compromise their electronic security in any number of ways taking away people’s choices until they can’t make bad decisions anymore just doesn’t seem worth it to me

          • thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Sure, but at that point we’re getting into the weeds of fake webpages, which really isn’t anything apple could control anyway. Nothing’s to say that if sideloading didn’t exist, that page wouldn’t just direct them to a form to fill out your banking information. All it does is change the method. Apple could simply maintain a hash database of files that are known as dangerous and package it into a built-in AV for iOS (like most OSes do)

            Nothing’s also to say that the page wouldn’t just abuse one of the hundreds of vulnerabilities that currently exist in WebKit currently.

            For your average user, they’re probably only visiting legit sites on that browser anyway. My grandparents both have Android phones and to my knowledge have never been “tricked” into installing an APK. I can probably say the same for the vast majority of people.

            I believe the benefits outweigh the costs here. Apple loses their grip on the walled garden which is punishing for developers and makes Apple judge, jury and executionor on not only what apps can run on iOS, but also how much developers have to give up to Apple (they could up their cut to 90% at anytime and currently developers can’t do shit about it).

  • TheMurphy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    This would actually be a big step for many Android users wanting to try out another OS.

    I know for myself that sideloading apps is a must for me on my phone, and if an iPhone could do that, it’s at least one step closer for consideration.

      • Octopus1348@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        8 months ago

        on Apple you are forced to use an Apple ID

        Not entirely true. For most functionality on Android, you also need to be signed in with Google, but you can de-google it. On Apple, it’s the same, but you can’t de-apple it. You can currently only use the App Store which needs an Apple ID, so you lose like 80% of the stuff you could use your phone for.

        • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          For most functionality on Android, you also need to be signed in with Google

          Really? Funny, my Lineage devices have zero Google Crap and they work just fine. Phone, email, SMS, messengers (Telegram, XMPP, Wire, SimpleX, Signal), web works fine, I’m able to run my sync tools like Foldersync, Syncthing, Resilio, my calendar works, my shopping list app works and syncs to their servers just fine, I use 4 mapping apps two are offroad/hiking, same ones I used when it had google) my address book works, etc.

          I have ~300 apps on my phone.

          So what’s this “most functionality” thing that I apparently don’t know about?

          • Octopus1348@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s de-googling (which I specifically mentioned in my previous comment). I’m talking about the stock experience most people will have on Android. For that, you need a Google account.

            An user not familiar with Android will just use the Play Store, and they’ll need to log in with Google.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              Not really, you can just remove your Google Account after setting it up and things will stay working without issue.

              You only really need a Google account to download apps from the Play store. But you can use sideloading and different stores for that.

              • Octopus1348@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                But you can use sideloading and different stores for that.

                That’s (part of) what I said. You can also remove your Apple ID after you downloaded some apps, but that doesn’t change the fact that you need one to do so.

    • maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      This would actually be a big step for many Android users wanting to try out another OS.

      That’s the biggest benefit, competition ripples back and forth across services and improves everything. One thing gets better, so other things have to get better, so everything gets better.

      Knock-on effects are insanely good.

    • maness300@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nah. As an Android user, the only other OS’s I’m interested in are ones that further embrace the Linux ecosystem.

    • Crash Override@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      49
      ·
      8 months ago

      They’ll allow you to sideload, but there’s nothing in the law that states they have to let you sideload whatever you choose. Apple will find a way to appease the dumbasses in Europe while still protecting the overall security of their platform for the rest of their users

      Everyone wants the iPhone to be like Android. If that were the case, there would be no compelling reason to choose iOS, other than superior hardware, but your average user doesn’t even really care about that.

      • OrangeCorvus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        8 months ago

        Apple will find a way to appease the dumbasses in Europe

        I imagine Tim Apple’s bottom is shinier than Bender’s from all that kissing. One often wonders why people keep drinking the Kool-Aid from such behemoths. Must be something in the water.

      • Patch@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        but there’s nothing in the law that states they have to let you sideload whatever you choose

        That’s pretty much exactly what the law does say.

        The gatekeeper shall allow and technically enable the installation and effective use of third-party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, its operating system and allow those software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the relevant core platform services of that gatekeeper.

        There’s a provision for not letting the user actively break the device, but that’s it. And it’s couched in terms like “if strictly necessary and proportionate” and “provided they are justified”, so it’s not something Apple can apply on a whim.

        • Crash Override@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          8 months ago

          It doesn’t say anything about specific software. They have to allow you to use third party stores, they don’t have to allow you to download torrent apps so that you can pirate.

          There was a time, on Android custom roms, if you had pirated apps installed, they were uninstalled automatically. I see something similar happening here.

          • Patch@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            It doesn’t say anything about specific software. They have to allow you to use third party stores, they don’t have to allow you to download torrent apps so that you can pirate.

            Literally in the quote I posted…

            The gatekeeper shall allow and technically enable the installation and effective use of third-party software applications or software application stores

      • maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        there’s nothing in the law that states they have to let you sideload whatever you choose.

        There is, actually. And there is much more, you also will be able to publish on the App Store without using Apple’s payment services for example.

        EU lawmakers are slow, but not completely stupid.

  • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I would rather have a “all users must have root access to their devices” or all software must be user replaceable integrated into the law. We let Apple do their own thing, but adventurous users could try installing android and such on the iPhone (similar to how the asahi project is making Linux on M series macs a reality)

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      As shown with Android, even if you have root it’s not enough, as it won’t let you indefinetly support the device when the firmware and drivers are still secret. Freedom of choice for whatever OS you like (meaning that any OS can make a port) would be safer and more liberating, I thing.

      Also, to hell with Android, I want to install Linux on this thing and finally be able to backup all apps, configurations and files via simple “rsync” command or when the screen/touch/battery die install TV-centric OS to at least repurpose this expensive device as new smart TV box :).

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Which is why I’m saying all software must be replaceable. If Apple can update firmware, so should the users be able to

  • yildo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Moves like this always assume that location equals citizenship. As an EU citizen living in North America, a move like this means that I would not get the remedy that Apple legally owes me (or would owe me if I owned an iOS device)

    The main thing I’ve been sideloading on Android for a decade is a fan implementation of the Dominion card game called Androminion. It was trademark cease and desist removed from the Play Store a decade ago, but you can still get the apk on Github

    There’s a couple other things. One big gap in both the Google and Apple stores is the complete absence of adult content. I’m amazed there’s not more of a clamour for adult apps among either userbase, given that most people don’t own a normal computer. Sideloading could plug that gap

    • Aatube@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Just change country/region. No location required. If you do it through iOS you might need a payment method, which you don’t need if you’re changing it on the web.

        • Hexagon@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          He’s just a troll, or a shill. Don’t give him attention or he will feel important

          • GigglyBobble@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s what actual Apple fanbois sound like though. I believe it’s a specific case of Stockholm Syndrome.

            • Aatube@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Excuse me. As an Apple fanboy, I’ve seen that both Apple fanboys and Apple haters are as worse as each other on average. Don’t fall prey to enemy mentality and think in absolutes from the worst examples you’ve seen.

              • GigglyBobble@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                I haven’t seen this for any other corp though.

                No Windows user cheers for Microsoft when they publish record revenue figures. They know, they paid for it.
                No Android user defends phone makers if the new model has nothing new but costs 10-20% more.

                But there isn’t a thread or article about Apple without some commenters defending them. Regardless of the shit they pull.

                • Aatube@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’ve never seen anybody cheer for Apple revenue figures. It’s just a bunch of boring numbers that always go up, unless the company is brave enough to stand against investors. I’ve seen plenty of people defend Samsung for what they do, and in China I’ve seen the most obnoxious Huawei fanboys. Both of these companies have on average the same amount of new features each year as Apple does, and none of them persistently increases the price; the new model costs more now because they’ve cut last year’s models’ prices. To say that DadeMurphy is representative of most Apple fans is certainly an exaggeration.

                • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Kinda like how the kind of people that buy a Rolex because it’s expensive will scoff at Seiko owners. On the other hand, the kind of people that buy Rolex because they admire its mechanical movements is probably own a Seiko as well.

                • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  I absolutely do see people simp for Microsoft

                  E.g. when Microsoft was buying Bethesda and Activision, threads were full of people saying it was great, and those who said otherwise got a lot of hate for it.

                  I’ve seen people fanboying over Windows too

                  We see it with Tesla

                  We see it with Nvidia

                  Apple is the posterboy of megacorps that people simp for, but they are far from the only one