Fine and dandy until half the software I want and/or need to run requires a root kit or otherwise dangerous access and the alternative is “don’t get to do that thing” where “that thing” may include stuff like communicating with clients or a job interview or whatever.
Short of legislation (please! Please just outlaw shitty behavior like this!) you need a platform too big to ignore that prohibits the worst behavior, or you’re gonna be forced to choose between two kinds of loss constantly.
Problem is, this "need" for big platforms is entirely a matter of faith. It's like your "need" for supernatural bed-time stories that explain human suffering and make you feel cozy; they're just tall tales. You're taking this practice entirely on their word, your "proof" that this system works is a backwards understanding of determinism. The only realistic, grounded worldview is to conclude that we don't need fairytales, and that we repeat them as an axiomatic comfort and not a truth.
Similar problem pervades with Apple. They have no written obligation to protect you, they've been caught lying about security at the request of larger entities than them. They have no technical obligation to provide a secure experience; no GrapheneOS equivalent exists for iPhone, and Apple sues researchers that attempt to dissect the production build of iOS. They cooperate with governmental bodies worldwide and cannot fend-off state-sponsored attacks even when thousands of personnel are targeted. Default programs like iMessage, Facetime and iCloud Mail are all vulnerable to zero-click exploits. The App Store regularly approves trojan horse variety malware masquerading as brands people trust. Apple's platform security is a veritable trainwreck.
If you liken Apple's approach as the diametric opposite of Open Source security, then they are the perfect example of why this mindset fails. There are no half-measures with security, when someone locks your room without giving you the key it's not for your protection. Lord only knows people will argue that the cell door makes them feel safer though. Tall tales, and all that.
> Problem is, this "need" for big platforms is entirely a matter of faith. It's like your "need" for supernatural bed-time stories that explain human suffering and make you feel cozy; they're just tall tales. You're taking this practice entirely on their word, your "proof" that this system works is a backwards understanding of determinism. The only realistic, grounded worldview is to conclude that we don't need fairytales, and that we repeat them as an axiomatic comfort and not a truth.
Oh, so, how is it going with getting hdmi 2.1 support upstreamed into the kernel tree these days?
the “fairy tale” seems real and the needs seem genuine. You are being rude and dismissive and reductive.
> Oh, so, how is it going with getting hdmi 2.1 support upstreamed into the kernel tree these days?
About as lousy as getting Vulkan upstreamed into MacOS, for much the same reason. Corporate interests and licensing feuds regularly supersede what the community would prefer, or even is capable of making for themselves. Big platforms will gladly reject a free solution if it means they lose out on licensing costs; just look at iOS and the way Apple rejects common-sense standardization so they can eke-out the last vestiges of cash from their victims.
If HDMI® Licensing Administrator, Inc. let AMD provide a free interface to their IP, how could they strongarm Apple and Microsoft into paying for a license to their kingdom? Is this colloquial "big platform" protecting consumer interests now?
The need comes from a set of pragmatic concerns, current reality, and the way human systems behave.
What’s the concrete proposal here? There ain’t much in the Debian repos, for example, that’s useful to me for anything but tinkering, as far as things that make my everyday life better and easier. I’d have to bring in closed-source software and engage with a bunch of megacorps to make an open-ecosystem device do anything I care to do beyond playing with it. How is that an improvement? What do I tell my wife to do with all this? My dad? “Here, I put an open-source os on your phone, it’ll get worse battery life, much of the automation you use daily is now not available, a bunch of platform features you use are gone, most of the apps you like aren’t here, and things like notifications are probably flakier than you’re used to. Just use the web browser for everything important”?
Apple sucks. Sure, we agree. So what? The alternative is—unilaterally—largely disengaging with the benefits of computing technology in day-to-day life and waiting for the government to fix the whole shitty industry.
The appeal of Apple is I get a partial solution to the problem of every damn “legitimate” company trying to spy on me and open up back doors to my system, that I can recommend to other people in my life, and since this solution is basically the exact opposite of “become a tech hermit” people will actually do it and be glad they did it. Me included, because I don’t want to become a tech hermit (unless everyone else is also going to, in which case, yes please, very much yes).
> I’d have to bring in closed-source software and engage with a bunch of megacorps to make an open-ecosystem device do anything I care to do beyond playing with it. How is that an improvement?
Benefit of choice? Currently you rely on iCloud, I assume. iCloud is about as "trust me, bro" as you can get in the cloud storage industry; blatantly backdoored, expensive beyond understanding, and integrated too deeply to replace entirely. On other platforms you're not forced down just one avenue of convenience, you get to exercise your choice as a consumer between different solutions, or even roll your own. The express advantage is that you are enabled to not be helpless when a corporation makes mindbogglingly dumb decisions on your behalf as a user.
It's not trite or pedantic to point out your hypocrisy here. Supporting a company you think "sucks" is a terrible example to set for the rest of your social circle. I used to be that way about Google - might as well use their products since everything else is borderline garbage, right? But it isn't right, and supporting their business is actively making the world a worse place. You're welcome to suffer through whichever corporate woodchipper you think is less painful, but I can tell you firsthand the only thing I miss from MacOS and Windows are the built-in ads. If the dark patterns get any darker, I doubt most users will want to keep using their preinstalled OSes in the first place.
With regards to your wife/dad/family/whoever, "so what" indeed. If I replaced my dad's Android phone with LineageOS I legitimately don't think he would ever know as long as his YouTube app worked. Is it really that hard to imagine the people that suffer through Windows 11 slogging through Debian and Fedora instead? It's not a problem for Steam Deck owners, and for the average Google Sheets-bound employee it's probably an even easier switch. How am I expected to commiserate with people that, by your insinuation, don't care?
Short of legislation (please! Please just outlaw shitty behavior like this!) you need a platform too big to ignore that prohibits the worst behavior, or you’re gonna be forced to choose between two kinds of loss constantly.