I didn't have one but I knew people who did and it was fast. I just wish they would have released a Surface Phone. I would have bought it on day 1.
- Thread starter ijustwannaplaywii
- Start date
- Views 2,250
- Replies 27
- Likes 2
For all of Apple's major flaws and the absolutely infuriating lack of access to literally anything but what they give you on stock, there are reasons for why they do it. Just.. not enough good ones to convince me to use Apple products, lmao.
A lot of what Apple does (aside from trying to keep their works proprietary) can really just come down to device optimization. For example, it's MUCH easier to design, plan, and optimize an Operating System if you know it's only going to be run on very specific hardware. Since that removes a lot of the guesswork when it comes to designing software to be paired with potential hardware it makes it much easier for the official developers to create a smoother and more tailored experience for their own products. But that doesn't really excuse them for not allowing users to access, much less modify their own devices - whether it be physically or via soft-modification.
Android while it offers more customization in the aspects that Apple doesn't, has a lot of the problems that IOS doesn't because of the earlier stated reasons. Android (generally) isn't made with any specific hardware sets in mind (unless it's tailored by developers for their own purpose, e.g Samsung [They're basically just the Apple of Android atp though]). So by only covering the bare-basics it becomes much harder to make a smooth-running OS across the endless variation of hardware dependencies.
The same that's said of Android could also be said for Windows. You could make an absolute monster of a PC, but that doesn't mean that Windows would be properly optimized to your system, since once again - it isn't made with specific guidelines in mind. It's just made to work as broadly as possible. Which a lot of these optimization issues could be fixed INCREDIBLY easily by allowing users access to their own systems to properly optimize them to their needs.
But sadly corporations loveee their proprietary works, so I don't really see that happening for a lot of things.
A lot of what Apple does (aside from trying to keep their works proprietary) can really just come down to device optimization. For example, it's MUCH easier to design, plan, and optimize an Operating System if you know it's only going to be run on very specific hardware. Since that removes a lot of the guesswork when it comes to designing software to be paired with potential hardware it makes it much easier for the official developers to create a smoother and more tailored experience for their own products. But that doesn't really excuse them for not allowing users to access, much less modify their own devices - whether it be physically or via soft-modification.
Android while it offers more customization in the aspects that Apple doesn't, has a lot of the problems that IOS doesn't because of the earlier stated reasons. Android (generally) isn't made with any specific hardware sets in mind (unless it's tailored by developers for their own purpose, e.g Samsung [They're basically just the Apple of Android atp though]). So by only covering the bare-basics it becomes much harder to make a smooth-running OS across the endless variation of hardware dependencies.
The same that's said of Android could also be said for Windows. You could make an absolute monster of a PC, but that doesn't mean that Windows would be properly optimized to your system, since once again - it isn't made with specific guidelines in mind. It's just made to work as broadly as possible. Which a lot of these optimization issues could be fixed INCREDIBLY easily by allowing users access to their own systems to properly optimize them to their needs.
But sadly corporations loveee their proprietary works, so I don't really see that happening for a lot of things.
Ios is the only device I haven't compiled for, but I heard it's closed source or has no public sdk or something.
The general populace will always pick whatever they want &/or need. Personally I got my iPhone because it runs iOS. Using apple stuff just makes sense to me ... because I like pasting something that I had copied on a different device. Because I can remotely close tabs that I’ve moved to my phone so I can read them later. Because I like the camera’s look and framing choices. Buying into the walled garden is a choice sometimes.
Having said that, I hate every iOS version since 15.0 as they’ve ruined jailbreaking thanks to rootless (SSV). Also I get excited whenever there’s a new samsung S or Z phone coming out, and love using old Notes I borrow from other people. There’s no right answer but in my opinion they both got major pros and cons.
Having said that, I hate every iOS version since 15.0 as they’ve ruined jailbreaking thanks to rootless (SSV). Also I get excited whenever there’s a new samsung S or Z phone coming out, and love using old Notes I borrow from other people. There’s no right answer but in my opinion they both got major pros and cons.
Post automatically merged:
It’s propietary with a semi-open source kernel at best
Last edited by burningup,
I remember TechLinked making a video about the EU demanding Apple to allow users to side-load apps.
Realistically? I doubt it'll happen. It's Apple.
It'd honestly be amazing if they natively allowed that, but yeah- it's Apple, lol. Their motto atp is "Restricting our users as much as possible!"
Similar threads
- No one is chatting at the moment.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Veho:
It's not like they're complaining that their Slurpee is 99% ice or something, but if the cocktail calls for "shot of vodka, shot of vermouth, shot of gin, shot of Campari, three shots of juice, squirt of lemon" and ends up being a thimbleful of booze, that's a problem. -
@
The Real Jdbye:
the funny thing is cocktails in norway are only allowed to have 1 20ml shot of booze -
-
-
-
-
@
The Real Jdbye:
but you could buy as many shots of whisky (or anything else) as you want and ask for a glass of ice and pour them in
-
-
-
@
Veho:
There was a comparison of the number of Ibuprofen poisonings before and after they limited the maximum dosage per box or per pill (i'll look that up). No limit on the number of boxes you can still buy as many as you want, so people argued it was pointless.
-
@
Veho:
But the number of (accidental) poisonings dropped because drinking an entire package of ibuprofen pills went from "I need a new liver" to "I need a new box of Ibuprofen".
-
@
Veho:
Here we have ketoprofen that used to be prescription-only because of the risk of toxic dosages, but then they halved the dose per pill and sell them in bottles of six pills apiece instead of twenty and it doesn't need a prescription any more. Yes you can buy more than one bottle but people simply don't.
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Usually accidentally overdose of ibuprofen here is from people taking like cold medicine then ibuprofen for a headache and the combination is over what they need -
