this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
894 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59347 readers
5626 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
IOS is the worst operating system i have ever used
Why do people buy it?
Because it's familiar, easy, pretty and does a lot of thinking for you.
Familiar only if you worked with it before.
Easy... fair enough.
Pretty... debatable.
Apple established itself as a luxury brand. So it gives customers this "prestige feeling". That's at least my take.
Yeah, I agree. I used it for 6 months for work and it's not my thing, but plenty of people seem to love it. I guess the high price is actually a feature.
Think different, but stay the same, In Apple's world, that's the game. A touch of irony, don't you think? In a sea of similar, we all sink.
I have both an iPhone and a Samsung. Both work well but I still prefer the iPhone though it’s a 6 years old one. I’m not an expert but I feel like every app use more familiar choices for design.
Because it's a brand and people are morons who need external validation. Same reason for most brands - you pay a lot more for the same thing so you can seem cool or like you have money.
Because it's cool apparently.
It's cool because it is expensive so it is a status symbol. Just like wearing expensive jewelry is cool.
I don't need people to think I'm cook if that is their criteria.
Or get a fold phone if you want to burn money 💰
y'all people that keep saying 'status symbol' or 'expensive' really haven't bought a phone in like a decade, right? because android phones are costing the same as apple flagships. how ignorant can you be?
Why do you think the prices rose? Maybe a little inflation but also because they wanted to be perceived as as good or better than the iPhone. So they had to match or exceed the price.
And this price match won't change consumer perception overnight. Apple already had the "premium" perception and it will stick around for a long while.
Have you actually sat down and used iOS as your full time phone OS for a week? If you're used to android then yes there's quirks you have to learn. But after being a diehard android user for years I could never go back. And that's that I still use both every day since my work phone is Android and my person phone is an iPhone.
I just can't not have a back button that's always in the same place!
What button? Haven't used a button on android for years now. Except power+volume ofc
One of the 3 virtual buttons that always display (4 for me since I have the accessibility button displayed also). (Background, homepage, and back- reverse order for standard android. I have Samsung)
Why not use the standard swiping gestures, it's much more convenient and much faster.
I hate gesture controls. Even more fiddly and imprecise than fake buttons. Pinch zoom, scroll, and change page are more than enough.
How come it's more fiddly? It works soooo smooth and reliable. And that coming from a dude who can't type one error-free word on the phone.
My general problem with touchscreen controls is chance of error and lack of feedback. I want buttons. I don't want to accidentally do a thing because I idly swiped at the screen while looking away briefly.
lol the gesture controls on modern smartphones are overwhelmingly less fiddly (read: not at all) than your horrible excuses for defending an outdated piece of technology like 'buttons' when much better options exist.
lol back button - how freaking 2000s. buddy we just move our finger left on the screen and we go back. like are you a caveman? this is Android fans these days, crowing about obsolete pieces of their technology like it was good. it wasn't then it really isn't now.
Swiping from the left is almost universally a go back in ios.
With android's gestures it simulates pressing the back button which is really awful. But iOS does swipes correctly.
Only if apps follow the IOS design patterns. I know at my previous company, we didn't. And neither does the official Reddit app: https://frankrausch.com/ios-navigation
Hahaha iOS swipe is awful.
If you 4 finger swipe now it goes back to previous app. Do it again now it goes to the app you just left. Wait a few seconds and it's anybodies guess where it goes.
Even worse if you bring down the "notification" screen... Supposedly swiping up makes it go away, but it rarely works. Same with pulling up the app bar while in ful screen apps - that takes two swipes, and the second one has to be just so, not too fast, not too slow, and within some weird timing - try it too soon and it just doesn't respond.
Apple's swiping system is just a fucked up mess. (I use iOS all day long).
Swiping to go back to a previous app isn't the best, but Androids implementation is just as janky. Once you figure out what the delay is for the current app to be the "latest app" then it's not awful.
Maybe iPad OS is different, but I don't ever have any issues with full screen apps on regular iOS.
iOS always felt slower tbh. Like it takes an extra step or two to do similar tasks. That and I love sideloading, rooting, and putting my homescreen apps towards the bottom too much to ever fully switch over.
I chose Apple for my work phone for only one reason: battery life. It is a wildly inferior experience for anyone who wants or needs more than just a phone. The way I have to send photos and documents through other services just to get them to my computer, the utter lack of control of the phone's file system, no sideloading...
If for any reason what you need can't or won't work through the Apple ecosystem, iPhones go from feeling pretty smooth to being an obstacle, and I'm not paying $1000+ for an obstacle.
I use iOS every day.
It SUCKS.
If all you want to do are the things Apple decides you can do, and want to do things only Apple's way, it's great.
I choose Apple phones for my work phone, since it's managed by the company anyway, so even an Android would be locked down. And it's not like I would use a corp phone for the things I do with my personal phone - there's too much risk in that.
Apple won't even allow apps to sync photos automatically. I don't want to use their cloud, at all. I just want photos I take synced between my devices using a single tool. No reason for those photos to go anywhere else.
Currently I sync files, automatically, between a dozen devices. All my photos from every laptop and Android phone go to the same folder on one machine. Anything I download with any device is available, almost immediately, for all other devices.
Except for my iOS devices. They can't play in this game, even though the same apps are available on iOS.
Which is what most people want to do, and that's why so many people love the iPhone.
Supposedly photo sync will back up all your photos to a local machine. iCloud does everything you'd want it to do minus the local server part. But once again that's not what 99% of people want to do.
I wanted a fast laptop without a fan and with a big haptic feedback touchpad. Happy to hear about non-Apple options for this.
Think you might have confused iOS and MacOS
MacOS is even worse than iOS. Have to use it for work. And while the hardware is the best I've ever used, the software is complete garbage.
Desktop OSes today range from acceptable to abysmal.
Oh yeah, I completely concur. I don't get the ux argument either, I always find it to be incredibly slow and frustrating to use whenever I have to
These are fascinating requirements. Mind explaining?
Fast, quiet, big touch pad. What'd fascinating or out of the world here? These are just kind of things most people want, not everyone wants to manually update their kernel or whatever.
I've got an Asus ZenBook (specifically this one that came out last year). It does have a fan, but it's pretty quiet. I barely notice it most of the time. It's pretty fast, too. Don't know how large of a touchpad you want, though.
Doesn't look bad, but I'm guessing it doesn't have a haptic touchpad? (Clicking is equally easy anywhere on the touchpad, because there isn't actually a click, the click is simulated by a vibrator.)
No, there's no haptic touchpad. TBH, I didn't even know that was a thing.
I think Apple trademarked having a big touchpad. And possibly also one that works.
Privacy and security mostly I would imagine
Closed source software can't be audited, so it can't be secure. If software isn't secure, the exploits rid it of any privacy.
See: The bimonthly remote takeover bugs that keep getting found. Like this one: https://citizenlab.ca/2023/09/blastpass-nso-group-iphone-zero-click-zero-day-exploit-captured-in-the-wild/
"Oh whoopsy doopsy, looks like your iPhone, camera, files, GPS and more were accessible to someone who sent you an iMessage.. for the third time this year"
That’s the biggest load of bullshit I’ve ever heard.
Closed source software is audited all the time.
Ok let me rephrase - nobody without a conflict of interest can audit a closed source application. If Microsoft paid for an audit of Windows, that doesn't tell you anything about whether or not Windows is backdoored.
The audit is not for you. Closed source software is audited all the time, but the results of those audits are generally confidential. This is about finding security bugs, not deliberate backdoors.
The key with this is who do you trust. Sure, open source can be audited by everyone, but is it? You can’t audit all the code you use yourself, even if you have the skills, it’s simply too much. So you still need to trust another person or company, it really doesn’t change the equation that much.
In practice, most common open source software is used and contributed to by hundreds of people. So it naturally does get audited by that process. Closed source software can't be confirmed to not be malicious, so it can't be confirmed to be secure, so back to my original point, it can't be private.
I didn't go into that much detail in my original comment, but it was what I meant when I first wrote it. As far as "does everyone audit the software they use", the answer is obviously no. But, the software I use is mostly FOSS and contributed to by dozens of users, sometimes including myself. So when alarms are rung over the smallest things, you have a better idea of the attack vectors and privacy implications.
Just working on software is not the same as actively looking for exploits. Software security auditing requires a specialised set of skills. Open source also makes it easier for black-hat hackers to find exploits.
Hundreds of people working on something is a double-edged sword. It also makes it easy for someone to sneak in an exploit. A single-character mistake in code could cause an exploitable bug, and if you are intent on deliberately introducing such an issue it can be very hard to spot and even if caught can be explained away as an honest to god mistake.
By contrast, lots of software companies screen their employees, especially if they are working on critical code.
I don't know if you really believe what you're saying, but I'll continue answering anyways. I worked at Manulife, the largest private insurance company in Canada, and ignoring the fact our security team was mostly focused on pen testing (which as you know, in contrast to audits tells you nothing about whether a system is secure), but the audits were infrequent and limited in scope. Most corporations don't even do audits (and hire the cheapest engineers to do the job), and as a consumer, there's no way to easily tell which audits covered the security aspects you care about.
If you want to talk about the security of open source more, besides what is already mentioned above, not only are Google, Canonical and RedHat growing their open source security teams (combined employing close to 1,000 people whose job is to audit and patch popular open source apps), but also open source projects can likewise pay for audits themselves (See Mullvad or Monero as examples).
I will concede that it is possible for proprietary software to be secure. But in practice, it's simply not, and too hard to tell. It's certainly not secure when compared to similar open source offerings.
lol this is such a weird blanket statement that means nothing. congratulations, you can baselessly slam something you don't like. Why are you the way you are, is the better question. iOS has clear benefits and there are a plethora of reasons of why one would choose an iPhone over the other options.
but GO OFF, random internet pleb.