Oskuro said:
I probably did, because you wrote something entirely different than what you explain below. You originally wrote about making the software exclusive to their platform - not making delivery of software exclusive to their platform.
What I meant is that the only official method to install software in an Apple device is through the AppStore. They've set it up so if you want to use/publish software on their hardware, you must subject yourself to their policies.
That's not true for Apple's Mac computers, only for iOS devices.
But more to the point - it's exactly the same for Sony's Playstation Store and Microsoft's Xbox Live. Since we're discussing gaming, wouldn't those be the more relevant examples? Why make the leap to Apple? Just because it's popular to bash Apple?
The same thing applies to Microsoft and Sony about subjecting yourself to their policies in order to publish - and it's much easier for small developers to publish on Apple's platform than either Microsoft or Sony's.
Compare to Android, where you can upload apps without using their store. And yes, you could jailbreak your Apple device, but when installing software requires voiding your device's warranty, there's something not right there.
And again, compare to Microsoft and Sony.
Just as *all* console manufacturers, and Apple, do.
Again, why in an article about gaming consoles did you previously neglect the other two
console makers and go straight to Apple? Because they are the current "big bad" among nerds or something? Because it makes for more sensationalism and attention?
It might be just me, but if I fork over money for a piece of hardware, say an iPhone, and want to install an app that Apple's content standards don't like, say one that shows a floppy penis on the screen, I'm well within my rights as an adult to do so, and I don't see why Apple, or any other company, should have a say on what content I choose to use on the hardware I payed for.
Apple or anybody else is not obligated to provide you a method for doing so. You can jailbreak or use the hardware however you like. But Apple/Sony/Microsoft make the product, and they don't have to actively assist you in using the product in ways other than intended.
While the "walled garden" does have its issues, it actually has a lot of benefits for average users, like not being as vulnerable to malware, and having a useful parental control system.
They build hardware. They are not the moral guardians of the world.
Correction: they build hardware
and software, which function closely together. They also never claimed to be moral guardians of the world. Blowing things a little out of proportion there, perhaps?
Furthermore, as a hobbyist developer, I don't like the idea of subjecting myself to the whims of a corporation. Why should I limit my creative vision to fit their corporate image?
You shouldn't. Who said you should?
Hence my comment. I'd be onboard with an OS/Box that is open to third party software, like Android is. If not, I'll just pass, as I do with iOS and consoles.
So, nobody has limited your freedom, and you have every right not to use products that don't suit you. So what's all the fuss about?