Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
Has anyone been surprised in the slightest that Apple locks you in, since the 1980's? I mean, it's literally ALWAYS BEEN the shittiest company to do any tech work with because it's so proprietary, in their hardware, software, entire ecosystem. THIS WAS ALWAYS THE PROBLEM WITH APPLE WHY HAVE SO MANY IDIOTS BOUGHT INTO IT.
Good UI, familiarity, catering to non-tech people, marketing to certain lifestyles, and the hassle of migrating out of the apple ecosystem and buying new apps. At one time apple had better offerings than the PC world did, but when it caught up any reason to buy apple products at 1.5x the cost evaporated for me. This was long before smartphones.
Source?
Photoshop mostly. Graphics people HAD to have a mac. Also Macintosh screens were better, or at least better than the average PC CRT.
At least some of their displays still are. The current 16” MacBook Pro has a 3456x2234 (what else uses 1.5:1 aspect ratio, so weird…) resolution, with HDR1000, and pre-calibrated profiles for a variety of film and graphic design color spaces. Just a monitor matching those specs is close in price to a base model 16”. Then professionally calibrating it if you’re not set up to do so yourself isn’t cheap either.
That's always been the way with Apple. If you fit into the 0.1% of users that can make use of their products, it's good value. If you don't, it's bad value and so locked down there's nothing you can do about it. Most people don't need what Apple is offering, yet buy it anyway. That's the part I don't get.
Source: my personal opinion, pre-OSX in the PowerPC days.
you mean back when it's only speciality was CAD and Music engineering, but no workflow, office or networking, yeah I remember
Decent product with big marketing appealing to their desire to be uniquely elite
People voted with their wallets
Yes, Apple locks you in, but Microsoft has always been worse. Apple's options are proprietary, but Microsoft used their monopoly power to destroy their competitors like Netscape, and waged war against Linux. Meanwhile, Apple switched to a variation of NeXTSTEP which is mostly compatible with Unix and the GNU tools.
On the iPod / iPhone front, both Google and Apple lock users in to their app stores. Both manufacture un-repairable phones. The non-standard Lightning connector was a pain in the ass, but so was the frequent switching on Android phones from mini-B B to micro-B to USB-C. And, until USB-C there was the constant problem of trying to plug in the phone and getting the orientation of the plug wrong, something Apple got right with Lightning.
Then there's advertising / surveillance. Google is an ad-tech company so privacy is never going to be high on their list of priorities for their end-users. Meanwhile, Apple led the way with App Tracking Transparency. Yes, Apple still surveils its users, but at least it doesn't seem to use that data to rent eyeballs the way Google does.
Google and Apple are both shitty companies, but if you want a modern smartphone you basically have to deal with one of them. Apple and Microsoft are both shitty companies but if you want a desktop or a laptop, without the constant toil of dealing with Linux, they're your only options. So, it's about what bothers you more: anticompetitive actions including embracing standards with the aim of destroying them from within, or annoying proprietary stuff? Planned obsolescence and an extreme aversion to fixability, or slightly less surveillance, a slightly more open system, but much more surveillance?
Really, what's needed is proper regulators who can reign in all these shitty companies.