Linked by David Adams on Thu 24th Jun 2010 16:22 UTC, submitted by Governa
Permalink for comment 431602
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-03-08
Why would Apple make their devices that complex and that potentially dangerous in order to add a feature (ie the ability to install Apps from an "open" source) that the vast majority of consumers don't care about? Apple's aim, it model, is to make complex devices as easy and safe to use as possible. Hence the App Store.
Indeed, the discussion becomes pointless at the moment where we start to invoke Apple's opinion.
You are saying that Apple have safety as their goal. I personally think that allowing people to install whatever they want instead of having them lick Stevie's boots before is not reducing security, as long as it's done properly, for reasons which are stated before. Taking this reasoning further, I think that this is not the reason why Apple did that, and propose a reasonable alternative explanation (companies all want to maximize their profit, no matter how jerkish the chosen option is).
But again, in the end, none of us know Apple's motivations. It's even possible that they had several reasons for doing that, including false beliefs of increased security.