I don't care if the inevitable future of the Mac platform is more locked down. In fact I welcome it. Does it limit what I can do with my device? Of course. Do I lament some of the control I’ve already given up? Sure. But the trade off is a safer and smoother computing experience that allows me to focus more on what I want to achieve with what the platform does provide.
I spent some time on Linux, I got into hyper-customizing every minute detail, I swapped out third party RAM and even early adopted SSDs by mounting them in the optical drive bay. I built a PC tower from personally selected components. I triple booted Windows and Linux on my first Intel Mac with community built boot loaders well before Boot Camp was a thing.
I can’t imagine spending my time that way anymore. I learned a lot, but now I just wanna get stuff done. I like having some of the system out of reach. I like knowing that it’s readonly and I like the kind of hardware advances Apple’s vertical integration has enabled.
It’s okay if we value different things, and it’s okay if we make different compromises to experience them.
You go so far as to validate the things he's concerned about and reiterate that you just don't care about them. I don't see what's wrong with pointing out the inherent shortsightedness of that line of thinking.
>it’s disappointing to me that so many here simply can’t conceive that some people don’t share their priorities, and make conscious choices that reflect their own priorities.
Have you considered that those people understand basic human psychology and that they take issue with the exact priorities that they are speaking against?
What problem? How do my decisions to prefer one computer platform have any impact on GP or you or anyone? Apple turning the entire Mac line into iPads can’t and won’t eliminate more open platforms that you or GP may prefer. There’s no future inflection point where Apple has locked down the Mac platform in a way that enables them to storm into your home and replace your Linux computer (or whatever) with a Mac.
It’s elitist because the suggestion is that my preference represents an inability to evaluate the impact it has on me. It has no meaningful impact on you. It would have no meaningful impact on you if I decided to eschew all computing technology and go live in a monastery.
> You go so far as to validate the things he's concerned about and reiterate that you just don't care about them. I don't see what's wrong with pointing out the inherent shortsightedness of that line of thinking.
I am allowed to have different preferences and priorities. It’s not shortsighted, I see the compromise I’m making and I’m satisfied with what it provides in return. And since it in no way harms you or GP, it’s not your business to tell me to change my preferences.
> Have you considered that those people understand basic human psychology and that they take issue with the exact priorities that they are speaking against?
Have you considered that taking issue with other people’s preferences and imposing your own is far more controlling than just accepting that some people like different things, even if their preferences are personally limiting in a way you’re not comfortable with for yourself?
>Actual money in the hand now is worth more than theoretical money in the future and so on.
Exactly, short-term profit will almost always trump long-term problems. Is that so difficult to consider?
