Apple products are great if you're already in the ecosystem. As someone who's only Apple product was an iPod nano, I never understood the hype. Yes, they make nice looking devices, but Apple products are all so... Locked. If you want to run Adobe Premier on your new M1 MacBook, great, it does it amazingly well. If you want to run a half dozen virtual machines on the same M1 (which has more than enough power to do it), then you're totally out of luck.

It's the "walled garden" approach that I don't like. Computers, and by extension, smartphones and smart watches, are capable of so much more than what we ask of them, but if we're not allowed to even try then why would I dig myself further into an ecosystem that says "here's what you're allowed to do" rather than "here's what you can do".

Apple has it's place; if you like it, great, but it's not for me.

I think Apple as a company is in the business of selling an overpriced lie.

A glued unswappable battery is not a beautiful design. Pricing casually diving into the 4 digits is not equality. Locked down software and hardware enforce the idea that technology is magic and not something that can be known and judged in context.

The alternative is not FOSS or Linux. That's the diametrical opposite path and as dumbed down as the Apple offer is, you can't ask everybody to wrap their head around what the fuck a Kernel even is.

As far as I am concerned there's a very healthy middle-ground that's plain old "boring" Android and Windows.

The FOSS and open ecosystem is a deep rabbit hole to jump down. Its an important one to be sure, but its also important to know that there is no really feasible way for lay folks to fully pass any sort of purity test without swapping to Linux, using a nonstandard mobile OS, etc. These are all achievable things to do, but they come with significant tradeoffs that require people to be very tech savvy.

I'd say it would be good to learn more about open source as an idea, and then take consistent, small measures to wean yourself out of the totally closed Apple ecosystem. But dont beat yourself up - the most important change is the one upstairs...IRL impacts will flow from that over time.

These are probably more related than you think. I believe we were on track to work together in a global Open Science initiative until Bill Gates stepped up to bankroll most of the biggest initiatives under the agreement that the results were proprietary.

Apple historically was the first company to sue for software copyright infringement. As many other have posted in this thread, they haven't gotten better over time.

I don't use Apple products myself, although I do have an old iPad. My main issue with them isn't a moral one though, it's that Apple seem to design their products to work as slickly as possible with their own ecosystem to the detriment of everything else.

If you use an iPhone, an iPad, an Apple Watch and a Mac then you're probably enjoying a great user experience. If you want to use an Apple device with anything else you're probably in for some amount of pain. I'm not against them, but they're not for me.

I do try and use FOSS software where I can, not least Lemmy and Mastodon, but my main devices are a Windows PC along with an Android phone and tablet. Windows is obviously closed source, and while Android itself is open source you can't say the same for all the vital Google stuff on top. I have a plan to get my hands on a high specced Raspberry Pi when they're finally back in stock and use it as my main home desktop for light use. If I had a laptop of my own I'd definitely be running Linux on it too.

I think everyone should absolutely look into FOSS hardware and software, although in reality I doubt most people would care. If anything it's just the "free" part they care about, but there's obviously a huge benefit in software and hardware being free for others to build on, fork and improve. I'd love nothing more than seeing everything work on this principle, but that's sadly not the world we live in.

You touched upon quite a few interesting topics, so I’ll try to summarize a few things quickly (i.e. prepare for a wall of text).

Generally speaking, citizens of various countries around the world pay taxes, and some of that money gets turned into science. Theoretically, those papers should be accessible to all the citizens because they paid for the experiments to be made and the papers written.

However, the story doesn’t end there! Usually, those papers go through a bizarre system where the scientist pays for them to be published in a journal and then the readers also need to pay to read them. IMO this part of the system is very broken, and open access seems like a way to fix it.

If you feel like it’s all just a big scam, then using sci-hub doesn’t really have any ethical problems. If you feel like the system is contributing something important, then paying for it shouldn’t be a problem either. I’m open to both interpretations, but I’m also reading from sci-hub, so I’m not entirely neutral.

I wonder if you friend would argue that scientific journals are a scam and Apple is also scamming people in a way. If that’s the case, it’s a social justice thing, isn’t it?

It’s true that Apple is pretty bad when it comes to right to repair or FOSS. If you believe that more things should be FOSS, then you probably would be using Android products instead. However, that world comes with a long list of problems too, such as privacy, but that’s a story for another wall of text.

However, as far as the philosophy of open source is concerned, Android is slightly better than iOS. If you’re all about supporting open access and open source, it would make a lot of sense to use Android and avoid all Apple products.

Obviously there are other ways to look at this subject. Personally, I would love to use a 100% FOSS electronics, and as far as laptops are concerned, you can go pretty far in that direction. Mobile devices are a very different story though, but that’s a story for yet another wall of text.

My view: I could not, even if it would safe my own life, explain my 69 year old luddite mother how to operate and navigate an Android smartphone, but I was able to teach her how to use an iPhone 7 Plus without much trouble. She's 73 now and scrolls Twitter and Instagram like the best of them. Replies on emails are still full of typing errors but hey we communicate just fine.

What you are looking for is the Free Software movement, not Open Source. You can watch a short introduction here: https://youtu.be/Ag1AKIl_2GM

You can then understand why it was created and why it's important to society. According to the values of Free Software, Apple is an unethical company, because it restricts users freedom and their right to control their own devices. Doing that lets them abuse users by for example taking away their privacy or adding unskippable updates that might slow down their system or do other harmful things.

Free Software fixes this by giving you the freedom to study the program, modify it and distribute it. Just like the scientific knowledge is available to everyone and anyone can improve upon it.

I'd highly encourage everyone to use more FOSS stuff. Think of it this way, you believe all information should be free and open, what if every technological advancement was too. How far could we go?

Right now Apple got big and bad because they made the best stuff and worked real hard to isolate themselves from everyone else so they could build a walled garden. What if your first introduction to a computer was one that started open and free? What if the brilliant minds that integrated the Apple ecosystem did it openly so everyone could enjoy it going further? Also, what if every harmful technology had been done in the open so watchdogs could tell you if some software was harmful to you?

I think the world would be far better off. You could prove things are good and bad, you wouldn't have so much driven by greed but by the good intentions of good people.

FOSS, sometimes has all the features if you know where to look. There is an awesome Linux app called KDE connect that almost bridges the gap between phone and Linux. It can't do calls, but that's because unlike apple it can't reroute them. It can do texts, send links and files back and forth, control media, run arbitrary command from your phone, and it does all that not just between phone and computer, but also computer and computer, all devices you connect to it. It's amazing what good people with brilliant minds can do with so little. They didn't even need millions of dollars to do it, just some creativity.

I love the philosophy and have so believed in it because there are small places where you can get a glimpse of what incredible things we'd have if we just stopped being entitled and greedy.

I like to tinker. I don't buy apple products. I get that most people want a device that just works when they pick it up and integrates with the rest of their devices. Apple does this really well.

While I personally agree with your colleague, one must consider one's use case and the amount of time and effort it will take to replicate the things you like about the apple UX and ecosystem and make a judgement call. I have a Windows desktop, a Linux server, an Android phone and tablet and I spend a fair amount of time seeing them up and keeping them talking to one another to share data, but even then I can't get them to share settings simply like do not disturb.

Apple has innovated on the user experience to the point where if I pick up an iphone I can't navigate around it because it relies on a soft touch, "intuitive", gestural interface. And therefore it's easy for me to shun apple products on principle. The real hard work is migrating off the platform you know. And for people that were raised in the apple touch ecosystem, I don't realistically see many of them ever leaving.

I'm a software engineer who uses a lot of open source software and I use Apple devices whenever possible. Electronic devices cost a lot of money, so I want my money to count. With that said, every Apple device I've owned has lasted me for a very long time and are still working today; The longest one being a 2012 Macbook Air which is still alive and kicking today after 2 battery replacements.

Even if you do listen to your friend's advice and decide to go for another brand, which one actually advocates for the ideals your friend has shared with you? The direct alternatives to Apple products aren't better in any philosophical way. The ones that do either offer a completely difference experience or an inferior product.

Don't feel bad about what your friend is saying. He doesn't pay for your stuff.

I'm an Apple user, and have been since 2007 when I bought my first MacBook. I have an iPhone, a Watch, a bunch of Macs, and Apple TV. I have an iPad too, but the screen's broken, I can't afford to repair it, and honestly, I don't really have much use for an iPad these days.

While I like how much these devices sync with each other, and I love how well they're built, with every year that passes it sits less well with me how, if you can't afford the latest and greatest, you'll experience some level of OS-rot.

I mean, my iPad is new enough to support iPadOS 16, but too old to support Stage Manager. That I'm not really bothered by, but it's indicative of a problem. If the device is capable of running an OS, it should get all of the OS that its hardware will allow. Even more fundamentally though, say iOS 17 has some new additions to Notes.app that will also work in Sonoma, but your Mac isn't recent enough to go beyond Monterey; does that mean you can't view notes made on your iPhone on your Mac?

And yeah, that doesn't sit right with me.

I'm going to give a different and possibly controversial opinion to the others in here. To get started, I admit that I am a daily mac and ios user so there's definitely some bias there. That being said, I think there is a clear difference between the vaccine and information resources and using a mac or iphone. I think there is an incredible need for there to be a free and open source option that exists for everything (especially for public health and information), but not everything needs to be free and open source if a free version exists elsewhere (or even multiple viable free options). Just because I like going to libraries doesn't mean I dislike book stores. As a video editor, I very much disagree with my professional industry basically mandating ProRes, which forces Mac use (or at least it did for a long time), which institutes a costly and sometimes impossible barrier to entry for many people, which is lame because more editing friends in post is always better.

Maybe there's something I'm missing in the argument, but it seems like if a programmer or end user wanted to use open source software, nothing is stopping them, but if a government wanted to implement "open source" vaccines, that wasn't possible because of the patents. Sure, cross-integration would be super nice (airpods on an android, ipad on windows, imessage on everything, etc), but I don't know if it should be an expectation, just like cross-play in video games would be super nice, but shouldn't be an expectation.

I do like tinkering with things though, and that's really my main personal qualm with apple (I know they're a huge megacorporation, but they don't generally make my personal life worse for the most part). I was running a pretty beefy hackintosh for 7+ years before that computer decided to give up. Now I use that hardware for a home media server. I also love tinkering with little linux distributions on my raspberry pi. Apple really doesn't scratch any of these itches for me, but that's why I do both. I have the reliable mac for work and general computing use and I have my other devices for everything else.

i dont like apple, but i understand why people do. the ecosystem seems convenient, the promises of privacy, etc. but as a techy person i dont like to use them, it feels too constricting and overpriced. and they havent innovated in a long time (with the exception of vision pro, which although i find ridiculous, at least they finally did something innovative)

I consider Apple to be one of the most evil corporations out there, but it appears that my interpretation of "evilness" seema to coincide with size a lot.
so maybe i just don't like (stupidly) successfull companies.

Anyway, I think Apple locks people in their very nice walled garden and in that garden uses a lot of public infrastructure (like open source software, but also other open services on the net), and gives comparatively very little back to the community.

and they do it, because they think it propably makes slightly more money.

Which is also the reason I don't trust their privacy promises at all, since they can't prove many of them.

Apple could be an enormous force for good, but to me it feels like they care more about making 0.5% more money to put into their hoard.

Terrible company, I do believe the world would be better if it vanished.

I'm a huge open source advocate and developer. I used Linux for many many years, but these days I'm Apple all the way. I'm too old to hack around with everything, I want my commodities to Just Work, so I can focus on the stuff I want to do with it. Also, Apple are the only big company I remotely trust on privacy.

Having languished for years hoping for new updates of android and being hampered by carriers or phone makers, I greatly enjoy the long term support apple gives to its devices.

On then computer front I’m a huge fan of Linux distros. If I could I’d move on from windows.

Apple is just about the worst offender out there in terms of desire to maintain a closed ecosystem.

• They only adopt open hardware standards when forced to by law

• They scrupulously enforce price controls on their resellers, ensuring that you can't usually purchase prior generations at a discount

• They intentionally degrade performance on older generations of devices through malicious software updates to force users to upgrade

• They aggressively combat open source and cross platform integration. E.g., Apple TV can't be cast to a Google device, etc.

Just had a lunch conversation today as well and a colleague's iPhone got stolen. I mentioned how the problem of being able to do everything on the phone makes it a single point of failure (back in the day when I traveled I needed internet cafés to login into my brokerage account to sell off some stock. Now I just do it with my phone.). We discussed a bit more how he was stuck and frustrated as all things are done with the phone now (Uber, 2-factor authentication etc.).

But, it was an iPhone, so Apple allowed him to completely shut down and erase his old phone together with all payment info and all other personal info. And then just enter his Apple ID on his new phone (paid by the insurance) and he was back in the game.

If I had my Fairphone stolen, I'd have to somehow recover some parts of my data from my personal backup and the installation process of any new device would take some time. Also, who knows what the thief could've done with my phone?

So yeah, I'm completely opposed to my device being controlled by a corporation to the point they can lock, erase and move all data (including app data) somewhere else, but I do see the advantages.

Ethical consumption is nearly impossible to actually achieve which is why the best way to solve corporate bad practices is a healthy dose of regulation and government. It never hurts to, if you can, avoid doing business with certain bad actors if you'd like but often times you're trading one bad actor for another in a different way.

Personally though I'm not a fan of Apple products. They can be well made and their silicon is incredible. Very fast and energy efficient and for a few years it was far ahead of other arm offerings and in terms of efficiency is still ahead of mobile x86 offerings(though the gap isnt that gigantic anymore it does still offer far better single core performance per watt at low levels). Their software manages to be well designed and whether I agree with it or not manages to get certain features in the mainstream.

That said I prefer the more open way of doing things. Like for example take moving files into and out of an iphone. Pre-airdrop you had to use all kinds of syncing software in order to move files out whereas on android I could just plug it in and navigate my files like a usb. Post airdrop, well airdrop only works on apple products as a means of keeping you locked into the ecosystem. I dont think a good chunk of the way they do things is necessarily better, and they rarely do things first, and worst of all when they do it's often a proprietary way that is not compatible with other devices and OS.

(Note that I'm not much of a tech wiz myself, so I only roughly understand the issue with the lack of privacy.)

When it comes to weighing the pros and cons between security versus convenience, it's hard for me to say that one tops the other. We live in a fast-paced world. At the same time, I hate the idea of people profiting off my data and trying to snoop. A lot of companies like Apple have an iffy reputation when it comes to data security, even though they say they protect your data and privacy. At the same time, many companies provide services which have become an integrated part in people's lives.

I have an Android because I love dabbling with FOSS apps. I never want to have a phone from Apple. However, I also have an iPad— and I'm planning on getting a MacBook. The iPad is good for taking notes and making digital art, while the MacBook helps me deal with industry standards in my future career field.

So for me, I'm not indifferent but... I guess a better way to word it is that I'm wary. On a day-to-day basis I prefer efficiency, but in the long-term I think it might bite me in the ass. Somehow. If it didn't already. (Probably did.)

My amateur opinion: Apple makes beautiful and thoughtful devices that are tightly integrated into a system of services that work well. But I don't use them, mostly because of the closed nature of that ecosystem, and also because they are consistently more expensive. Back when you could jailbreak and sideload apps on iPhones, I had a series of iPhones and they were pretty good phones, although iTunes always sucked. While they were around, iPods were clever. But I preferred to buy music from a variety of places, I wanted to install apps that I wanted and not what were available on the App Store, and I really didn't like the user-hostile decisions Apple made to sell more hardware. Getting rid of the headphone jack was one of the worst decisions to me, as was Apple's dogmatic refusal to use USB-C until European regulators recently forced the change.

I've been an Apple user now for several years now and I get why someone would choose an Apple product, disregarding their monopolous philosophy. Every device is extremely well made with attention to detail, feels almost worth the money you're paying for. The software is adjusted for every device, on iPad you (most of the time) get software that utilizes the space and not just upscaled mobile software. I'm sure that goes for Android now too, but at least it didn't when I switched. The "ecosystem" works incredibly well, everything can be sychronized and my AirPods connect instantly.

However since I've started going to university my mindset has changed. Now I value repairability over being "Apple chique", I've started becoming more and more attached to the open source philosophy (not only concerning software) and frankly, I don't feel a need for Apple anymore so the drawbacks started weighing heavier. I swapped my MacBook for a ThinkPad running Linux. I don't care about the cloud anymore either - I'm much more happy with having my own, decentralised, cloud. I also feel like I want some change. Apple has become boring to me - but that is a personal taste.

You kind of hit on the major tradeoff while thinking through it. That tight product integration (phone, watch, tablet, laptop) is a selling point for a lot of people to buy into closed tech ecosystems. It's easy and it just works. In exchange for those seamless integrations, you kind of lock yourself in to that family of tech products. There's also the fact that the owner of said ecosystem will happily monitor and monetize all your activity on those integrated products. Open source solutions allow you to strip out that corporate telemetry to a greater or lesser extent. You can also achieve some similar levels of product integration, but it does demand a little more effort and technical savvy from the end-user. I wouldn't claim that one or the other choice is explicitly wrong or evil, as people have different tech needs and different amounts of skill/time to devote to this stuff. That said, I personally have tried to be more thoughtful about what I do and do not control with respect to my digital life.

The only Apple thing I ever enjoyed using was a ][e.

I use windows, Apple products and Linux. I prefer FOSS products and will go out of my way to use Ubuntu or arch on my desktop and laptops (going on 15 years) even if it’s harder to get working in certain situations (e.g., gaming). I have to use windows at work. I use apple products (iPhone, iPad, headphones, watch) for the same reasons OP stated, they just work. I need a reliable phone and don’t trust google or the other android manufactures so I see apple as the lesser evil.

Use whatever is best for your situation.