>I don’t understand this fascistic need to restrict how other people use their devices.
What? This is literally what you are doing. You want to restrict other people's devices and rob them of their freedom "because of your Grandma". We want to give people more freedom such that everybody can use their devices as they see fit. Should you still want more restriction, that's also an option that's included, since you have the freedom to just keep using it with its restricted defaults. It's insane that you are incapable of understanding this.
>That decision has zero impact on you.
No, quite the contrary. It robs 99.9% of people of their consumer rights and robs them of their freedoms, just "because of your Grandma". While our aims have zero impact on you, since you can just keep using your device as you always have. You're literally putting the logic on its head. So take your own advice and "you can simply ignore how we and 99.9% of society use our devices, and move along with your life. Mind your own business and simply buy your Grandma a different phone from a different company which meets your needs. There is no shortage of such devices and companies."
>The whole point of a marketplace is to encourage differentiated products from a variety of companies. You are saying that a company should not be allowed to sell me a red car because you prefer blue cars. The correct solution is for you to go buy a blue car from one of the many companies that sells blue cars.
Here comes the expected nonsense analogy. Yet more evidence that you have zero understanding of the topic and that you're yet another Apple shill who blindly regurgitates the same old debunked talking points ad nauseam. Let me briefly debunk it. "The whole point of a marketplace" is not to sell "differentiated products", that's just your primitive understanding; the point of a marketplace is to connect buyers and sellers, price discovery and competition - without which price discovery is impossible; all of these have to operate under fair market principles which are enforced by the state which has laws to enforce and ensure that no market participant becomes too dominant and anti-competitive and thus breaks fair market principles. Famous examples are:
So your claim that I'm supposedly stating "that a company should not be allowed to sell me a red car" is false and a gross misrepresentation of what I'm saying and a clear indicator that you will simply ignore any argument and any evidence just to blindly regurgitate absurd analogies that make zero sense in the given context just to recycle old and debunked talking points in defense of Apple's anti-competitive and consumer hostile business practices.
What? This is literally what you are doing. You want to restrict other people's devices and rob them of their freedom "because of your Grandma". We want to give people more freedom such that everybody can use their devices as they see fit. Should you still want more restriction, that's also an option that's included, since you have the freedom to just keep using it with its restricted defaults. It's insane that you are incapable of understanding this.
>That decision has zero impact on you.
No, quite the contrary. It robs 99.9% of people of their consumer rights and robs them of their freedoms, just "because of your Grandma". While our aims have zero impact on you, since you can just keep using your device as you always have. You're literally putting the logic on its head. So take your own advice and "you can simply ignore how we and 99.9% of society use our devices, and move along with your life. Mind your own business and simply buy your Grandma a different phone from a different company which meets your needs. There is no shortage of such devices and companies."
>The whole point of a marketplace is to encourage differentiated products from a variety of companies. You are saying that a company should not be allowed to sell me a red car because you prefer blue cars. The correct solution is for you to go buy a blue car from one of the many companies that sells blue cars.
Here comes the expected nonsense analogy. Yet more evidence that you have zero understanding of the topic and that you're yet another Apple shill who blindly regurgitates the same old debunked talking points ad nauseam. Let me briefly debunk it. "The whole point of a marketplace" is not to sell "differentiated products", that's just your primitive understanding; the point of a marketplace is to connect buyers and sellers, price discovery and competition - without which price discovery is impossible; all of these have to operate under fair market principles which are enforced by the state which has laws to enforce and ensure that no market participant becomes too dominant and anti-competitive and thus breaks fair market principles. Famous examples are:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._AT%26T_(2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
So your claim that I'm supposedly stating "that a company should not be allowed to sell me a red car" is false and a gross misrepresentation of what I'm saying and a clear indicator that you will simply ignore any argument and any evidence just to blindly regurgitate absurd analogies that make zero sense in the given context just to recycle old and debunked talking points in defense of Apple's anti-competitive and consumer hostile business practices.