I just want to ask you something. I'm a software developer, able to build out of parts and configure a headless Linux box, unlock the bootloader on, flash and root an Android phone and use both successfully, and "Please OS vendor I want something simple, ... , please lock down my machine" is literally THE reason why I got an expensive iPhone as my last phone instead of a cheaper Android.
If you have two otherwise-equal choices, but one has great default settings, but allows you to change things if you really really want, and the other has the same great defaults, but is locked down and doesn't allow you any choice, then if you pick the locked-down choice, I think you're frankly quite stupid.
What I think is really stupid is how many people seem to think that having the ability to change things means that they absolutely MUST go through all the settings menus and change things. What really galls me is how many so-called technologists even believe this. It comes up all the time in Gnome vs. KDE arguments, and I'm seeing the same mentality here. If you don't want to change things, then don't.
> think that having the ability to change things means that they absolutely MUST go through all the settings menus and change things.
That sure does sound like a straw man argument to me. Are you sure you've really heard "pls don't make me change all the things, I don't like changing things" instead of the much more plausible "pls don't make me use a system where someone had to implement (and has to support) functionality that I personally don't need, and as a (possibly) developer myself I understand that this adds complexity to the system and places burden on BOTH the user and the developer"?
It's not a straw man. People really do say these things. They complain that the existence of lots of configuration menus and options means that they MUST go through all these menus and configure everything themselves. Believe it or not. I've seen it time and time again, for over a decade, every time there's an argument of Gnome vs. KDE.
Not really, the choice will then becomes use chrome and deal with their JIT draining your phone/privacy invasive ads or you cant use this feature from google docs/slides/youtube being slow… etc
Bringing up the device performance and hinting at planned obsolescence of devices is probably not the best tactic here when debating android vs iOS.
Apple has a worse track record when it comes to that (while still allowing Google/android plenty of room for the same).
I just want to ask you something. I'm a software developer, able to build out of parts and configure a headless Linux box, unlock the bootloader on, flash and root an Android phone and use both successfully, and "Please OS vendor I want something simple, ... , please lock down my machine" is literally THE reason why I got an expensive iPhone as my last phone instead of a cheaper Android.
Would you say that I'm stupid?