Google gets mild-mannered, disappointed commenters sighing about how they've messed up search, the web, and has no product/customer support. When Apple comes up, people get on their soap boxes with expletives about how society and the world is fundamentally being ruined. The tone just isn't comparable at all.
You're definitely not looking in the right places then. I've seen Microsoft, Google, twitter, Mozilla, you name the company; coming under fire and everyone piling on. When apple gets criticised in the same way (few and far between that it is), you get an army of apologists out in force ready to die to defend all that apple does.
I've never come across a company that instills that sort of blind faith in its users.
My personal stance is I don't trust any of these companies and will come to threads to be informed about whatever privacy/security/monopoly practices these companies are trying to bypass/do this week for their own profit. I have no allegiance, they're all as bad as each other. In my experience apple is able to do more and gets criticised less.
A recent example was Google implementing something in chrome apple had implemented ages ago in safari. You actually had people saying is was ok for Apple to do it but not Google.
The main difference is that most people use one of the google products directly or indirectly, regardless of their attitude towards the company.
In comparison it is easier to not use Apple products if you don't like the company.
And thus people like you who own an Apple device feel targeted for their choice of using Apple and thus see it as more aggressive and powerful. It is as simple as that. You can find this pattern in every kind of domain, I see people replying with anger and/or passion to any criticism on their car, motorbike or bicycle brands. They naturally feel compelled to defend their brand of choice because they actually feel targeted as owner of it, because it feels like their own discernment is targeted indirectly.
>They naturally feel compelled to defend their brand of choice because they actually feel targeted as owner of it, because it feels like their own discernment is targeted indirectly.
True. But regardless if the commenter is right or wrong, anger is not the proper answer. If the commenter is right, you have some thinking to do. If he's not, you shouldn't care.
Well I guess we need some people at the other extreme to balance out all the Apple-is-the-messiah types.
I'm being glib, here, but I think that's a fairly normal effect. If people's opinions about something are generally pretty boring, average, and uncontroversial, few people will feel the need to stir the pot and adopt extreme views.
But seeing others unquestioningly, unapologetically drooling over something, without allowing any sort of criticism, just eats at some people so much that they need to adopt the completely opposite position and find any reason to brutally criticize.
you must have missed the soapboxes on how google cannot properly support products anymore (The "google graveyard") and especially any topic touching on Youtube.
But sure, for Android topics they get off lighter because devs do technically have F-Droid as an option, or simply hosting an APK on version control for user s to find. There are ways to get around Google's barriers even if they have a steep financial penalty. Apple gives no official way without voiding your warranty (I don't even think rooting your Android these days void you).
You can install only some types of apps from third party stores or sideload them. Many apps like banking apps require using Google Play Services and if you use a third party ROM like LuneageOS or Huawei HarmonyOS, good luck with installing certain apps.
well yes. That's more on the dev than google though. No one is forcing Chase to stay on Google Play and go so far to not work if you sideload it. Or maybe Google is and that will be rounded into all the other stuff happening in courts.
They are important apps, but they are relatively few that go that far.
