←back to thread

2071 points K0nserv | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
divan ◴[] No.45088415[source]
> It should be possible to run Android on an iPhone and manufacturers should be required by law to provide enough technical support and documentation to make the development of new operating systems possible

As someone who enjoyed Linux phones like the Nokia N900/950 and would love to see those hacker-spirited devices again, statements like this sound more than naïve to me. I can acknowledge my own interests here (having control over how exactly the device I own runs), but I can also see the interests of phone manufacturers — protecting revenue streams, managing liability and regulatory risks, optimizing hardware–software integration, and so on. I don't see how my own interests here outweigh collective interests here.

I also don’t see Apple or Google as merely companies that assemble parts and selling us "hardware". The decades when hardware and software were two disconnected worlds are gone.

Reading technical documentation on things like secure enclaves, UWB chips, computational photography stack, HRTF tuning, unified memory, TrueDepth cameras, AWDL, etc., it feels very wrong to support claims like the OP makes. “Hardware I own” sounds like you bought a pan and demand the right to cook any food you want. But we’re not buying pans anymore — we’re buying airplanes that also happen to serve food.

replies(8): >>45088441 #>>45088609 #>>45088627 #>>45088697 #>>45089438 #>>45089444 #>>45089818 #>>45091879 #
tern ◴[] No.45088697[source]
Not to mention, it's an authoritarian attitude, talking about forcing companies to support arbitrary software stacks
replies(4): >>45088780 #>>45088911 #>>45088976 #>>45090727 #
jacquesm ◴[] No.45088780[source]
That's not what they wrote at all.
replies(1): >>45090035 #
tern ◴[] No.45090035{3}[source]
> It should be possible to run Android on an iPhone and manufacturers should be required by law to provide enough technical support and documentation to make the development of new operating systems possible

I was writing in reference to this quote ^

It would have been more accurate for me to say "support the development of arbitrary software stacks," but where do you draw the line between "supporting the development of" and "supporting"?

replies(1): >>45090896 #
jacquesm ◴[] No.45090896{4}[source]
Because the documentation is already written, it just isn't opened up. All you need to do is open it up. The big stumbling block when writing drivers for new hardware is simply to know what goes where.
replies(1): >>45142910 #
1. tern ◴[] No.45142910{5}[source]
As soon as you open up the means, you open up an expectation of support

If Apple provided all the docs, people would start building, and then they would start complaining when Apple doesn't consider them a customer of the business, and Apple would eventually be forced to react, which would take energy away from there core commitment: delivering a unified product experience for consumers

I suspect you don't understand this, but this is why corporations are deliberately unhelpful in many (annoying) ways, and why people don't share things in general as much as you'd hope