Israeli-founded app preloaded on Samsung phones is attracting controversy

(www.sammobile.com)

Show context

duxup ◴[17 Nov 25 17:00 UTC] No.45955483[source]▶

I recently bought a cheap android device because I needed to test something on Android. The setup was about 3 hours of the device starting up, asking me questions, installing apps I explicitly told it not to, and then all sorts of other apps and OS updates trying to do their thing seemingly at once. I wasn't even transferring data, just a brand new phone, new google account.

What a horrible experience you get with some providers and phones.

It's to the point that I think there should be some sort of regulation that involves you getting a baseline experience on the OS rather than a bunch of malware out of the box.

replies(10): >>45955502 #>>45957276 #>>45957457 #>>45957756 #>>45957987 #>>45958074 #>>45958327 #>>45958370 #>>45958555 #>>45976735 #

rootusrootus ◴[17 Nov 25 21:09 UTC] No.45958327[source]▶

>>45955483 #

I remember back when the iPhone came out, this was perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of it, at least to me. We were so used to phones coming with crap on them and tightly coupled to the carrier. If the carrier didn't want something on the phone, it never got there. So Apple comes along and says "Hey, AT&T, we will make you the exclusive carrier for the iPhone iff you leave the entire experience under our control."

There were lots of downsides to that deal, of course, but I appreciate that it broke the carriers' exclusive control over mobile phones.

replies(1): >>45958485 #

1. cyanydeez ◴[17 Nov 25 21:22 UTC] No.45958485[source]▶

>>45958327 #

"I was so happy to get locked into a different eco system" is all I hear.

replies(4): >>45958607 #>>45958625 #>>45959447 #>>45961808 #

2. linksnapzz ◴[17 Nov 25 21:35 UTC] No.45958607[source]▶

>>45958485 (TP) #

You wouldn't get a phone in 2007 that didn't lock you in to something; the question is whose ecosystem you'd prefer to deal with.

I remember the Verizon crapware phone experience well.

replies(1): >>45960130 #

3. Forgeties79 ◴[17 Nov 25 21:37 UTC] No.45958625[source]▶

>>45958485 (TP) #

I would say their comment had a lot more nuance and thought put in to it than yours did.

replies(1): >>45959302 #

4. cyanydeez ◴[17 Nov 25 22:47 UTC] No.45959302[source]▶

>>45958625 #

I mean sure, but Androids been following Apple's lead, not tother way tround.

5. rootusrootus ◴[17 Nov 25 23:03 UTC] No.45959447[source]▶

>>45958485 (TP) #

Spinning up a competing carrier has a much higher barrier of entry, though, than creating a new mobile phone. If my only choices are carrier-controlled or manufacturer-controlled, I will choose the latter. Gives me way more options.

6. kotaKat ◴[18 Nov 25 00:42 UTC] No.45960130[source]▶

>>45958607 #

I remember when Verizon got deliberately hobbled phones on top of that. Some of the Windows Mobile phones came with up to half the RAM if you dared buy it on Verizon, and they locked the GPS out to use VZ Navigator instead of being able to just throw TomTom on 'em.

7. yupyupyups ◴[18 Nov 25 05:52 UTC] No.45961808[source]▶

>>45958485 (TP) #

When you think of old phones, think of the touch interface on a printer.

I don't like Apple either, they are DEFINITELY rent seeking and violating their users' privacy at the same time. There is no excuse for that. I think what the parent post was talking about is something historical. An iPhone at that time was a large step above a Nokia or a Sony Ericsson in terms of flexibility.

replies(1): >>45978799 #

8. M95D ◴[19 Nov 25 12:30 UTC] No.45978799[source]▶

>>45961808 #

Hold on a sec. Nokia and Ericsson made lots and lots of phone modeles. If you're comparing with cheap ordinary models everyone had, then sure, first iphone was great, but that's not a fair comparison. This is:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=iphone

↑