Older gen z here too, born in ‘99, and while I haven’t noticed the analogue thing, I’ve 100% noticed tech illiteracy in general.

Like, I’m talking about having a downloads folder full of junk because they don’t know that that’s where downloads end up. Installers left untouched after programs are installed because they’re worried that deleting the installer will delete the installed program.

Imo being raised with closed ecosystems like iPhones really stunted tech literacy for a lot of people. I grew up jailbreaking my phones and used my parent’s windows pc, so I kind of escaped it.

And a lot of people wouldn’t even care

I’m an older Gen Z, but same here. I really don’t know that much but can torrent, so people see me as some sort of tech god lol.

My younger sister on the other hand, also Gen z, is so tech illiterate that her downloads folder is a mess and thinks deleting installers will delete the installed program.

Did you miss what this post is about? In this scenario it’s literally not your body.

Fuck spez

You think abusing a child is easier than, say, punching someone in the face as you would do in video games?

Dude if you genuinely think that I’d recommend reaching out to someone…

In all seriousness tho, way to take the most extreme video game example possible to dismiss my point. Video game violence can have an extremely low “situational barrier”, but that doesn’t mean that video games will make you do those things.

Like how video games supposedly normalize violence? Are you going to go shoot a bunch of people because GTA exists?

Ffs guys what year is this? Thought we were past this silly mindset.

Which is, imo, pretty dumb. If it gives these people an outlet that literally hurts no one, I say they should be allowed to use it. Without it they’ll just go to more extreme lengths to get what they need, and as such may go to places where actual real life children are being abused or worse.

So while it’s still disgusting and I’d rather not think about it, if nobody’s being hurt then it’s none of my business. Let them get out their urges in a safe way that doesn’t affect anybody else.

Yeah, but I imagine Costco or Sam’s Club don’t manufacture products that then can’t be used together with products made somewhere else, do they?

This is an entirely different argument about whether companies should be allowed to make their products proprietary and only work with stuff sold by them, which btw is also common outside of Apple.

This discussion is about whether or not Apple has the right to enforce certain rules and demand a bigger cut from those who want to use their market place, and as we’ve gone over plenty of other markets do this as well. Apple isn’t unique here.

I’m saying Apple is out of line because they don’t let other people develop software compatible with their products and sell it without taking a cut.

Is Sony out of line because they won’t let you put your games on their marketplace and sell it without taking a cut? Nintendo? Microsoft?

Hell, even ignoring Costco and Sam’s Club, nearly any market you decide to sell your product in will be taking a cut, some more than others. This isn’t a new concept - if you want access to a company’s “user base” then you’re going to have to give the company a cut.

It’s as if I was manufacturing trailers, and had to pay Ford a 30% cut just because it can be hitched to a Ford.

Not quite, as the ability to hitch your trailer to a car, luckily, isn’t proprietary and works the same across the board. If instead you wanted your trailers to make use of a proprietary feature of Ford’s then yes, you’d have to pay a premium. Whether that’s parody with their OS throughout the trailer, or some other feature that’s specifically theirs, you don’t get access to that for nothing.

A better analogy though, as we’re talking about markets, is if you wanted to sell your trailers on Ford’s car lots. Yes, you alone manufactured these trailers, but if you want to sell them on Ford’s lots, to their clients, then you’re going to have to pay a premium.

By the way, this is how you know Apple is monopolistic; in a competitive market standards…

But you’re not talking about Apple here, you’re talking about the App Store. Apple itself isn’t a monopoly, as it quite literally has direct competitors. While the App Store is a “monopoly” in the same way that the PlayStation Store is a monopoly.

Apple’s ecosystem isn’t unique, take Cosco or Sam’s Club for example. If you want access to their “user base” then you’ll need to follow their rules and accept that they’ll be taking a bigger cut than other markets. You can choose to sell elsewhere, but that’s the price for access to their customers.

And as for your Ford example, that’s hardly a crazy concept. Plenty of manufacturers have to pay a premium to manufacture parts for certain companies.

Honestly tho… it seems like they have a point. It isn’t just blind ranting, there’s a lot of truth here.

And I say that as someone that doesn’t even particularly like Apple, I use Windows and prefer Android.

Developers: I don’t find your rules worth access to your user base. Luckily I have the option to release my app on other stores on Android, so I’ll simply do that.

Same, I haven’t supported them since 2020 but after this I’m never coming back. They can go fuck themselves, I hope their “Switch 2” fails like the WiiU did.

If they actually managed to, my faith in humanity would be restored a little bit

Honestly I agree. If you want sideloading, here’s the great thing about competition, you can go with a competitor that allows that.

I regularly swap between iPhone and various androids specifically because I want different things sometimes. I don’t want iPhone’s niche to get screwed up - one of their biggest selling points is their tailor made walled garden experience. It’s sure as hell not for everyone, but for those that like it, it’s fantastic.

And for the record, I say all this as someone who usually goes with Android.

This isn’t new, I’ve seen ai in the Google images results for months now, close to a year.

Unless you’re super into Fortnite or CoD, Linux plays virtually all of them too.

I haven’t heard anyone unironically use that line past the age of 7.

Competition is good. Poaching games isn’t. And how exactly is it competition if I have to use both to play my games?

If Epic really wanted to compete they’d compete in features, like GoG does.

Edit: Also if the Epic hate were really just about gamers hating competition to Steam, then GoG would be getting hate too.

McDonald’s does the exact same thing with their ice cream machines.