> But that’s a trivial cost compared to the consent problem. [..] AI bros keep telling me “just turn it off” and when I do they remove the choice.
This is barking at the wrong tree. If you value things like your privacy or the ability to strictly control what runs on your computer then perhaps it would be a good idea to not run a proprietary operating system that's primarily designed not to provide you with the best user experience possible but to slowly extract more and more value out of you?
You must be talking about someone other than Apple. Apple has been falling into value extraction lately (which I hope Ternus will change), but their operating systems very much have never been designed for that from the outset. Rather the opposite. Apple is the only company that comprehensively documents platform security and privacy. I can't think of anyone else who doesn't just say "trust me bro". Maybe GrapheneOS. Nobody actually proves they are who they say they are better than Apple does.
Apple is also one of the only companies to focus on user experience above all else (nearly, anyway). Again, I can't think of a single other example (maybe Framework comes close), but while Apple has incredible technology, they have always been fairly measured with it to attain just the user experience they want. IMO, that's what earned Mac a reputation for having poor performance, and iPhone a reputation for having low memory, because Apple gave them the specs they needed to run well and have a terrific UX, not necessarily the specs to push the frontier of what you can run at home.
Apple has been learning that frontier is important, though, and they've been leaning more into it lately. Part of why Apple Silicon has been such an incredible shock to the industry.
The author is complaining that his OS doesn't let him say "no". This would never happen with an OS which actually respects you. Of course, it's not Apple's fault, it never is -- it's those "AI bros"! It's incredibly ironic that the author writes "I’ve chosen not to kowtow to billionaires", yet he kowtowing to a company with a market cap of 5 trillion USD.
You wrote as if the entire operating system was designed from the start to extract value from you. That's what I'm disputing. I'm not trying to say that removing a disablement option that literally already existed had the user's best interest in mind. Just that it's not a sign of some core fundamental disrespect that the company has. We've already seen that Apple's been getting swept up by generative AI bullshit, like with the iPhone 16 marketing, and it is entirely fair to hold them accountable for all the shit they're doing, but it's also entirely possible that this is just a ripple and they're going to get themselves under control again.
Of course it's designed to extract value. MacOS is primarily a consumer content platform with some developer features, rather than vice versa.
The Apple experience is enshitifying at all levels and becoming consistently intrusive. I'm perpetually nagged about a 3 month trial of Apple Music I will never use and have zero interest in. Music player launches when I get in the car, even though I don't want it to. Apple Maps persistently asks me if I want a quick route home, when I don't. Apple TV repeatedly runs trailers for Apple Shows I have no interest in.
Apple '26 gave the world the much-loathed and objectively pointless Liquid Glass. iOS27 has some idiotically obvious bugs and usability issues. Parts of the hardware remain world-leading, but the software is getting less and less humane while pretending to be the opposite.
kouteiheika · · focus · HN ↗
This is barking at the wrong tree. If you value things like your privacy or the ability to strictly control what runs on your computer then perhaps it would be a good idea to not run a proprietary operating system that's primarily designed not to provide you with the best user experience possible but to slowly extract more and more value out of you?
LoganDark · · focus · HN ↗
Apple is also one of the only companies to focus on user experience above all else (nearly, anyway). Again, I can't think of a single other example (maybe Framework comes close), but while Apple has incredible technology, they have always been fairly measured with it to attain just the user experience they want. IMO, that's what earned Mac a reputation for having poor performance, and iPhone a reputation for having low memory, because Apple gave them the specs they needed to run well and have a terrific UX, not necessarily the specs to push the frontier of what you can run at home.
Apple has been learning that frontier is important, though, and they've been leaning more into it lately. Part of why Apple Silicon has been such an incredible shock to the industry.
kouteiheika · · focus · HN ↗
LoganDark · · focus · HN ↗
TheOtherHobbes · · focus · HN ↗
The Apple experience is enshitifying at all levels and becoming consistently intrusive. I'm perpetually nagged about a 3 month trial of Apple Music I will never use and have zero interest in. Music player launches when I get in the car, even though I don't want it to. Apple Maps persistently asks me if I want a quick route home, when I don't. Apple TV repeatedly runs trailers for Apple Shows I have no interest in.
Apple '26 gave the world the much-loathed and objectively pointless Liquid Glass. iOS27 has some idiotically obvious bugs and usability issues. Parts of the hardware remain world-leading, but the software is getting less and less humane while pretending to be the opposite.
LoganDark · · focus · HN ↗
And IME the app that launches in the car is the last app you had open. Open Apple Maps and then it shouldn't launch Music every time.
Liquid Glass was one person, who thankfully has already left. iOS 7 was the same deal, terrible at launch.
I do agree that the services are pretty bad. Like, advertising Apple's new pet movie through the fucking Wallet app? Should be straight to jail.