Same, but my PC runs on Linux so I don't feel threatened.
I feel like at some point normies may end up just using iPadOS or Android as a "convergent" device: a tablet/phone that they can plug into a docking station and use as a computer.
I am sort of hoping that it will work with something like GrapheneOS, so that I will be able to benefit from it on my phone.
Well, you should feel threatened. Where do you think the push towards TPM and secure boot is heading? Microsoft is insanely envious of how Apple and Google locked down their platforms and have total control over app stores, and that’s what Microsoft wants too. It’s a huge revenue stream they’re leaving on the table. Now that there’s precedent on mobile, they’ll have no problem pushing it through on desktop.
And once all the normies have moved to iPads, there won’t be a big enough market for anyone to manufacture PC hardware for hobbyists anymore.
In general, I don't care so much if Windows or macOS become as locked as Android or iOS, as long as I can install Linux on my hardware.
My point is that many people seem to complain because they want to be root on the Google-certified Android. I disagree with that: Google makes an OS where you cannot be root. If you want an OS where you can be root, you should be able to install another OS on the hardware you bought. Because you should own that hardware. But you don't own Google.
The problem is more that you're forced to use Google's OS. Usually just less convenient, but often in a literal sense too with these government services increasingly requiring attestation.
And also a third party should not be able to inspect my device and discriminate against my owned device. The device should attest its authenticity to me (or my organization that owns it) alone. Arguably, this is a social/political problem more than a technical one, but it tends to have a similar effect by imposing a cost on having control over your own computing (now you need to carry two phones).
Also while you can debate about stuff like Netflix DRM, access to banks and government services is not a privilege, it is a right (for a transaction that isn't otherwise illegal). The counterparty is not subject to freedom of association because in many places it is illegal to have cash transactions over a certain amount, and you can't choose a different government.
Yeah I agree with that as well. Fine if Google wants to lock some stuff on Android, but a bank should not be able to prevent me from using GrapheneOS (or Linux, or whatever I want).
Is that what you are saying or did I misunderstand?
Yeah, but the whole point of Google's locked down system and integrity APIs is to offer a way to subjugate users and transfer power from the users to the providers. Arguably it shouldn't work in an ideal competitive market where most consumers are intelligent, but it is how it is in our world.
Banks, governments, and anything else that's required to participate in society should not depend on proving the loyalty of my device to Google or any other entity that isn't me.
I feel like at some point normies may end up just using iPadOS or Android as a "convergent" device: a tablet/phone that they can plug into a docking station and use as a computer.
I am sort of hoping that it will work with something like GrapheneOS, so that I will be able to benefit from it on my phone.