they make bad products that are media darlings because it's fashion more than anything. they're treated like consumer advocates but they are one of the absolute worst companies for vendor lock-in, and are absolutely anti-consumer, but will have innumerable articles written about how they're "the best" for any given measure. it drives me nuts how the public perception of them is the complete opposite of what they actually are, and i don't get it.

also their software is bad. all due credit their hardware impressed but it doesn't matter if the software is crap.

and they aren't private: they've got all your data but have somehow convinced everyone that it's fine that they have it because they're somehow better than every other large tech company.

Not supporting the open nature of hardware and software.

Basically it's too much of a hassle to make their software run on other hardware or use other software on their hardware.

Closed source that pretends to be your friend. They are just wearing a different mask than google, microsoft, facebook, bytedance, and so on. Any privacy gained is a circumstantial side-effect that will cede to any monetary interests and will be used as an excuse to lock users into their walled garden.

Planned obsolescence: the other day I was setting up a refurbished MacBook air from 2017. It officially runs only up to macOS 12. I wanted to install apple's productivity suite iWorks (pages, keynotes, numbers) on it.

But the AppStore said I would need macOS 13 to download and install it. Why the eff doesn't it allow me to install an older version of those apps, and why does the 2017 not support macOS 13?

So I installed Open core Legacy Patcher, built a macOS 13 installer. Installed 13 with absolutely no issues and finally was able to install iWorks.

Any non versed or risk taking user would need to buy a newer Mac... good job apple.

Forcing me to keep updating my OS version, even though it probably isnt that necessary (yes like Windows). Ok there will be perks and nominal security/privacy issues but not sufficient to make me have to replace all my usual software for versions with huge bloat and zero improvement.

The quality of build and user experience are great and def better than even top end Windows machines, but really, is that the deal maker? (I use both Mac and PC units every day.) If you look after a MBPro it will last 20+ years, but the constant 'you cant update something bc your OS is really old (High Sierra in this case) becomes a total PITA, along with battery death etc. My PCs also last a very long time and are very reliable. If they do break they are usually easier to sort out (and much cheaper).

Genius bar is a joke. As a pretty mid range tech person I actually repaired/reinstalled a Yosemite machine myself rather than wait in excess of 14 days to get any help from them and then be charged an arm and a leg. Google was my friend. Cost? Nothing. I got a battery replacement for an old mac laptop from an independent good rep company, cost was about 25% of what Genius bar would have charged.

My next laptop will probably be a Dell or System 76 Linux. Just to experience a fancy Linux build in a posh box.

Walled gardens are antithetical to real privacy.

The fact that they claim to be the most private, but also the most closed, is a contradiction. And that irony doesn't sit well with a lot of people

I don't like closed systems, vendor lock-in, overpriced tools, or buying equipment that I'll never truly own.

In terms of privacy of course because in terms of price it’s another story

Top comment:

price

Also none of the comments even bother addressing the actual question.

Security theater: All you stuff is encrypted but they have the decryption keys

Proprietary App Store: The apps and the store itself are proprietary and I don't trust Apple.

Gaslighting their customers: Images shared with Android users from iPhone are purposely crushed to a unreviewable quality. The idea is to convince people that Android takes terrible photographs.

Seeing as no-one's answering the question in terms of privacy (although I agree with their sentiment)

Trust. You have to trust that they will respect your privacy. They actually talk a good game, are probably superior in privacy to the average android (but not GrapheneOS or Linux) in so much as they fend off other entities trying to hoover your data, mostly so they have exclusive access (at least to metadata, actual data may currently even be secure but that can change and possession is nine tenths and all that). At the end of the day, they're a greedy mega-corporation and cannot be trusted if they need to keep that line going up this quarter. I much prefer transparent systems that keep me in control and possession of my data.

I like their hardware, excellent build quality (shame about long term support and e-waste though). Will probably pick up a cheap M1 Air once Asahi linux stabilises.

I do like their laptops, but for literally everything else: the fact that I basically don’t own my own hardware.

I can’t install or distribute my own software without Apple’s arbitrary approval. When Apple decides it’s done supporting the products, I can’t even install a different OS like Linux because the hardware is completely locked down… they become paper-weights.

That is not how ownership is supposed to work.

Golden cage.

Their way or no way.

It's really simple.

Oh adding to that, ever since I received the knowledge: the support, guru or whatever appointment? Worse than doctors and I hate that too. Why??

Decide what good for me

• price
• closed ecosystem that funnels you into buying more overpriced hardware
• general feeling of superiority apple customers often seem to aquire

(e.g. my former project lead refused to touch other peoples devices because using them "doesn't feel like apple, eww")