We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption?
No, seriously, why are car manufacturers forced to allow owners the option of non-manufacturer fuel, non-manufacturer tires, non-manufacturer oil and so on, but when it comes to phones, suddenly "the consumers are making an informed choice"?
We regulate this shit for a reason, and that reason is that market forces alone are not enough to protect the consumer.
>We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption?
Do we really? By law you can't install your own software or ECU in your car and use it legally on the roads. I don't see many people pushing to be able to install BSD on their refrigerator. I think most people would be a lot happier if their TVs didn't come with a full OS. Game consoles have been locked down forever. While re-flashing my router is fun and nice to do, I would wager the absolute vast majority of people both never do it and certainly don't actually care if they can or not. ESPHome is a thing, but most people are buying IOT devices they don't have the ability to run anything they want on.
In fact, other than a personal computer, I'd wager most of the devices most people use in their day to day life with the ability to run software do not have – nor do people "demand" they have – the ability to run any arbitrary piece of software they want on it.
> By law you can't install your own software or ECU in your car and use it legally on the roads.
Who told you this? As long as the ECU you install meet the requirements, feel free. There's even a few open source ones. See https://megasquirt.info/
You are displaying the problem with allowing Apple special exemption to flout the rules - eventually people start believing that it must be against the law ... just like you did.
Better nip this nonsense while we can instead of everyone starting to believe that they may not modify the devices they purchased and own simply because the manufacturer said so.
I am well aware of the megasquirt project and others like speeduino. The existence and popularity of that product no more speaks to its legality anymore than the existence and popularity of illegal drugs speaks to theirs. Federal law prohibits tampering with any part of your vehicles emissions control systems, which includes the ECU and any aftermarket parts must comply to all relevant epa standards and almost always requires EPA or CARB certification [1]. In theory it might be possible to get that certification or get and exemption even without it, but it is notable that no CARB or EPA approved after market forced induction systems allow end user modification of the fueling control. Additionally no complete ECU replacements that I’m aware of will pass OBD II emissions tests or even report the relevant data.
Additionally megaquirt themselves repeatedly remind you their products are not legal for road use [2]:
> MegaSquirt® and MicroSquirt® controllers are experimental devices intended for educational purposes. MegaSquirt® and MicroSquirt® controllers are not for sale or use on pollution controlled vehicles. Check the applicable laws in your locality to determine if using MegaSquirt is legal for your application. For more information, see: www.megamanual.com/tamp.htm
Or
> No. MegaSquirt® EFI controllers DO NOT have exemption orders, and thus are NOT emissions legal for sale or use on any on-road pollution controlled vehicles in the U.S.A. or Canada. Competition vehicles that are never operated on public roads may be able to use MegaSquirt® EFI controllers, and some older 'non-emissions' on-road vehicles might be able to use MegaSquirt® EFI controllers as well. For other regions, please check your local regulations to see if a MegaSquirt® EFI controller is legal for your application. There is more information here: www.megamanual.com/tamp.htm
So, according to your argument, which you've stated twice now[1], it's okay for regulation of consumer devices.
Once again, I have to ask, why do you feel that phones should be exempt from regulation?
> Additionally megaquirt themselves repeatedly remind you their products are not legal for road use [2]:
Yeah, but they're perfectly legal for owners of the cars to use, as long as they stay on the track. You're arguing for not modifying the device at all, regardless of where it is going to be used.
[1] Thanks, by the way. It's awfully hard to get iPhone supporters to agree that regulation is a good thing once, nevermind twice.
> So, according to your argument, which you've stated twice now[1], it's okay for regulation of consumer devices.
I have said no such thing. I was challenging the assertion that we “demand [the option to control our devices] of almost all non-phone appliances”. I said nothing at all about the “good” or “badness” of regulation. The rest of your comment continues this bad faith interpretation of my argument and puts words in my mouth, so we’re done here.
We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption?
No, seriously, why are car manufacturers forced to allow owners the option of non-manufacturer fuel, non-manufacturer tires, non-manufacturer oil and so on, but when it comes to phones, suddenly "the consumers are making an informed choice"?
We regulate this shit for a reason, and that reason is that market forces alone are not enough to protect the consumer.
Your thoughts on it are irrelevant.