> This is why I don't use an os that depends on cloud functionality built into the os for much of its fuctionality.

macOS doesn't require this. My Apple account has a handful of apps purchased over the years, and that's it. I could've bought them directly from the vendors, but the store makes it easier to update.

>macOS doesn't require this

Technically true but I tried using a mac without creating an Apple ID and gave up. You can't access the store without it so you are locked out of Mac apps that aren't installed by default, and all apps that only distribute through the store now.

You don’t need the App Store to install most apps, and can just download .dmg or even .zip files with them; I feel like only a handful of developers go full-App Store-only (with good reason; it not only imposes extra restrictions on certain functionality but also takes a big cut of your sale).

I've used macbooks for 15 years and have never felt the need to create an Apple ID. Maybe I've just been lucky but I have never even encountered a piece of software that didn't offer a direct download or brew installation.

Xcode.

Development on Apple hardware generally

You only need Apple ID to get Xcode though, everything else is available without

And even if, there are torrents and sites. Same for Steam games. Fuck the cloud.

Perhaps that's not a loss, because why would you want to depend on apps that you essentially need an Apple account to use? I've had great luck with finding apps with Homebrew.

Well I just stopped using a Mac. It's not worth jumping through hoops.

Does iOS?

The operating system does not. The App Store does, and unfortunately on iOS the App Store is the only way to download apps not included with the OS.

I don’t think it is stupid but the golden rule is multiple backups. I personally believe 3 backups is the minimum. A physical one and 2 others. Either another physical copy stored at another location to protect against things like fire or 2 cloud backups to prevent situations like this. But I have only ever met one person who did this. His house burned to the ground and lost all data at his house but had back ups at his brother and on some cloud service and lost nothing. I was impressed as most people I know have zero back ups.

I don't think the customer should be required to implement their own redundancy on top of the services they subscribe to.

I don’t think so either in the sense we are seeing in this case. As in there should be some legal protections like sure Apple can choose to close his accounts but should allow him a reasonable amount of time to export his data. But one should in best practice always have their own redundancies as too many times we have seen companies lose data for various reasons.

Yes, therefore it is better to stick with services that have open protocols, so you can rely on FOSS tools to handle redundancy for you.

Using FOSS solutions and setting redundancy is not going to work for average users.

I think you’re missing the point here, which is we need regulations to protect consumers against big tech.

Regulations that will do what? I think the parent is correct to call out the entrenchment of first-party services as an issue.

Sure, but until then FOSS solutions are the way to go.

Of course this is not for average people, but neither is making backups.