3 ms·

I've yet to hear a good reason for Apple's strict restrictions on what can/can't run on the iPhone. Initially a lot of people said the App store restrictions w

I've yet to hear a good reason for Apple's strict restrictions on what can/can't run on the iPhone. Initially a lot of people said the App store restrictions were to ensure the safety of the cell phone network from viruses, misbehaved apps, etc. But clearly that's hogwash. Phone's running Symbian, WinMo, BB-OS, Palm, etc. have been allowing the user to run apps without a nanny/gatekeeper for ages with no ill effects. I won't even mention the lack of problems with the Android Market to date.. Then there are folks who claim its "to control the user experience". That's also clearly hogwash. Is it O.K. if the RIAA decides that "to control the user experience" you're not allowed to rip CD's to your iPod? And of course, there is the easy counterexample that allowing users to freely choose their applications (that whole free market thing) hasn't seemed to have hurt the legendary user experience of OSX. What particularly bothers me is the combination of the strict restrictions in the iPhone App store and the App store being the only way to load an app on the phone. To say nothing of the vigor with which Apple has attempted to thwart users with "jailbroken" iPhones. It's almost pathological.

blasdel 17y ago
That's some lazy vigor -- they fix the software exploits after they're published. Sure it's nice to be able to root your own phone, but it'd be pretty obnoxious if other people could root my phone! It's entirely about "controlling the user experience" as you say. They don't really mind the jailbreakers all that much (it provides an outlet for the fiddlers) as long as it doesn't become mainstream. The way they see it, the problem with allowing people to install packages from elsewhere is that unsophisticated users would use it; fuck themselves; and blame Apple. They don't want the platform to grow out of their control -- Jobs would have a heart attack if it became perfectly normal to install customizations, themes, haxies, etc. There's nothing inherent about the platform that would restrain any of that, the gate at the App Store does it all. They want to keep it so that every iPhone works and behaves like an iPhone. In their opinion, you should go to another vendor if you want a different user experience, much less a self-created one.
- theBobMcCormick 17y ago
  Hogwash. Unsophisticated users installing third party packages and "fucking themselves" doesn't seem to be a big problem in OSX. Nor does it seem to be a big problem for Symbian, WinMob, BB, Android, etc. Allowing Opera, as an example, to be installed on an iPhone isn't going to stop it from working and behaving like an iPhone. It'll just be an iPhone with 1 additional application installed on it. Hardly world changing.
  - blasdel 17y ago
    Unsophisticated users "fucking themselves" was a huge problem in OS X's early years (and only petered out with the horde of switchers 3-4 years ago), mostly thanks to the aggressive efforts of these folks: http://unsanity.com/ http://unsanity.com/ It was an extraordinarily similar situation: tons of expected features were left out of the new OS, and large parts of the UI changed substantially from what old users were habituated to. The most popular 'Haxie' by far was Windowshade, which restored the old window minimization metaphor of collapsing into the titlebar, and was installed by millions of mostly elderly people. Unfortunately, that whole class of extensions worked by means of a kernel extension that diddled with the address spaces of every binary and interposed itself in core GUI library code. They fucked over not just the users, but anyone who had to support any application on their systems. If they allowed you to easily install apps from other sources, they'd be right back in that boat immediately and they know it. A fringe group of users (and handset manufacturers) have been fucking themselves for years on Windows Mobile: http://www.xda-developers.com/ http://www.xda-developers.com/ -- and they've had an exodus to Android, where they have access to a lot more consumer users that would think of installing their stuff.

blasdel 17y ago

That's some lazy vigor -- they fix the software exploits after they're published. Sure it's nice to be able to root your own phone, but it'd be pretty obnoxious if other people could root my phone! It's entirely about "controlling the user experience" as you say. They don't really mind the jailbreakers all that much (it provides an outlet for the fiddlers) as long as it doesn't become mainstream. The way they see it, the problem with allowing people to install packages from elsewhere is that unsophisticated users would use it; fuck themselves; and blame Apple. They don't want the platform to grow out of their control -- Jobs would have a heart attack if it became perfectly normal to install customizations, themes, haxies, etc. There's nothing inherent about the platform that would restrain any of that, the gate at the App Store does it all. They want to keep it so that every iPhone works and behaves like an iPhone. In their opinion, you should go to another vendor if you want a different user experience, much less a self-created one.

theBobMcCormick 17y ago
Hogwash. Unsophisticated users installing third party packages and "fucking themselves" doesn't seem to be a big problem in OSX. Nor does it seem to be a big problem for Symbian, WinMob, BB, Android, etc. Allowing Opera, as an example, to be installed on an iPhone isn't going to stop it from working and behaving like an iPhone. It'll just be an iPhone with 1 additional application installed on it. Hardly world changing.
- blasdel 17y ago
  Unsophisticated users "fucking themselves" was a huge problem in OS X's early years (and only petered out with the horde of switchers 3-4 years ago), mostly thanks to the aggressive efforts of these folks: http://unsanity.com/ http://unsanity.com/ It was an extraordinarily similar situation: tons of expected features were left out of the new OS, and large parts of the UI changed substantially from what old users were habituated to. The most popular 'Haxie' by far was Windowshade, which restored the old window minimization metaphor of collapsing into the titlebar, and was installed by millions of mostly elderly people. Unfortunately, that whole class of extensions worked by means of a kernel extension that diddled with the address spaces of every binary and interposed itself in core GUI library code. They fucked over not just the users, but anyone who had to support any application on their systems. If they allowed you to easily install apps from other sources, they'd be right back in that boat immediately and they know it. A fringe group of users (and handset manufacturers) have been fucking themselves for years on Windows Mobile: http://www.xda-developers.com/ http://www.xda-developers.com/ -- and they've had an exodus to Android, where they have access to a lot more consumer users that would think of installing their stuff.