4 ms·

The AppStore is a huge deal and was barely even mentioned. Censoring what they sell in the AppStore is fine with me. Maintaining a monopoly on the sales of soft

by nnutter 17y ago

The AppStore is a huge deal and was barely even mentioned. Censoring what they sell in the AppStore is fine with me. Maintaining a monopoly on the sales of software for use with their devices by exploiting contract law and the DCMA is not. Yet we are supposed to forgive them because they are doing cool things with hardware/software? Enjoy.

theBobMcCormick 17y ago
I'd actually be O.K. with the restrictions in the App store if there was any non-jailbreak method of loading apps outside the app store. That would allow you to install things like Google Voice, Opera, or whatever if you the user want to, while still providing a squeaky clean simplified view to the average user. For example, on an Android phone, by default you can only install apps from the Android Market. However, by checking one checkbox in the phone's preferences, you can install non-market apps. Those might be apps you upload using the Android developer tools (if you're a dev), or you can download and install apps from a website, or you can use a third party market (like SlideMe).
- netcan 17y ago
  I think you might have trouble really maintaining squeaky cleanliness. The 'average user' still might want or need Google Voice, Opera, or something she needs for work. She sees it on someone else's phone, she asks how you get it. The tell her: Go to preferences, untick 'allow only app store apps', click OK after scary warning, download app to your PC, follow installation instructions... The iphone just got a bit more difficult. People outside of the top 5% users will be exposed to this stuff, on their phones or on other people if it is available and semi-sanctioned. Precisely because Apple is heavily censoring and annoying developers in the app store, average users are likely to want non-app-store-apps. Maybe even more on the iPad. This power user who is a programmer vs average user who log in to facebook via readwriteweb is not really a useful description of the world. Most iPhones are in in between hands.
  - tjogin 17y ago
    > The iphone just got a bit more difficult. And a bit more dangerous. Malware lies not far down this path. I think Apple is even more concerned with malware than they are with the difficulty part.
    - pyre 17y ago
      The AppStore approval process does not guarantee that something is not malware. At best it's just a superficial filter. It's like creating a mail filter that puts any email that contains the word 'viagra' into your spam folder and calling it a 'spam filter.'
      - tjogin 17y ago
        Unlike the non-functioning spam-filters you speak of, the AppStore approval process actually has a flawless record of keeping it out. Now, I'm not saying that's squarely because of the diligence of the reviewers. Most likely, it's just as much or more because there's a paper trail from every app to its publisher, a long with the fact that someone is at least going to make a cursory review of the app before giving it the 'OK'. One of these, or all three in combination is keeping malware out of the AppStore. Whichever, the end result is that the AppStore review process is stopping malware extremely well.
        ZeroGravitas 17y ago
        Flawless record? What about all the ad-supported apps where the new ads suddenly started calling premium phone numbers if you accidentally tapped the ad.
        mechanical_fish 17y ago
        Unfortunately, that exception kind of proves the rule. Apple left in a loophole - they kind of had to allow apps to link to arbitrary external content without registered authors - and, lo, through the loophole comes malware. This, alas, is why I'll probably have to keep buying computers instead of just the iPad if I want to run emacs or other user-scriptable apps. To the extent that it is possible, Apple wants every line of code on the phone to be traceable to an author and revokable in case of trouble. The exception is the web, of course. Apple's browser supports everything; if you want arbitrary power, write one of those web apps we've heard so much about for the last decade! We who aspire to use emacs on iPad now need an HTML5/JS version. It's like being boiled in our own Kool-Aid: people have been claiming for years that web apps can eventually replace all other apps, and now the rubber meets the road.

by nnutter 17y ago

theBobMcCormick 17y ago

I'd actually be O.K. with the restrictions in the App store if there was any non-jailbreak method of loading apps outside the app store. That would allow you to install things like Google Voice, Opera, or whatever if you the user want to, while still providing a squeaky clean simplified view to the average user. For example, on an Android phone, by default you can only install apps from the Android Market. However, by checking one checkbox in the phone's preferences, you can install non-market apps. Those might be apps you upload using the Android developer tools (if you're a dev), or you can download and install apps from a website, or you can use a third party market (like SlideMe).

netcan 17y ago
I think you might have trouble really maintaining squeaky cleanliness. The 'average user' still might want or need Google Voice, Opera, or something she needs for work. She sees it on someone else's phone, she asks how you get it. The tell her: Go to preferences, untick 'allow only app store apps', click OK after scary warning, download app to your PC, follow installation instructions... The iphone just got a bit more difficult. People outside of the top 5% users will be exposed to this stuff, on their phones or on other people if it is available and semi-sanctioned. Precisely because Apple is heavily censoring and annoying developers in the app store, average users are likely to want non-app-store-apps. Maybe even more on the iPad. This power user who is a programmer vs average user who log in to facebook via readwriteweb is not really a useful description of the world. Most iPhones are in in between hands.
- tjogin 17y ago
  > The iphone just got a bit more difficult. And a bit more dangerous. Malware lies not far down this path. I think Apple is even more concerned with malware than they are with the difficulty part.
  - pyre 17y ago
    The AppStore approval process does not guarantee that something is not malware. At best it's just a superficial filter. It's like creating a mail filter that puts any email that contains the word 'viagra' into your spam folder and calling it a 'spam filter.'
    - tjogin 17y ago
      Unlike the non-functioning spam-filters you speak of, the AppStore approval process actually has a flawless record of keeping it out. Now, I'm not saying that's squarely because of the diligence of the reviewers. Most likely, it's just as much or more because there's a paper trail from every app to its publisher, a long with the fact that someone is at least going to make a cursory review of the app before giving it the 'OK'. One of these, or all three in combination is keeping malware out of the AppStore. Whichever, the end result is that the AppStore review process is stopping malware extremely well.
      - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
        Flawless record? What about all the ad-supported apps where the new ads suddenly started calling premium phone numbers if you accidentally tapped the ad.
        mechanical_fish 17y ago
        Unfortunately, that exception kind of proves the rule. Apple left in a loophole - they kind of had to allow apps to link to arbitrary external content without registered authors - and, lo, through the loophole comes malware. This, alas, is why I'll probably have to keep buying computers instead of just the iPad if I want to run emacs or other user-scriptable apps. To the extent that it is possible, Apple wants every line of code on the phone to be traceable to an author and revokable in case of trouble. The exception is the web, of course. Apple's browser supports everything; if you want arbitrary power, write one of those web apps we've heard so much about for the last decade! We who aspire to use emacs on iPad now need an HTML5/JS version. It's like being boiled in our own Kool-Aid: people have been claiming for years that web apps can eventually replace all other apps, and now the rubber meets the road.