21 ms·

I agree that Apple has done a lot to reduce carrier control, but I don't like Apple's control either. The main issue I have with them is not allowing sideloadin

I agree that Apple has done a lot to reduce carrier control, but I don't like Apple's control either. The main issue I have with them is not allowing sideloading of apps and their strict control over the App Store. I see that as just as evil as what a lot of the carriers were doing beforehand. That's why I look more toward Android than Apple. Yes, Android is not as free or open for the end consumer as it could be because Google has made too many concessions to carriers (modifying UI, apps that cannot be uninstalled, slow updates, etc). However, their model is still far more open than iOS, for the simple fact that you can install anything you want on it. Yes, Google still does not allow all apps in the Marketplace, but there's still sideloading. Edit: Just to make it clear, I agree with the article. I don't mean to say that Google/Android will fix everything. The real issue is still the carriers. However, I think Google is a better example of open than Apple, even if that works against them sometimes.

lzw 16y ago
Think about it this way. You can install any app you want on your iPhone as well. The thing is, Apple charges $99 a year for the privilege. Get a developer account, and run whatever you want. In order to have any security, you need to sign executables, and Apple's $99 essentially covers the cost of doing that. This is much better than the $100 per app up to many thousands that previously you'd have to pay. Maybe unsigned executables is a risk you're willing to take on, but given the level of derogatory misinofrmation that people spread about apple as it is, I understand why they want to limit the potential damage. The media does not distinguish between some code downloaded over the internet for jailbroken phones and something from the appstore, as it is. And everyone is apparently very eager to make hay whenever they can blame something on Apple.
- Zak 16y ago
  The problem with having to buy a developer account or jailbreak the phone is that many of the apps that wouldn't be approved never get written. The commercial viability of an app is somewhat limited when the first step in the installation instructions is "jailbreak your phone".
  - jsz0 16y ago
    Android apps that appear in the top 10-20 paid apps require rooting which is more or less the same barrier of entry. (I can't remember if this requires you to check "unknown sources" or not. Maybe by default they don't appear)
- fragmede 16y ago
  Let me describe an app that doesn't exist, would do well in the app store, but will never be allowed. What the app does does, is turn the iPhone into a normal usb drive when connected to a computer. On top of that, your music is available in normal folders, that you can drag to your computer. Additionally, you can drag music onto that drive, and the music will be playable on the iPhone after you disconnect. (Yes, iPhoneBrowser and DiskAid kind of allow you to do this, but I'm talking about having the iPhone handle it natively.) And y'know what? I blame Apple for this app not existing. $100 doesn't allow me to run whatever I want if it doesn't exist.
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    Most people don't need or want what you're describing. I use iTunes (on OSX) and I like it. I prefer it to manually laying out folders of music. Folders don't make sense for music anyway because how the songs should be organized depends on what mood I'm in at the time. Tags would be much better. Which is what you can do with iTunes.
loewenskind 16y ago
>I see that as just as evil as what a lot of the carriers were doing beforehand. Seeing Apple's behavior as evil is just not rational. It is a simple, obvious trade off. By having the control they do they can control the iPhone experience and make sure as few people as possible have a bad experience (and since they're selling phones they want to make sure no uninformed user can blame the phone for a bad experience. The only way to do that is try to make sure they can't download misbehaving apps). The cost are: people can do every possible thing they would want to and may not like that, developers have to wait for their app to be on the store, it may get rejected, etc. Android chose the opposite, an app marketplace that's almost completely open (I'm assuming they don't allow obvious malicious software). This is not more or less evil, it is simply a different trade off. The costs are: people can do anything they want and will sometimes do bad things (accidentally or on purpose), etc. People need to take the emotion out of the argument. The iPhone isn't becoming a legislated requirement or anything, there is no reason to get emotional about it.

lzw 16y ago

Think about it this way. You can install any app you want on your iPhone as well. The thing is, Apple charges $99 a year for the privilege. Get a developer account, and run whatever you want. In order to have any security, you need to sign executables, and Apple's $99 essentially covers the cost of doing that. This is much better than the $100 per app up to many thousands that previously you'd have to pay. Maybe unsigned executables is a risk you're willing to take on, but given the level of derogatory misinofrmation that people spread about apple as it is, I understand why they want to limit the potential damage. The media does not distinguish between some code downloaded over the internet for jailbroken phones and something from the appstore, as it is. And everyone is apparently very eager to make hay whenever they can blame something on Apple.

Zak 16y ago
The problem with having to buy a developer account or jailbreak the phone is that many of the apps that wouldn't be approved never get written. The commercial viability of an app is somewhat limited when the first step in the installation instructions is "jailbreak your phone".
- jsz0 16y ago
  Android apps that appear in the top 10-20 paid apps require rooting which is more or less the same barrier of entry. (I can't remember if this requires you to check "unknown sources" or not. Maybe by default they don't appear)
fragmede 16y ago
Let me describe an app that doesn't exist, would do well in the app store, but will never be allowed. What the app does does, is turn the iPhone into a normal usb drive when connected to a computer. On top of that, your music is available in normal folders, that you can drag to your computer. Additionally, you can drag music onto that drive, and the music will be playable on the iPhone after you disconnect. (Yes, iPhoneBrowser and DiskAid kind of allow you to do this, but I'm talking about having the iPhone handle it natively.) And y'know what? I blame Apple for this app not existing. $100 doesn't allow me to run whatever I want if it doesn't exist.
- loewenskind 16y ago
  Most people don't need or want what you're describing. I use iTunes (on OSX) and I like it. I prefer it to manually laying out folders of music. Folders don't make sense for music anyway because how the songs should be organized depends on what mood I'm in at the time. Tags would be much better. Which is what you can do with iTunes.

loewenskind 16y ago

>I see that as just as evil as what a lot of the carriers were doing beforehand. Seeing Apple's behavior as evil is just not rational. It is a simple, obvious trade off. By having the control they do they can control the iPhone experience and make sure as few people as possible have a bad experience (and since they're selling phones they want to make sure no uninformed user can blame the phone for a bad experience. The only way to do that is try to make sure they can't download misbehaving apps). The cost are: people can do every possible thing they would want to and may not like that, developers have to wait for their app to be on the store, it may get rejected, etc. Android chose the opposite, an app marketplace that's almost completely open (I'm assuming they don't allow obvious malicious software). This is not more or less evil, it is simply a different trade off. The costs are: people can do anything they want and will sometimes do bad things (accidentally or on purpose), etc. People need to take the emotion out of the argument. The iPhone isn't becoming a legislated requirement or anything, there is no reason to get emotional about it.