3 ms·

"We made a deal with the devil when we collectively decided to write and use apps and not the web." No - apps are fine. Even app stores are fine. It's the fa

"We made a deal with the devil when we collectively decided to write and use apps and not the web." No - apps are fine. Even app stores are fine. It's the fact that you can't distribute an app outside an app store ... this is a problem. So basically Apple is the problem, everyone else is fine.

scarface74 8y ago
It’s only a “problem” for a relatively few techies. Most people would be better served by a wall gardened. Seeing the mess that the average consumer makes on thier Windows computers is evidence. My mom would never have to worry about getting malware because she searched for a printer driver if she had an iPad. Heck, she wouldn’t have had to worry about a printer driver at all. And if you want to see what happens on mobile when you have an App Store with an out clause like on Android for the common consumer, look no further than what happened with Fortnight.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  I totally disagree and the evidence is Android. A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. B) It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. C) The 'Windows' analogy doesn't really hold because mobile OS APIs are totally locked down. Any app installed on Windows/Mac can effectively wipe out your machine. It's a huge risk. An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant explicit rights. Fortnight is not a bad example of anything really. There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. Moreover, there's evidence that they can't get the apps and functionality they need, because there are quite a number of apps that simply cannot be easily developed and deployed in iPhone - so many corporate and B2B apps. It's possible in only limited scenarios. The 'security' issue is not real. It's a tactic by Apple to control the market and that's mostly it.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-virues-list.html https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-viru... It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. People have been saying the same thing about PCs since the 80s. How has that worked out? An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant explicit rights. Like “Access File System”,”read phone state”, etc.? Fortnite isn’t a good example of anything. https://www.cnet.com/news/just-as-critics-feared-fortnite-for-android-came-with-an-epic-security-risk/ https://www.cnet.com/news/just-as-critics-feared-fortnite-fo... There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. Except that you never hear about the malware on iOS that is able to be installed on Android devices. There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. There is plenty of B2B software on iOS, a large multinational company I use to work for distributed all types of apps for their employees that never went through the App Store. Another company I worked for distributed B2B software for other customers. Moreover, there's evidence that they can't get the apps and functionality they need, What apps does the general non techie consumer “need” or “want” that they can’t get on iOS.
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      A windows app can do anything do your computer. Spyware, malware, erase the hard drive. No permissions needed. Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission. This is perfectly fair. There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform. "What apps can't I get" ? Well, this HN reader for one. There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission Have you seen the list of permissions that allow an app to do basically anything on an Android phone? And if you think asking for permission before an app is granted these widespread permission are good enough, that’s just about as effective as UAC was on Vista. There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform. It may be worth it to you but not to the millions of people that click yes to every dialog box. These are the same people that have ten toolbars on their web browser. Well, this HN reader for one. There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android. The people who want an app to read Hacker News are dwarfed by the amount of people who would just as easily install ransomware on their phone as they would on Windows. I’ll install almost any app on my phone/iPad/AppleTV just to try out because it can’t do any harm. I would have to treat an Android phone like I treat installing software on Windows - only from a few trusted sources. You can’t even install CloudFlare’s recently released app without it asking for microphone access and file access.
- int_19h 8y ago
  A walled garden with a discreet gate that one needs to know how to open would still serve the non-techie crowd perfectly well, without compromising freedom for the rest.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    How well did that work with Windows UAC?
    - int_19h 8y ago
      UAC is a bad example - it's more like a walled garden where the wall consists entirely of gates, and when you approach any, it asks you if you want to open that. Hardly discreet. In any case, this was in the context of app stores. What I meant is the ability to go flip a switch that enables sideloading, as you can do with Android or Win10 Store apps, if you know that one exists - on the assumption that if you do, you also know the risks. On Win10 specifically, this is stashed away in the system settings page titled "For developers", which comes with a bunch of warnings, so it's not something you can turn on by accident.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        You just need that one person who thinks they are an “advanced user” to tell everyone else the secret trick and it spreads like a virus. About like all of the iOS users that aggressively quit apps because they think it increases battery life. Or an app like Fortnite....
        int_19h 8y ago
        And yet this doesn't happen on Android.
chipotle_coyote 8y ago
I half-agree. Maybe three-quarters? I would prefer that Apple let applications be distributed outside their app store; the mechanisms are all in place for them to be able to still have tools to stop genuinely bad actors this way (e.g., only allow signed applications to be side-loaded, so even if apps can't be yanked from a store, the developer certificate can still be revoked). But even if they did that (which I rate as "unlikely but not as impossible as many others think"), there's a big problem with them being inconsistent and even capricious in rules enforcement coupled with badly communicating when issues arise. While that's a huge problem as long as they're effectively the only game in town for app distribution, it would... still be a huge problem even if that weren't true, because the chances are they would still far and away be the biggest app store.

scarface74 8y ago

It’s only a “problem” for a relatively few techies. Most people would be better served by a wall gardened. Seeing the mess that the average consumer makes on thier Windows computers is evidence. My mom would never have to worry about getting malware because she searched for a printer driver if she had an iPad. Heck, she wouldn’t have had to worry about a printer driver at all. And if you want to see what happens on mobile when you have an App Store with an out clause like on Android for the common consumer, look no further than what happened with Fortnight.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
I totally disagree and the evidence is Android. A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. B) It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. C) The 'Windows' analogy doesn't really hold because mobile OS APIs are totally locked down. Any app installed on Windows/Mac can effectively wipe out your machine. It's a huge risk. An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant explicit rights. Fortnight is not a bad example of anything really. There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. Moreover, there's evidence that they can't get the apps and functionality they need, because there are quite a number of apps that simply cannot be easily developed and deployed in iPhone - so many corporate and B2B apps. It's possible in only limited scenarios. The 'security' issue is not real. It's a tactic by Apple to control the market and that's mostly it.
- scarface74 8y ago
  A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-virues-list.html https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-viru... It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. People have been saying the same thing about PCs since the 80s. How has that worked out? An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant explicit rights. Like “Access File System”,”read phone state”, etc.? Fortnite isn’t a good example of anything. https://www.cnet.com/news/just-as-critics-feared-fortnite-for-android-came-with-an-epic-security-risk/ https://www.cnet.com/news/just-as-critics-feared-fortnite-fo... There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. Except that you never hear about the malware on iOS that is able to be installed on Android devices. There's no evidence that people really benefit from fully walled garden. There is plenty of B2B software on iOS, a large multinational company I use to work for distributed all types of apps for their employees that never went through the App Store. Another company I worked for distributed B2B software for other customers. Moreover, there's evidence that they can't get the apps and functionality they need, What apps does the general non techie consumer “need” or “want” that they can’t get on iOS.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    A windows app can do anything do your computer. Spyware, malware, erase the hard drive. No permissions needed. Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission. This is perfectly fair. There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform. "What apps can't I get" ? Well, this HN reader for one. There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission Have you seen the list of permissions that allow an app to do basically anything on an Android phone? And if you think asking for permission before an app is granted these widespread permission are good enough, that’s just about as effective as UAC was on Vista. There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform. It may be worth it to you but not to the millions of people that click yes to every dialog box. These are the same people that have ten toolbars on their web browser. Well, this HN reader for one. There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android. The people who want an app to read Hacker News are dwarfed by the amount of people who would just as easily install ransomware on their phone as they would on Windows. I’ll install almost any app on my phone/iPad/AppleTV just to try out because it can’t do any harm. I would have to treat an Android phone like I treat installing software on Windows - only from a few trusted sources. You can’t even install CloudFlare’s recently released app without it asking for microphone access and file access.
int_19h 8y ago
A walled garden with a discreet gate that one needs to know how to open would still serve the non-techie crowd perfectly well, without compromising freedom for the rest.
- scarface74 8y ago
  How well did that work with Windows UAC?
  - int_19h 8y ago
    UAC is a bad example - it's more like a walled garden where the wall consists entirely of gates, and when you approach any, it asks you if you want to open that. Hardly discreet. In any case, this was in the context of app stores. What I meant is the ability to go flip a switch that enables sideloading, as you can do with Android or Win10 Store apps, if you know that one exists - on the assumption that if you do, you also know the risks. On Win10 specifically, this is stashed away in the system settings page titled "For developers", which comes with a bunch of warnings, so it's not something you can turn on by accident.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      You just need that one person who thinks they are an “advanced user” to tell everyone else the secret trick and it spreads like a virus. About like all of the iOS users that aggressively quit apps because they think it increases battery life. Or an app like Fortnite....
      - int_19h 8y ago
        And yet this doesn't happen on Android.

chipotle_coyote 8y ago

I half-agree. Maybe three-quarters? I would prefer that Apple let applications be distributed outside their app store; the mechanisms are all in place for them to be able to still have tools to stop genuinely bad actors this way (e.g., only allow signed applications to be side-loaded, so even if apps can't be yanked from a store, the developer certificate can still be revoked). But even if they did that (which I rate as "unlikely but not as impossible as many others think"), there's a big problem with them being inconsistent and even capricious in rules enforcement coupled with badly communicating when issues arise. While that's a huge problem as long as they're effectively the only game in town for app distribution, it would... still be a huge problem even if that weren't true, because the chances are they would still far and away be the biggest app store.