7 ms·

To downvoters: That point is valid. It's the golden cage that allowed them to do of course good things this time. This argument is the old one against a walled

by ce4 8y ago

To downvoters: That point is valid. It's the golden cage that allowed them to do of course good things this time. This argument is the old one against a walled garden and it still stands.

ken 8y ago
The point may be valid, but it's not what this discussion is about. Apple didn't cut off a user for running unauthorized software on their iPhone. They cut off Google for using a paid enterprise service to distribute their software in violation of its TOS.
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  That loses a bit of the nuance. Apple cut off Google distributing software within apple's TOS after Google had already stopped breaking the TOS.
  - jakebellacera 8y ago
    But Google already broke Apple's TOS, so it seems like Apple still has grounds to revoke their license.
    - joshuamorton 8y ago
      Right, I'm not saying this isn't warranted necessarily, just that it's punitive not preventative.
      - jyrkesh 8y ago
        No, they still needed to revoke the cert because the app was still hanging out on users' devices. The only way to ensure that those apps are dead, from Apple's perspective, is to revoke the cert
- chii 8y ago
  > paid enterprise service to distribute their software that's the problem - why should this service exist in the first place? It's extortion to have to pay to distribute apps to people who want them, on devices they own themselves.
  - kngspook 8y ago
    Not really. Give me your code, and I can upload it on to any iPhone I want, without paying a cent to Apple.
    - chii 8y ago
      Not without violating the ToS and jailbreaking (voiding warranty).
- mirimir 8y ago
  Yes, and more to the point, they cut off Facebook and Google for distributing unreviewed apps to the general public. So the violation was using the enterprise key to evade app review by Apple. Which Apple does to protect its customers. And so Apple is just protecting its customers.
  - jmanderley 8y ago
    Facebook already got their access back, I assume the block on Google won't last all that long, either.
    - mirimir 8y ago
      Yes, and revoking the enterprise key wasn't punitive. It was the only way to reliably kill the violating apps.
    - peteretep 8y ago
      Presumably FB got it back after signing in blood that they were only going to use this for internal, non-public releases
      - kngspook 8y ago
        I believe Apple will do everything they can to keep them from abusing the ToS, but I also believe Facebook will try to work around any and every restriction applied to them.
        mirimir 8y ago
        Yeah, well, but Apple can always reject apps that violate their ToS, or revoke keys used to work around that. So ultimately Facebook can't win. Except if they force Apple to nuke all of their apps, which would put Apple in a difficult position. But perhaps Apple could sandbox apps, and prevent them from doing stuff that violates ToS.

by ce4 8y ago

To downvoters: That point is valid. It's the golden cage that allowed them to do of course good things this time. This argument is the old one against a walled garden and it still stands.

ken 8y ago

The point may be valid, but it's not what this discussion is about. Apple didn't cut off a user for running unauthorized software on their iPhone. They cut off Google for using a paid enterprise service to distribute their software in violation of its TOS.

joshuamorton 8y ago
That loses a bit of the nuance. Apple cut off Google distributing software within apple's TOS after Google had already stopped breaking the TOS.
- jakebellacera 8y ago
  But Google already broke Apple's TOS, so it seems like Apple still has grounds to revoke their license.
  - joshuamorton 8y ago
    Right, I'm not saying this isn't warranted necessarily, just that it's punitive not preventative.
    - jyrkesh 8y ago
      No, they still needed to revoke the cert because the app was still hanging out on users' devices. The only way to ensure that those apps are dead, from Apple's perspective, is to revoke the cert
chii 8y ago
> paid enterprise service to distribute their software that's the problem - why should this service exist in the first place? It's extortion to have to pay to distribute apps to people who want them, on devices they own themselves.
- kngspook 8y ago
  Not really. Give me your code, and I can upload it on to any iPhone I want, without paying a cent to Apple.
  - chii 8y ago
    Not without violating the ToS and jailbreaking (voiding warranty).
mirimir 8y ago
Yes, and more to the point, they cut off Facebook and Google for distributing unreviewed apps to the general public. So the violation was using the enterprise key to evade app review by Apple. Which Apple does to protect its customers. And so Apple is just protecting its customers.
- jmanderley 8y ago
  Facebook already got their access back, I assume the block on Google won't last all that long, either.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    Yes, and revoking the enterprise key wasn't punitive. It was the only way to reliably kill the violating apps.
  - peteretep 8y ago
    Presumably FB got it back after signing in blood that they were only going to use this for internal, non-public releases
    - kngspook 8y ago
      I believe Apple will do everything they can to keep them from abusing the ToS, but I also believe Facebook will try to work around any and every restriction applied to them.
      - mirimir 8y ago
        Yeah, well, but Apple can always reject apps that violate their ToS, or revoke keys used to work around that. So ultimately Facebook can't win. Except if they force Apple to nuke all of their apps, which would put Apple in a difficult position. But perhaps Apple could sandbox apps, and prevent them from doing stuff that violates ToS.