5 ms·

They call this illicit but actually, this to me seems to be a valid use of the technology. The only reason Apple has to prevent this is to maintain the walled g

by cheez 8y ago

They call this illicit but actually, this to me seems to be a valid use of the technology. The only reason Apple has to prevent this is to maintain the walled garden.

benologist 8y ago
The only reason it is even 'illicit' is Apple arbitrarily determines what may or may run on iOS. It's not illicit when PC software does something Microsoft doesn't like. The Amazon App Store isn't an illicit app store and apps downloaded from there aren't illicit compared to Google's app store. It's all just arbitrary, including their rules for what is allowed: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ This historical version is my favorite in which Apple try to suppress negative press by threatening developers who fall victim to arbitrary rejections - "If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps." https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer...
gpmcadam 8y ago
Seriously, the "only reason"?
- zeveb 8y ago
  Once someone has bought an iPhone from Apple, it's no longer Apple's phone. Apple no longer owns it. If the owner of the phone (who is, again, not Apple) wishes to trust only Apple-approved software, that is 100% his choice. But if he wishes to install software that Apple doesn't approve of, that's also a 100% legitimate choice. Sorry for all the emphasis, but this stuff is important. Once a manufacturer has sold a product, it no longer has any claim to it — none. It belongs to the purchaser, who is the sole owner.
  - mschuster91 8y ago
    Most expensive phones, however, are not purchased by the consumer but rather financed via contract, which means the phone technically belongs to the phone company - and they usually disallow jailbreaking or any other thing that would void the manufacturer warranty.
    - nathankunicki 8y ago
      That's irrelevant. If the phone carrier wants to lock those phones down, fine, though Apple has typically fought against carrier mods. However the same App Store policies apply to all iPhone owners, regardless of how it was purchased.
  - gpmcadam 8y ago
    OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. But "keeping people in their walled garden" isn't the _only_ reason, is it?
    - osmarks 8y ago
      Can you think of another one?
      - joemi 8y ago
        > There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. The comment you were replying to mentioned two others, right there...
    - zeveb 8y ago
      > OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. That was my whole point: once sold, those phones are no longer Apple's devices. Apple has absolutely no legitimate say in what the new owners choose to do with those phones. Nor does Apple have any legal or ethical exposure to what the new owners do with their phones: that is the owners' liability. Now, the owners may wish to enter an arrangement with Apple, and Apple may only choose to enter into that arrangement if the owners do certain things or refrain from doing certain things. That's completely fair. What's not fair is 'selling' someone a device, but retaining ownership of it. That's not a sale; it's a lease.
    - nathankunicki 8y ago
      I think you're limiting the use to "pirated app stores" yourself. There are other apps on those app stores, ones that Apple wouldn't approve, but are still useful. Taking away the question of whether Apple has the right to determine what is moral or ethical (I argue that they don't), I agree with the op in that the primary reason is to maintain the walled garden.

by cheez 8y ago

They call this illicit but actually, this to me seems to be a valid use of the technology. The only reason Apple has to prevent this is to maintain the walled garden.

benologist 8y ago

The only reason it is even 'illicit' is Apple arbitrarily determines what may or may run on iOS. It's not illicit when PC software does something Microsoft doesn't like. The Amazon App Store isn't an illicit app store and apps downloaded from there aren't illicit compared to Google's app store. It's all just arbitrary, including their rules for what is allowed: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ This historical version is my favorite in which Apple try to suppress negative press by threatening developers who fall victim to arbitrary rejections - "If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps." https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://web.archive.org/web/20141226094343/https://developer...

gpmcadam 8y ago

Seriously, the "only reason"?

zeveb 8y ago
Once someone has bought an iPhone from Apple, it's no longer Apple's phone. Apple no longer owns it. If the owner of the phone (who is, again, not Apple) wishes to trust only Apple-approved software, that is 100% his choice. But if he wishes to install software that Apple doesn't approve of, that's also a 100% legitimate choice. Sorry for all the emphasis, but this stuff is important. Once a manufacturer has sold a product, it no longer has any claim to it — none. It belongs to the purchaser, who is the sole owner.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  Most expensive phones, however, are not purchased by the consumer but rather financed via contract, which means the phone technically belongs to the phone company - and they usually disallow jailbreaking or any other thing that would void the manufacturer warranty.
  - nathankunicki 8y ago
    That's irrelevant. If the phone carrier wants to lock those phones down, fine, though Apple has typically fought against carrier mods. However the same App Store policies apply to all iPhone owners, regardless of how it was purchased.
- gpmcadam 8y ago
  OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. But "keeping people in their walled garden" isn't the _only_ reason, is it?
  - osmarks 8y ago
    Can you think of another one?
    - joemi 8y ago
      > There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. The comment you were replying to mentioned two others, right there...
  - zeveb 8y ago
    > OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. That was my whole point: once sold, those phones are no longer Apple's devices. Apple has absolutely no legitimate say in what the new owners choose to do with those phones. Nor does Apple have any legal or ethical exposure to what the new owners do with their phones: that is the owners' liability. Now, the owners may wish to enter an arrangement with Apple, and Apple may only choose to enter into that arrangement if the owners do certain things or refrain from doing certain things. That's completely fair. What's not fair is 'selling' someone a device, but retaining ownership of it. That's not a sale; it's a lease.
  - nathankunicki 8y ago
    I think you're limiting the use to "pirated app stores" yourself. There are other apps on those app stores, ones that Apple wouldn't approve, but are still useful. Taking away the question of whether Apple has the right to determine what is moral or ethical (I argue that they don't), I agree with the op in that the primary reason is to maintain the walled garden.