7 ms·

I don't think you're focusing on the entire picture. Some people here like iOS for the reasons you described. However I'm willing to bet, unless you can show m

I don't think you're focusing on the entire picture. Some people here like iOS for the reasons you described. However I'm willing to bet, unless you can show me otherwise, that it's a vocal minority. I don't know of anyone personally who is happy that Apple disallows GPL code. Comparing Apple's digital Fort Knox with Google's unsupervised free-for-all is a false dichotomy. There exists a happy medium, where power users get all the freedom they want but apps are still by default beholden to certain restrictions. And this is orthogonal to a proprietary API.

maxaf 7y ago
Please forgive me for being unnecessarily obtuse this early on a Monday morning. Where does Apple say that GPL code isn’t allowed on the App Store? I ask entirely out of my selfish need to avoid unpleasant surprises later on.
- izacus 7y ago
  Apple doesn't say it directly, but the way how they deliver apps to devices incompatible with GPL licensing terms. See for example https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/6109/is-it-possible-to-have-gpl-software-in-the-mac-app-store https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/6109/is-it-possibl... .
- ljackman 7y ago
  Apple has been slowly phasing out GPLed software from their own software, such as Catalina's migration from Bash to Z Shell, but even writing third party apps with the GPL has apparently been problematic in the past: https://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/07/18/vlc-for-ios-will-return-to-the-app-store-on-july-19-full-re-write-open-source-licensed-under-mplv2-and-gplv2/ https://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/07/18/vlc-for-ios-will-retu...
- soulofmischief 7y ago
  It's what I've heard rehashed around HN, but afaik the actual policy is more or less as described here: https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/18922 https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/18922 Essentially it works like it should anywhere else: If you don't publish source code and someone complains, you're out. In an ideal world Google Play would hold itself to the same standards. However, the App Store does impart restrictions which are incompatible with GPL, so it's not so much that Apple doesn't allow it as it is that GPL doesn't allow it. Apple has no official statement on this of course, but we know how they feel about GPL code given that they've removed every bit of it from their OS over the last few years.
  - avar 7y ago
    They haven't been removing GPL code actively, they decided not to take the risk of using GPL version 3 software, so they've let the respective versions of bash, rsync etc. linger at their last released GPL version 2 releases. E.g. Git is on GPL version 2 still (and probably forever), and Apple continues to update that in a relatively timely fashion.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - soulofmischief 7y ago
      Apple just switched to zsh, which is not GPL other than a few optional shell functions. Expect this trend to continue.
  - pseudalopex 7y ago
    The App Store came after the GPL. Also, Apple could let developers opt out of the restrictions.
    - soulofmischief 7y ago
      But they don't, and that's what this conversation is about.
      - pseudalopex 7y ago
        You attributed the incompatibility to the GPL. Apple created the incompatibility. Apple could easily fix it. The FSF can't change existing versions of the GPL.
- dwaite 7y ago
  Someone should probably tell VLC if GPL is disallowed, since they have been shipping across tvOS and iOS for years.
  - enitihas 7y ago
    I think VLC core had a large amount of code rewritten, to change the license (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787965), which required a large effort from the VLC team.
- Tinfoilhat666 7y ago
  Free Software Foundation says that GPL is not allowed in AppStore and they may request GPL software to be removed from App Store. https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  The issue is that the Apple dev ecosystem creates encumbrances that prevent users of GPL binaries from relinking them. That is a GPL violation and such binaries are not compliant with the license.
- zepto 7y ago
  They don’t- it’s the FSF restricting developers freedom. Not Apple.
  - Starz0r 7y ago
    How? I'll debate FSF ethics as much as the next guy, but they clearly state they want end user freedoms such as the freedom to modify the application you use. Apple clearly doesn't want that if you use specific GPL versions. This is an Apple problem, not FSF.
    - zepto 7y ago
      End user freedoms but not freedoms for the person who actually creates the code.
kllrnohj 7y ago
> There exists a happy medium, where power users get all the freedom they want but apps are still by default beholden to certain restrictions. And this is orthogonal to a proprietary API. Is this not the happy medium Google is trying to hit? Power users can unlock their bootloader and do whatever they want. This is still officially supported, with vendor blobs officially provided. By default things are restricted to deliver a happy user experience in the context of the average person that just wants a product that works. But you're free to do whatever you want. There's (usually) even controls to remove restrictions from apps manually without doing the custom ROM route, but there is always the ultimate power user toggle there of "flash a custom ROM"
- rjzzleep 7y ago
  That's what I thought when I bought my Sony phone. Except when you unlock it you run a crippled version of the phone. Huawei recently stopped allowing bootloader unlocks. Unlocking the bootloader is becoming increasingly rare. To be honest, ignoring the back and forth between the discussions here, am the only one that doesn't get WHY the firebase library isn't open source? It could just be GPL right? Most of the interesting stuff happens in the backend anyway, so what's the issue. Am I also the only one that thinks this gives google the chance to lock out/cripple third parties like huawei or other non certified android vendors from distributing Android apps that were built for the play store.
  - black_puppydog 7y ago
    I don't know the ins and outs of this, but wouldn't that still mean that the app would have to rely on google infrastructure to do push notifications? That might be a fix for the licensing problem, but it wouldn't address the problem that that would move virtually all remaining google-free (-ish) messengers into googles direction, with the potential for centrally siphoning of (meta-) data
    - testvox 7y ago
      No, the app can continue to use third party push notifications if the OS allows it to.
scarface74 7y ago
I don't know of anyone personally who is happy that Apple disallows GPL code. And this is what you call a geek bubble. In the grand scheme of things most people don’t know what the GPL is and out of those, only a minority care about it running on their phone.
- soulofmischief 7y ago
  Most of my friends are not "geeks", and do not exist in the technological space that I do. I'm not speaking from within a bubble.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    So you have friends that are not geeks who know about the GPL and care? This is the opposite of the “No True Scotsman”. Anyone who knows about and cares about the GPL is s geek.
    - soulofmischief 7y ago
      > Anyone who knows about and cares about the GPL is s geek. No, that would be a regular No True Scotsman. > So you have friends that are not geeks who know about the GPL and care? Did I say that? No, I didn't say that. I said I don't know anyone who is happy that Apple disallows GPL. This includes people who have no idea what the GPL is.

maxaf 7y ago

Please forgive me for being unnecessarily obtuse this early on a Monday morning. Where does Apple say that GPL code isn’t allowed on the App Store? I ask entirely out of my selfish need to avoid unpleasant surprises later on.

izacus 7y ago
Apple doesn't say it directly, but the way how they deliver apps to devices incompatible with GPL licensing terms. See for example https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/6109/is-it-possible-to-have-gpl-software-in-the-mac-app-store https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/6109/is-it-possibl... .
ljackman 7y ago
Apple has been slowly phasing out GPLed software from their own software, such as Catalina's migration from Bash to Z Shell, but even writing third party apps with the GPL has apparently been problematic in the past: https://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/07/18/vlc-for-ios-will-return-to-the-app-store-on-july-19-full-re-write-open-source-licensed-under-mplv2-and-gplv2/ https://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/07/18/vlc-for-ios-will-retu...
soulofmischief 7y ago
It's what I've heard rehashed around HN, but afaik the actual policy is more or less as described here: https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/18922 https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/18922 Essentially it works like it should anywhere else: If you don't publish source code and someone complains, you're out. In an ideal world Google Play would hold itself to the same standards. However, the App Store does impart restrictions which are incompatible with GPL, so it's not so much that Apple doesn't allow it as it is that GPL doesn't allow it. Apple has no official statement on this of course, but we know how they feel about GPL code given that they've removed every bit of it from their OS over the last few years.
- avar 7y ago
  They haven't been removing GPL code actively, they decided not to take the risk of using GPL version 3 software, so they've let the respective versions of bash, rsync etc. linger at their last released GPL version 2 releases. E.g. Git is on GPL version 2 still (and probably forever), and Apple continues to update that in a relatively timely fashion.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - soulofmischief 7y ago
    Apple just switched to zsh, which is not GPL other than a few optional shell functions. Expect this trend to continue.
- pseudalopex 7y ago
  The App Store came after the GPL. Also, Apple could let developers opt out of the restrictions.
  - soulofmischief 7y ago
    But they don't, and that's what this conversation is about.
    - pseudalopex 7y ago
      You attributed the incompatibility to the GPL. Apple created the incompatibility. Apple could easily fix it. The FSF can't change existing versions of the GPL.
dwaite 7y ago
Someone should probably tell VLC if GPL is disallowed, since they have been shipping across tvOS and iOS for years.
- enitihas 7y ago
  I think VLC core had a large amount of code rewritten, to change the license (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787965), which required a large effort from the VLC team.
Tinfoilhat666 7y ago
Free Software Foundation says that GPL is not allowed in AppStore and they may request GPL software to be removed from App Store. https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance https://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance
kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
The issue is that the Apple dev ecosystem creates encumbrances that prevent users of GPL binaries from relinking them. That is a GPL violation and such binaries are not compliant with the license.
zepto 7y ago
They don’t- it’s the FSF restricting developers freedom. Not Apple.
- Starz0r 7y ago
  How? I'll debate FSF ethics as much as the next guy, but they clearly state they want end user freedoms such as the freedom to modify the application you use. Apple clearly doesn't want that if you use specific GPL versions. This is an Apple problem, not FSF.
  - zepto 7y ago
    End user freedoms but not freedoms for the person who actually creates the code.

kllrnohj 7y ago

> There exists a happy medium, where power users get all the freedom they want but apps are still by default beholden to certain restrictions. And this is orthogonal to a proprietary API. Is this not the happy medium Google is trying to hit? Power users can unlock their bootloader and do whatever they want. This is still officially supported, with vendor blobs officially provided. By default things are restricted to deliver a happy user experience in the context of the average person that just wants a product that works. But you're free to do whatever you want. There's (usually) even controls to remove restrictions from apps manually without doing the custom ROM route, but there is always the ultimate power user toggle there of "flash a custom ROM"

rjzzleep 7y ago
That's what I thought when I bought my Sony phone. Except when you unlock it you run a crippled version of the phone. Huawei recently stopped allowing bootloader unlocks. Unlocking the bootloader is becoming increasingly rare. To be honest, ignoring the back and forth between the discussions here, am the only one that doesn't get WHY the firebase library isn't open source? It could just be GPL right? Most of the interesting stuff happens in the backend anyway, so what's the issue. Am I also the only one that thinks this gives google the chance to lock out/cripple third parties like huawei or other non certified android vendors from distributing Android apps that were built for the play store.
- black_puppydog 7y ago
  I don't know the ins and outs of this, but wouldn't that still mean that the app would have to rely on google infrastructure to do push notifications? That might be a fix for the licensing problem, but it wouldn't address the problem that that would move virtually all remaining google-free (-ish) messengers into googles direction, with the potential for centrally siphoning of (meta-) data
  - testvox 7y ago
    No, the app can continue to use third party push notifications if the OS allows it to.

scarface74 7y ago

I don't know of anyone personally who is happy that Apple disallows GPL code. And this is what you call a geek bubble. In the grand scheme of things most people don’t know what the GPL is and out of those, only a minority care about it running on their phone.

soulofmischief 7y ago
Most of my friends are not "geeks", and do not exist in the technological space that I do. I'm not speaking from within a bubble.
- scarface74 7y ago
  So you have friends that are not geeks who know about the GPL and care? This is the opposite of the “No True Scotsman”. Anyone who knows about and cares about the GPL is s geek.
  - soulofmischief 7y ago
    > Anyone who knows about and cares about the GPL is s geek. No, that would be a regular No True Scotsman. > So you have friends that are not geeks who know about the GPL and care? Did I say that? No, I didn't say that. I said I don't know anyone who is happy that Apple disallows GPL. This includes people who have no idea what the GPL is.