4 ms·

I co-founded a company called App.io which ran from 2012 to 2015. We let people run iOS apps in the browser and we did it by streaming the simulator from virtua

I co-founded a company called App.io which ran from 2012 to 2015. We let people run iOS apps in the browser and we did it by streaming the simulator from virtualised macOS instances. We were running EXSi on Mac Minis colocated in data centres around the world and the system ultimately worked really well (we definitely had scalability issues with such an unconventional setup). We were quite tight with Apple. We had meetings on campus with senior executives that led to a pilot program with iAd where people could actually play games as an interstitial ad unit. We had employees at Apple who were dedicated to working with us to run this pilot program. Apple ultimately decided to shut down iAd which doomed our collaboration and possible acquisition opportunities. So this move is really fascinating to me personally. Apple knew how we were doing it and embraced it, probably because we weren't competing against them or undermining the security of their OS.

lathiat 7y ago
You were at least using actual Apple Hardware.
threeseed 7y ago
It's all about the security of the OS. Apple is depending on privacy and security to be a key differentiator with other phones, tablets and computers. Especially as the markets for all three are slowing as new features are harder to invent. This company undermines this by allowing anyone to find bugs whilst encouraging them to profit off it instead of working with Apple.
- pr0zac 7y ago
  Its not about security and privacy, its about obscurity and PR. Corellium is heavily used by security researchers, killing it will reduce the number of bugs that are found in iOS and make the platform less secure overall. Apple wants to project the appearance they have minimal security flaws and they accomplish this largely by making security research more difficult to perform. I'm also confused why you seem to think security researchers don't deserve to get paid for their work. Bug bounties have been around for a while now for a reason.
  - panpanna 7y ago
    Apple has always been hostile towards traditional security researchers (remember how they harassed the guys behind the wifi remote exploit?) Which is why the $1m announcement was an odd move and done people on HN consider it just a PR thing.
  - fragmede 7y ago
    Not GP poster but the contradiction is Apple (wants to be) serious about security. Thus, Apple will pay for (certain kinds of) bugs. Corellium is used to find bugs. Apple is trying to shut down Corellium. This move by Apple seems to contradict the notion that Apple is serious about security - how are researchers supposed to find bugs without this?(a successful lawsuit would also set precedent that no US entity could run a very similar service) Sure, there's workarounds (eg buy a pile of iPhones), but why is Apple making it harder to secure their product?
HNcantBtrustd 7y ago
This is why Apple is the last platform I develop for, and I use JavaScript. Out of the big tech companies, Apple seems to be the most likely to ruin my business model by cutting me off. Edit, is there something incorrect here? It's historically true and relevant to op.
paulcarroty 7y ago
Apple model of use makes you something like renter of their hardware/software.

lathiat 7y ago

You were at least using actual Apple Hardware.

threeseed 7y ago

It's all about the security of the OS. Apple is depending on privacy and security to be a key differentiator with other phones, tablets and computers. Especially as the markets for all three are slowing as new features are harder to invent. This company undermines this by allowing anyone to find bugs whilst encouraging them to profit off it instead of working with Apple.

pr0zac 7y ago
Its not about security and privacy, its about obscurity and PR. Corellium is heavily used by security researchers, killing it will reduce the number of bugs that are found in iOS and make the platform less secure overall. Apple wants to project the appearance they have minimal security flaws and they accomplish this largely by making security research more difficult to perform. I'm also confused why you seem to think security researchers don't deserve to get paid for their work. Bug bounties have been around for a while now for a reason.
- panpanna 7y ago
  Apple has always been hostile towards traditional security researchers (remember how they harassed the guys behind the wifi remote exploit?) Which is why the $1m announcement was an odd move and done people on HN consider it just a PR thing.
- fragmede 7y ago
  Not GP poster but the contradiction is Apple (wants to be) serious about security. Thus, Apple will pay for (certain kinds of) bugs. Corellium is used to find bugs. Apple is trying to shut down Corellium. This move by Apple seems to contradict the notion that Apple is serious about security - how are researchers supposed to find bugs without this?(a successful lawsuit would also set precedent that no US entity could run a very similar service) Sure, there's workarounds (eg buy a pile of iPhones), but why is Apple making it harder to secure their product?

HNcantBtrustd 7y ago

This is why Apple is the last platform I develop for, and I use JavaScript. Out of the big tech companies, Apple seems to be the most likely to ruin my business model by cutting me off. Edit, is there something incorrect here? It's historically true and relevant to op.

paulcarroty 7y ago

Apple model of use makes you something like renter of their hardware/software.