3 ms·

The way you mention this, it makes it sound as if this is the worst that Apple does. Another way of looking at it, is that if it's allowed for dropbox it could

The way you mention this, it makes it sound as if this is the worst that Apple does. Another way of looking at it, is that if it's allowed for dropbox it could be allowed for other apps. End of the day it's your decision whether you want to still use an Apple device, assuming you have the choice, after knowing the potential problems with it.

pfranz 6y ago
But this wasn't "allowed" or endorsed by Apple. It was a third-party company doing something underhanded. Is there some reason Dropbox would be more trustworthy on Linux? I think the "lame overreach" hurts the credibility of the argument--even if it has merit.
- systemvoltage 6y ago
  Exactly. Does Linux not have a crap piece of software sending data to Amazon servers? Oh right. Ubuntu.
- cmsj 6y ago
  Apple actually worked against Dropbox a few times in recent years, and added a bunch of APIs for annotating files in Finder, to stop Dropbox from monkeypatching it. More recently Dropbox has started using a kernel extension to support its SmartSync feature, which will soon be stymied, as Apple makes it more convoluted to load third party kexts in Big Sur.
hyko 6y ago
It’s a crazy argument from them, considering their licensing allows anyone to do anything they like with a system apart from hide the resulting source code. Policing third parties like Dropbox is actually a strength of a proprietary system, so why bring it up at all? I could make the claim that GNU software can get you killed, because military organisations build applications on top of it. This is true, but it hardly seems a fair point to make in assessing something like GNU/Linux. There are legitimate weaknesses and user hostile designs in Apple operating systems, but Dropbox is not one of them. Edited to add: anyone who remotely cares about security would not allow Dropbox anywhere near their systems, but that’s another discussion!
guiltygods 6y ago
"Another way of looking at it, is that if it's allowed for dropbox it could be allowed for other apps." And the same people will cry censorship if Apple tries to enforce anything on Dropbox.

pfranz 6y ago

But this wasn't "allowed" or endorsed by Apple. It was a third-party company doing something underhanded. Is there some reason Dropbox would be more trustworthy on Linux? I think the "lame overreach" hurts the credibility of the argument--even if it has merit.

systemvoltage 6y ago
Exactly. Does Linux not have a crap piece of software sending data to Amazon servers? Oh right. Ubuntu.
cmsj 6y ago
Apple actually worked against Dropbox a few times in recent years, and added a bunch of APIs for annotating files in Finder, to stop Dropbox from monkeypatching it. More recently Dropbox has started using a kernel extension to support its SmartSync feature, which will soon be stymied, as Apple makes it more convoluted to load third party kexts in Big Sur.

hyko 6y ago

It’s a crazy argument from them, considering their licensing allows anyone to do anything they like with a system apart from hide the resulting source code. Policing third parties like Dropbox is actually a strength of a proprietary system, so why bring it up at all? I could make the claim that GNU software can get you killed, because military organisations build applications on top of it. This is true, but it hardly seems a fair point to make in assessing something like GNU/Linux. There are legitimate weaknesses and user hostile designs in Apple operating systems, but Dropbox is not one of them. Edited to add: anyone who remotely cares about security would not allow Dropbox anywhere near their systems, but that’s another discussion!

guiltygods 6y ago

"Another way of looking at it, is that if it's allowed for dropbox it could be allowed for other apps." And the same people will cry censorship if Apple tries to enforce anything on Dropbox.