5 ms·

I disagree. I like Apple products, own an iPhone and iPad, but I wish I could run any code on it because they are my devices. Having a streamlined experience ov

I disagree. I like Apple products, own an iPhone and iPad, but I wish I could run any code on it because they are my devices. Having a streamlined experience overall shouldn’t prevent me from installing an emulator, and shouldn’t trap businesses into paying ridiculous fees. Im hesitating buying a Mac as my next computer because of their locked down attitude, which could spill to MacOS (already has to some degree).

mike_d 6y ago
> I wish I could run any code on it But by extension that means any bad guy can run any unsigned code on it as well. Look at the prevalence of Android malware to iOS. The latter basically doesn't exist outside of well funded nation states.
- munk-a 6y ago
  Apple does an extremely poor job of software inspection - they have API limiters that are quite effective at shutting down a lot of the malicious-to-device software people might write but privacy concerns are impossible for them to cover. Depending on how you define unsigned code your statement is either quite correct or extremely inaccurate and I think issues like privacy and data tracking are, honestly, more noticeable and impactful to the average non-techy user than your phone being part of a botnet.
  - mike_d 6y ago
    "Hide my Email for Sign in", killing advertising identifiers, preventing cross app tracking, etc. are all things that can only exist on a platform where code is signed and sandboxed. Is Apple's app store vetting or API restrictions perfect? No, of course not. But it is a million times better than any other platform.
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  The former basically doesn't exist in Western nations either, so I'm not sure what the point is here. A well designed permissions system means what code runs is up to the user.
  - mike_d 6y ago
    In 2019 Kaspersky Labs identified over 3 million unique Android malware samples. iOS malware is so rare AV companies usually issue press releases about finding them (like LightSpy). The reason you might not know about Xerxes, SMSreg, Cerberus, LokiBot, BlackRock, FunkyBot, UpDroid, etc. is because another Android malware family isn't newsworthy.
- jefft255 6y ago
  Unless Apple really screws up, that malware would have to be downloaded and installed by me. If I "flip a switch" and enable that option, that's on me. PCs have always been like this and no one bats an eye. I'd be willing to accept that risk; hey, Apple could make flipping that switch really freaking difficult if they wanted too, I wouldn't mind. Just as long as I have the option.
  - surfpel 6y ago
    There are many tech illiterate people in this world, and many who would be easy prey to someone pulling a scam, getting them to flip that switch.
    - jefft255 6y ago
      My answer to that is: what about PCs? Of course you're right, and I'm right too (I'd like to think ahah). This is freedom at the cost of security; this trade-off, as in real life, has no simple solution. I certainly don't pretend to have the answer here.
    - ac29 6y ago
      Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself, but we dont outlaw them because as a society we recognize that they are also useful tools.
      - surfpel 6y ago
        > Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself Great analogy actually. Ladders are dangerous, yes - but we don’t make them necessary to daily life and they’re certainly not something most people interact with
  - dijit 6y ago
    My girlfriend has an iPhone and an android phone. She is 29, she has accidentally installed malware from the play store, multiple times. Anecdote yes, but the fact it happened in my house and more than once opened my eyes significantly to the problem. My grandparents have no chance if my girlfriend gets got. You and I live in a microcosm, most people on this site have a very finely tuned bullshit filter. Don’t assume everyone does, even the young.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  You can run any code on it already as a developer.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
jki275 6y ago
You can run pretty much any code on your iPad and iPhone that you want. You do need to pay your 99 bucks or so for a dev account, but you can run anything you can build for your iOS devices that way. There is no "locked down attitude" with macOS, macOS is as open as ever. You can easily turn off all the malware protection if you want to do that. Many devs do. The argument here isn't about you running any code you want. The argument is about access to the App Store and forcing Apple to allow anyone to distribute anything. That's something I don't want. I want Apple to distribute high quality apps that I can generally trust not to be riddled with malware, unlike their competitors. Apple has built a high value App Store, and devs want to change that to suit their wishes, and in so doing would turn it into the thing it has managed to keep away from since its beginning.
- jefft255 6y ago
  I think your argument is invalid, because i.e. Epic wouldn't want to share a buildable XCode project of Fortnite with you. The 99$ fee is also unreasonable IMHO. Also, building complex applications is far from non-trivial; it's typical for me to spend a few hours fiddling with dependencies to get some complicated code running. As for MacOS, yes on the software side things are still open, but on the hardware side things are closing up (for example, mandatory unbreakable encryption which can make data recovery impossible; I don't have a big problem with that however). Plus I've got no idea how long that will lasts since Apple does whatever it wants.
  - dmurray 6y ago
    > I think your argument is invalid, because i.e. Epic wouldn't want to share a buildable XCode project of Fortnite with you. They could share an installer that downloads and copies their binaries. Not too different from what many game publishers do on PC. I'm not sure whether the main barrier to people doing this is the $99/year fee, or the friction associated with setting up a developer account, or the perceived (and real) risk of getting malware if customers made a habit of doing this. But an iPhone in the US already costs $1000 over say 5 years, plus several hundred per year in carrier costs. I could entertain an argument that an extra $99/year to have an effectively unlocked device is not exorbitant or anticompetitive. If you think it is...would you still think so at $49? Or $9? The revenue Apple get from that must be insignificant compared to the app store.
g_p 6y ago
It seems to me the obvious solution is to extend the "parental controls" install permission feature, and add an optional restriction API for "sideload apps" (like on Android). This would handle the "I want a locked down device" scenario for MDM and parental controls users. Those who want an unrestricted device could enable sideloading (which would permit non-apple-notarized apps to be installed), and permit non-expiring developer self-signed apps. Then the free market could go ahead and develop "stores" and alternative ecosystems.

mike_d 6y ago

> I wish I could run any code on it But by extension that means any bad guy can run any unsigned code on it as well. Look at the prevalence of Android malware to iOS. The latter basically doesn't exist outside of well funded nation states.

munk-a 6y ago
Apple does an extremely poor job of software inspection - they have API limiters that are quite effective at shutting down a lot of the malicious-to-device software people might write but privacy concerns are impossible for them to cover. Depending on how you define unsigned code your statement is either quite correct or extremely inaccurate and I think issues like privacy and data tracking are, honestly, more noticeable and impactful to the average non-techy user than your phone being part of a botnet.
- mike_d 6y ago
  "Hide my Email for Sign in", killing advertising identifiers, preventing cross app tracking, etc. are all things that can only exist on a platform where code is signed and sandboxed. Is Apple's app store vetting or API restrictions perfect? No, of course not. But it is a million times better than any other platform.
Mindwipe 6y ago
The former basically doesn't exist in Western nations either, so I'm not sure what the point is here. A well designed permissions system means what code runs is up to the user.
- mike_d 6y ago
  In 2019 Kaspersky Labs identified over 3 million unique Android malware samples. iOS malware is so rare AV companies usually issue press releases about finding them (like LightSpy). The reason you might not know about Xerxes, SMSreg, Cerberus, LokiBot, BlackRock, FunkyBot, UpDroid, etc. is because another Android malware family isn't newsworthy.
jefft255 6y ago
Unless Apple really screws up, that malware would have to be downloaded and installed by me. If I "flip a switch" and enable that option, that's on me. PCs have always been like this and no one bats an eye. I'd be willing to accept that risk; hey, Apple could make flipping that switch really freaking difficult if they wanted too, I wouldn't mind. Just as long as I have the option.
- surfpel 6y ago
  There are many tech illiterate people in this world, and many who would be easy prey to someone pulling a scam, getting them to flip that switch.
  - jefft255 6y ago
    My answer to that is: what about PCs? Of course you're right, and I'm right too (I'd like to think ahah). This is freedom at the cost of security; this trade-off, as in real life, has no simple solution. I certainly don't pretend to have the answer here.
  - ac29 6y ago
    Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself, but we dont outlaw them because as a society we recognize that they are also useful tools.
    - surfpel 6y ago
      > Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself Great analogy actually. Ladders are dangerous, yes - but we don’t make them necessary to daily life and they’re certainly not something most people interact with
- dijit 6y ago
  My girlfriend has an iPhone and an android phone. She is 29, she has accidentally installed malware from the play store, multiple times. Anecdote yes, but the fact it happened in my house and more than once opened my eyes significantly to the problem. My grandparents have no chance if my girlfriend gets got. You and I live in a microcosm, most people on this site have a very finely tuned bullshit filter. Don’t assume everyone does, even the young.
dogma1138 6y ago
You can run any code on it already as a developer.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

jki275 6y ago

You can run pretty much any code on your iPad and iPhone that you want. You do need to pay your 99 bucks or so for a dev account, but you can run anything you can build for your iOS devices that way. There is no "locked down attitude" with macOS, macOS is as open as ever. You can easily turn off all the malware protection if you want to do that. Many devs do. The argument here isn't about you running any code you want. The argument is about access to the App Store and forcing Apple to allow anyone to distribute anything. That's something I don't want. I want Apple to distribute high quality apps that I can generally trust not to be riddled with malware, unlike their competitors. Apple has built a high value App Store, and devs want to change that to suit their wishes, and in so doing would turn it into the thing it has managed to keep away from since its beginning.

jefft255 6y ago
I think your argument is invalid, because i.e. Epic wouldn't want to share a buildable XCode project of Fortnite with you. The 99$ fee is also unreasonable IMHO. Also, building complex applications is far from non-trivial; it's typical for me to spend a few hours fiddling with dependencies to get some complicated code running. As for MacOS, yes on the software side things are still open, but on the hardware side things are closing up (for example, mandatory unbreakable encryption which can make data recovery impossible; I don't have a big problem with that however). Plus I've got no idea how long that will lasts since Apple does whatever it wants.
- dmurray 6y ago
  > I think your argument is invalid, because i.e. Epic wouldn't want to share a buildable XCode project of Fortnite with you. They could share an installer that downloads and copies their binaries. Not too different from what many game publishers do on PC. I'm not sure whether the main barrier to people doing this is the $99/year fee, or the friction associated with setting up a developer account, or the perceived (and real) risk of getting malware if customers made a habit of doing this. But an iPhone in the US already costs $1000 over say 5 years, plus several hundred per year in carrier costs. I could entertain an argument that an extra $99/year to have an effectively unlocked device is not exorbitant or anticompetitive. If you think it is...would you still think so at $49? Or $9? The revenue Apple get from that must be insignificant compared to the app store.

g_p 6y ago

It seems to me the obvious solution is to extend the "parental controls" install permission feature, and add an optional restriction API for "sideload apps" (like on Android). This would handle the "I want a locked down device" scenario for MDM and parental controls users. Those who want an unrestricted device could enable sideloading (which would permit non-apple-notarized apps to be installed), and permit non-expiring developer self-signed apps. Then the free market could go ahead and develop "stores" and alternative ecosystems.