5 ms·

I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Most of my problems have been with restrictions that

I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Most of my problems have been with restrictions that Apple has put on me in their Mac and iOS product lines. > Apple requiring Sign In with Apple (when signin with Google/Facebook are implemented) where you can hide your email address. That’s not possible with multiple app stores. Yes it is. You, as a consumer can choose to stay in the Apple app store where developers have to follow that rule. If a particular developer is only publishing in the non-Apple app store, you can simply use a competing app that is in Apple’s app store. This is the same advice you’d give to someone who doesn’t like Apple products at all... you’d say “Go buy an Android”. In the future though, you’ll only have to say “Go use a non-Apple app store”.

wcarey 6y ago
Would you support compelling developers who have a monopoly on a particular app to support all available app stores? It seems like a developer who held a monopoly in a particular app would be the in the same position Apple is in with the app store writ large? For example, if the only way to fill out my employer's timecard is via an iOS app, should they be compelled to offer the app in all the available app stores?
- wayneftw 6y ago
  If that particular app was essential to modern day life for a huge portion of the general population then yes, absolutely.
  - wcarey 6y ago
    What it it's essential to the life of a relatively small group of users? It seems like the rights of smaller groups like that are the ones that most need collectively bargained, as they'll be in a relatively poor position to negotiate with the organization compelling them to use the app?
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      You created the hypothetical, not me. So you can feel free to answer your own questions because I'm not exactly sure what your point is. This is about giving users and developers a choice outside of Apple's app store. If you like freedom and choices, you should get on the right side of this debate. If some relatively small group of users had a choice, they would always be able to choose Apple's protection.
      - wcarey 6y ago
        I’ve been a part of a small group of users not offered that choice (essentially, install remote access on your personal device or terminate you employment), so I appreciate Apple negotiating for me.
        wayneftw 6y ago
        Sounds like the problem lies with whatever group you chose to associate with. If you're depending on Apple to stop you from making bad decisions about what kinds of employers to work for, I think you've got bigger problems than what might happen if there were an alternate iPhone app store.
- damnyou 6y ago
  If the developer was worth over a trillion dollars, or if the app was used by 20% or more of the global population, absolutely.
scarface74 6y ago
I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Are you saying that viruses, malware, ransomware, keyloggers, multiple toolbars have not been a problem in general over two decades? You remember when “reputable” sites like SourceForge were bundling adware?
- wayneftw 6y ago
  > Are you saying that viruses, malware, ransomware, keyloggers, multiple toolbars have not been a problem in general over two decades? Not for me. > You remember when “reputable” sites like SourceForge were bundling adware? Sure. What's your point? I think I know: You would gladly trade the freedom of the general population for security. If so - I'm sorry to hear that. If not, maybe you should think about what you're saying because you're on the wrong side of the debate.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    > Not for me. So would Apple be better off serving you or the general population? I think the numbers speak for themselves. > I think I know: You would gladly trade the freedom of the general population for security. If so - I'm sorry to hear that. If not, maybe you should think about what you're saying because you're on the wrong side of the debate. Yes because when the founding fathers came up with the phrase they were referring to the “freedom” to save a little money buying virtual currency to buy the Carlton dance in Fortnite. You are perfectly free to buy an Android device. Most people would gladly choose some type of assurance that they could install video conferencing software and not have a secret web server installed that they don’t know to delete (ie Zoom)
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      We are also perfectly free to enforce our existing anti-trust laws and make new laws for important digital platforms as we see fit. Seems like a better option than just letting big corps do whatever they want. There's more of us than them.

wcarey 6y ago

Would you support compelling developers who have a monopoly on a particular app to support all available app stores? It seems like a developer who held a monopoly in a particular app would be the in the same position Apple is in with the app store writ large? For example, if the only way to fill out my employer's timecard is via an iOS app, should they be compelled to offer the app in all the available app stores?

wayneftw 6y ago
If that particular app was essential to modern day life for a huge portion of the general population then yes, absolutely.
- wcarey 6y ago
  What it it's essential to the life of a relatively small group of users? It seems like the rights of smaller groups like that are the ones that most need collectively bargained, as they'll be in a relatively poor position to negotiate with the organization compelling them to use the app?
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    You created the hypothetical, not me. So you can feel free to answer your own questions because I'm not exactly sure what your point is. This is about giving users and developers a choice outside of Apple's app store. If you like freedom and choices, you should get on the right side of this debate. If some relatively small group of users had a choice, they would always be able to choose Apple's protection.
    - wcarey 6y ago
      I’ve been a part of a small group of users not offered that choice (essentially, install remote access on your personal device or terminate you employment), so I appreciate Apple negotiating for me.
      - wayneftw 6y ago
        Sounds like the problem lies with whatever group you chose to associate with. If you're depending on Apple to stop you from making bad decisions about what kinds of employers to work for, I think you've got bigger problems than what might happen if there were an alternate iPhone app store.
damnyou 6y ago
If the developer was worth over a trillion dollars, or if the app was used by 20% or more of the global population, absolutely.

scarface74 6y ago

I’ve been running PCs and Macs in my house for over 2 decades. I have not once had a problem with viruses. Are you saying that viruses, malware, ransomware, keyloggers, multiple toolbars have not been a problem in general over two decades? You remember when “reputable” sites like SourceForge were bundling adware?

wayneftw 6y ago
> Are you saying that viruses, malware, ransomware, keyloggers, multiple toolbars have not been a problem in general over two decades? Not for me. > You remember when “reputable” sites like SourceForge were bundling adware? Sure. What's your point? I think I know: You would gladly trade the freedom of the general population for security. If so - I'm sorry to hear that. If not, maybe you should think about what you're saying because you're on the wrong side of the debate.
- scarface74 6y ago
  > Not for me. So would Apple be better off serving you or the general population? I think the numbers speak for themselves. > I think I know: You would gladly trade the freedom of the general population for security. If so - I'm sorry to hear that. If not, maybe you should think about what you're saying because you're on the wrong side of the debate. Yes because when the founding fathers came up with the phrase they were referring to the “freedom” to save a little money buying virtual currency to buy the Carlton dance in Fortnite. You are perfectly free to buy an Android device. Most people would gladly choose some type of assurance that they could install video conferencing software and not have a secret web server installed that they don’t know to delete (ie Zoom)
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    We are also perfectly free to enforce our existing anti-trust laws and make new laws for important digital platforms as we see fit. Seems like a better option than just letting big corps do whatever they want. There's more of us than them.