5 ms·

“ These measures are always marketed as being for security from hackers and more recently also in the name of privacy, but from the beginning it has always been

“ These measures are always marketed as being for security from hackers and more recently also in the name of privacy, but from the beginning it has always been about ensuring that Apple can control which applications and accessories are allowed on the iPhone, in particular when those applications compete with their own offerings.” Uh, well ok unsupported assertion. Apple has always allowed third party calendars, email clients, messaging apps, etc. It’s always been security, privacy AND battery life. This original iPhone didn’t allow third party apps for a year, and they were only going to be web apps. Eventually they game up with a tight sandbox with strict limits on background processing that protected battery life, privacy and the essential phone functionality from rogue apps. Being able to buy a tightly managed device that maximizes its battery life and your privacy and security is an important choice for consumers.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
If people actually wanted this then they would be able to sell the exact same device without those restrictions, or have a configuration switch to disable them during a factory reset, and people who want it could still have the one with them. But they don't.
- dylz 6y ago
  I'm kind of curious how many general-purpose non-technical-HN-type people would want this with the connotation that you would need a signed untampered no-sideloading-allowed device to interact with many apps (such as any multiplayer game, all banking apps, any food ordering or delivery app, etc.), so you're permanently excluded from using or touching a significant amount of the ecosystem. Identical situation currently plays out on desktop gaming, where anticheat software does not run in WINE or equivalent and you can't connect, and VMs are blocked and will result in bans from multiplayer games, to the point where if you are running normal Windows, you will be removed from the game for having VMware or Docker or anything similar open or running in the background. If you attempt to block these, you are refused service.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    The advantage of the unlocked device is, of course, that you can then have it forge all of the checks and run whatever apps you want anyway. The whole point is to run any apps you want to. You might end up with some cat and mouse there for the apps like anti-cheat, but they're Turing machines all the way down, and the user themselves doesn't have to develop the anti-fingerprinting technology. Moreover, how many games do you think will want the user to have an unlocked device, if it means they can distribute their game without paying 30% to Apple? It is also, of course, ridiculous for a bank or food delivery app to refuse to install their app on a device which is actually controlled by the user when they allow the same device to do the same things on its website, and companies doing such things would have a tendency to lose customers to smarter competitors who don't.
    - dylz 6y ago
      Yes, it's a cat and mouse game, but you only need to fail a check once, then it's "your account has been suspended indefinitely, please contact support". > how many games do you think will want the user to have an unlocked device Many more will rather be able to attest that the user isn't pirating all IAP. > It is also, of course, ridiculous for a bank or food delivery app to refuse to install their app on a device which is actually controlled by the user when they allow the same device to do the same things on its website Ridiculous, yes, but it's still done anyway. The same device is also often not allowed to do the same things on the website, or the website implements similar or identical fingerprinting code. Everything from polling tons of "logged in URLs" like facebook's favicon to detect what sites the user is logged into, to port scanning the user's LAN, none of this should be a thing and should be extremely illegal, but in practice it's abused heavily.
      - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        > Yes, it's a cat and mouse game, but you only need to fail a check once, then it's "your account has been suspended indefinitely, please contact support". Which the developer will have a market incentive to not want to do, because they can't get money from you if you're not using their product, and unlike phone platforms, most app developers have aggressive competition. > Many more will rather be able to attest that the user isn't pirating all IAP. Not really. If the user has an unlocked device, turning them away isn't going to turn a profit because then you lose their business regardless. Better to get the users who don't pirate than to lose them all. And it's not as if the user is going to lock the device back up for most of these games -- especially when there will be other apps that only work on an unlocked device. > Everything from polling tons of "logged in URLs" like facebook's favicon to detect what sites the user is logged into, to port scanning the user's LAN, none of this should be a thing and should be extremely illegal, but in practice it's abused heavily. The solution there being to stop patronizing anybody who does that, which everybody should already be doing as a general principle. Moreover, all this is all rather academic when we could get the actual result by allowing the user to do this to their device and seeing what happens, so it can't be an argument for not doing that. Worst case is not very many people do it, and then still what is it hurting?
bananaface 6y ago
Apple's calender, email client and messaging app don't generate revenue, they're loss leaders. There's no reason for them to block competitors to those apps.
- valuearb 6y ago
  So what competitors are they blocking? Very few.
  - bananaface 6y ago
    Competitors to the app store and competitors to Apple's payment processor.
m463 6y ago
Even the most cursory web search can easily support his assertion. for instance apple has removed apps that help you find other apps. It has removed apps trying to use features available only to apple built-in apps (calling them private interfaces) but really - the eu and the us are scrutinizing apple's store as anti-competitive. That's a pretty big indicator. And even when apple doesn't outright remove apps, it cherry-picks design features of third-party apps to add it to their own apps. myself, I would like to be able to compile and add my own apps to my phone. Just like computers used to be. I cannot do that without asking apple for permission.
- valuearb 6y ago
  You can compile and add your own apps to your phone, using Xcode for free. You can distribute those apps to tens of thousands of people using TestFlight. And apps helping you find other apps linked to the App Store, so wheres the competition?
  - m463 6y ago
    wrt my wish to run apps on my phone, you missed the key point where you have to ask apple permission. Even with "free", and accepting terms and conditions, and using your apple id, and all that stuff - I believe you have to renew the certificate weekly. and testflight is a developer thing - with lots of extra asking permission.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

If people actually wanted this then they would be able to sell the exact same device without those restrictions, or have a configuration switch to disable them during a factory reset, and people who want it could still have the one with them. But they don't.

dylz 6y ago
I'm kind of curious how many general-purpose non-technical-HN-type people would want this with the connotation that you would need a signed untampered no-sideloading-allowed device to interact with many apps (such as any multiplayer game, all banking apps, any food ordering or delivery app, etc.), so you're permanently excluded from using or touching a significant amount of the ecosystem. Identical situation currently plays out on desktop gaming, where anticheat software does not run in WINE or equivalent and you can't connect, and VMs are blocked and will result in bans from multiplayer games, to the point where if you are running normal Windows, you will be removed from the game for having VMware or Docker or anything similar open or running in the background. If you attempt to block these, you are refused service.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  The advantage of the unlocked device is, of course, that you can then have it forge all of the checks and run whatever apps you want anyway. The whole point is to run any apps you want to. You might end up with some cat and mouse there for the apps like anti-cheat, but they're Turing machines all the way down, and the user themselves doesn't have to develop the anti-fingerprinting technology. Moreover, how many games do you think will want the user to have an unlocked device, if it means they can distribute their game without paying 30% to Apple? It is also, of course, ridiculous for a bank or food delivery app to refuse to install their app on a device which is actually controlled by the user when they allow the same device to do the same things on its website, and companies doing such things would have a tendency to lose customers to smarter competitors who don't.
  - dylz 6y ago
    Yes, it's a cat and mouse game, but you only need to fail a check once, then it's "your account has been suspended indefinitely, please contact support". > how many games do you think will want the user to have an unlocked device Many more will rather be able to attest that the user isn't pirating all IAP. > It is also, of course, ridiculous for a bank or food delivery app to refuse to install their app on a device which is actually controlled by the user when they allow the same device to do the same things on its website Ridiculous, yes, but it's still done anyway. The same device is also often not allowed to do the same things on the website, or the website implements similar or identical fingerprinting code. Everything from polling tons of "logged in URLs" like facebook's favicon to detect what sites the user is logged into, to port scanning the user's LAN, none of this should be a thing and should be extremely illegal, but in practice it's abused heavily.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > Yes, it's a cat and mouse game, but you only need to fail a check once, then it's "your account has been suspended indefinitely, please contact support". Which the developer will have a market incentive to not want to do, because they can't get money from you if you're not using their product, and unlike phone platforms, most app developers have aggressive competition. > Many more will rather be able to attest that the user isn't pirating all IAP. Not really. If the user has an unlocked device, turning them away isn't going to turn a profit because then you lose their business regardless. Better to get the users who don't pirate than to lose them all. And it's not as if the user is going to lock the device back up for most of these games -- especially when there will be other apps that only work on an unlocked device. > Everything from polling tons of "logged in URLs" like facebook's favicon to detect what sites the user is logged into, to port scanning the user's LAN, none of this should be a thing and should be extremely illegal, but in practice it's abused heavily. The solution there being to stop patronizing anybody who does that, which everybody should already be doing as a general principle. Moreover, all this is all rather academic when we could get the actual result by allowing the user to do this to their device and seeing what happens, so it can't be an argument for not doing that. Worst case is not very many people do it, and then still what is it hurting?

bananaface 6y ago

Apple's calender, email client and messaging app don't generate revenue, they're loss leaders. There's no reason for them to block competitors to those apps.

valuearb 6y ago
So what competitors are they blocking? Very few.
- bananaface 6y ago
  Competitors to the app store and competitors to Apple's payment processor.

m463 6y ago

Even the most cursory web search can easily support his assertion. for instance apple has removed apps that help you find other apps. It has removed apps trying to use features available only to apple built-in apps (calling them private interfaces) but really - the eu and the us are scrutinizing apple's store as anti-competitive. That's a pretty big indicator. And even when apple doesn't outright remove apps, it cherry-picks design features of third-party apps to add it to their own apps. myself, I would like to be able to compile and add my own apps to my phone. Just like computers used to be. I cannot do that without asking apple for permission.

valuearb 6y ago
You can compile and add your own apps to your phone, using Xcode for free. You can distribute those apps to tens of thousands of people using TestFlight. And apps helping you find other apps linked to the App Store, so wheres the competition?
- m463 6y ago
  wrt my wish to run apps on my phone, you missed the key point where you have to ask apple permission. Even with "free", and accepting terms and conditions, and using your apple id, and all that stuff - I believe you have to renew the certificate weekly. and testflight is a developer thing - with lots of extra asking permission.