6 ms·

> No computer platform should be allowed to prevent sideloading or other stores from competing What about platforms like Playstation or the computers built int

> No computer platform should be allowed to prevent sideloading or other stores from competing What about platforms like Playstation or the computers built into Teslas etc, should we allow sideloading on those? How do you define a platform?

mikepurvis 6y ago
TBH I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft is gearing up for this fight with Sony, given that every Xbox Series does in fact allow sideloading once placed into the included-and-supported developer mode.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  MS is ahead of the curve here. Rather than trying to combat homebrew, they are embracing it within some predefined boundaries. The 360 allowed for homebrew as well. I think they learned a lot from XBMC.
  - IntelMiner 6y ago
    What? The 360 never had any homebrew enabled
    - kevingadd 6y ago
      It was called XBox Live Indie Games, you could sideload anything you wanted once you paid the initial fee, and then you could put it on the store and accept purchases if it got through a peer review system.
    - mywittyname 6y ago
      Sure you could! I used XNA Game Studio to produce games and apps that would run on my 360. They couldn't take full advantage of the hardware. But if you paid a fee, you could sell your game on XBL much like the App Store or Steam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA_Game_Studio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA_Game_Studio
- throwaway48201 6y ago
  Maybe not gearing up for a fight with, but rather making sure they don't get lumped in with Google have made it very clear that you have options other than the Play Store in recent dev docs
efraim 6y ago
General purpose computing. A game console or Tesla computer is not made for general programs, they have specific purposes. It's also a case of "you know it when you see it", iPhone wasn't a big platform when it launched but now it's the primary platform for many peoples computer needs, it should not be exclusively run by a private company.
- ericmay 6y ago
  > it should not be exclusively run by a private company. Why? If you don't like the iPhone there are other general purpose computers that you can use, ranging from a laptop to a Pixel smart phone... > General purpose computing. If you want to call it a general purpose computer, then you also have to include tablets, laptops, desktop computers, and Android phones. All of a sudden there is quite a bit of choice for customers here. To name a few: Google Microsoft Samsung LG Dell HP Huawei Amazon ... The fact that Apple may very well make the best one, doesn't mean there isn't competition or that it isn't a competitive market.
  - efraim 6y ago
    It's dishonest to pretend that smart phones are not a very large and important portion of the digital market today and very hard to be without. They are used for payment, identification, messaging etc that a laptop or desktop can not replace. Having the choice between apple or google is not much of a choice. And a company that wan't to reach the public must have a smart phone app and therefore must have a ios app. Your list of manufacturers does not take the platforms into consideration. None of those are allowed to use apples platform unless they follow their strict rules. There isnt't a competitive market unless ther's free movement and perfect information and the two smart phone platforms have large lock-in effects today so it hardly qualifies. The portion of the market that is android or windows are competitive markets, it's easy to switch from a samsung phone to a lg phone.
    - ericmay 6y ago
      I'm not sure what I'm being dishonest about? If you're to say that the iPhone is a general purpose computing device then you have to also compare it to other general purpose computing devices and take into consideration the general purpose computing market. Maybe it's simply the best one with the best features? I mean, I know that if I had to choose to only have one (a laptop or iPhone) I'd choose the laptop because it has features that the iPhone doesn't. But they also have overlapping features, complementary features, and sometimes mutually exclusive features. You mention payments - I can pay for things using my laptop, or if I have a credit or debit card (ya know, the thing you're using for payments) I can just use that at the store normally. Messaging - yep you can send messages from your laptop. I could go on. The killer feature of the iPhone is that it's in your pocket, but it's also a limiting factor. You can live without one, easily, however. Doom scrolling Facebook (sorry, keeping in touch with friends and family - totally not addiction) is not important and living without that is very easy. > Your list of manufacturers does not take the platforms into consideration. None of those are allowed to use apples platform unless they follow their strict rules. I can't use any of those manufacturer's platforms without following their rules. I'm not sure what you're trying to explain. > There isnt't a competitive market unless ther's free movement and perfect information and the two smart phone platforms have large lock-in effects today so it hardly qualifies. You can debate whether it's a competitive market, but I'm not sure what you're explaining here is part of the considerations, or at least these may map to larger overall considerations. But you have to be careful to be specific about what you are talking about. Are we talking about the iOS App Store, or the general purpose computer market? It matters. > The portion of the market that is android or windows are competitive markets, it's easy to switch from a samsung phone to a lg phone. You can easily switch from iPhone to Android as well. One of my friends does it at least once a year because he wants to be "all-in" on either Google or Apple but finds flaws in each.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
> What about platforms like Playstation or the computers built into Teslas etc, should we allow sideloading on those? I think we should, yes. Not necessarily by default, but there should be a switch advanced users can flip. Re: Tesla, there is in fact a long history of people fixing and modifying their cars. Why not the computers in those cars?
- ben_w 6y ago
  Hm. Hypothetical: if you modify the software in a Tesla, and your modification allows a hacker to remote control it, and this power is used to commit vehicular homicide, how much of the burden of responsibility do you have? I’m not a lawyer, so while I can throw out phrases like “endangering others through negligence”, I don’t know what the threshold is or even if that’s the right concept in this case. With regards to game consoles, I tend to agree with you — no good reason for them to be allowed to prevent side-loading. With regards to phones however, I explicitly want the devices heavily locked down by law, to the extent that other people should not be allowed to put random software on them. This is because they are powerful sensor packages that almost everyone carries almost all the time, so the mere possibility of malware turning them into blackmail spy boxes is a problem for all of society — everyone, given what I’ve heard about “three felonies per day” [0] — and not just the person who installs the dodgy app. I say this despite not liking that the action of American cultural hegemony in the App Store means those stores have a bigger problem with nipples than with violence. And likewise, I have a problem with the law that requires me (a British citizen working in Germany) to keep the U.S. government informed about my app’s use of encryption in case I “export” something they can’t break, which is insane in my opinion. Security is important and app stores help, but trust can be chained and delegated, and it is possible to have alternative App Stores which Apple/Google audit for security. [0] https://kottke.org/13/06/you-commit-three-felonies-a-day https://kottke.org/13/06/you-commit-three-felonies-a-day
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    > Hypothetical: if you modify the software in a Tesla, and your modification allows a hacker to remote control it, and this power is used to commit vehicular homicide, how much of the burden of responsibility do you have? If you were negligent, I'd say you were responsible, just like if you hit someone because you took off the breaks and couldn't stop. Although... response question: Let's say in ten years, Tesla stops providing security updates for their old cars. If you continue driving the car anyway, and it gets hacked and kills someone, who is responsible? Which is to say, I'm not super into this whole internet-connected-car thing. ;) > With regards to phones however, I explicitly want the devices heavily locked down by law, to the extent that other people should not be allowed to put random software on them. This is because they are powerful sensor packages that almost everyone carries almost all the time. What if I decide to carry around a Raspberry Pi, or wear a wire? I understand the concern, but I don't think controlling what everyone else uses is a reasonable solution in a free society.
tfehring 6y ago
Or Fortnite, for that matter? Why should I be forced to buy skins with Epic’s in-game currency instead of loading my own?
- parthdesai 6y ago
  Fortnite is a free game, I pay to own my iPhone.
  - tfehring 6y ago
    Should it be different for similar games that aren’t free (gratis) then? Should I be required by law to be able to load third-party items in Call of Duty?
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      There needs to be different rules for products that are essential to modern life, like smartphones. We have more rules and regulations for things like food services, airlines, banking and farming than we do for a store like GameStop or a jewelry products.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    Then if you care so much about running whatever software you want on it, perhaps you should have bought a phone that lets you do that instead? I'm not personally in favor of walled gardens myself, but everyone who bought an iPhone knew that's what they were getting and did it anyway.
    - kevingadd 6y ago
      "everyone who bought an iPhone knew that's what they were getting and did it anyway" is an incredibly strong assertion you're not making an effort to support here. Are you seriously claiming that every owner of an iPhone understood the nuances of Apple's app store policies before they bought the phone?
mhh__ 6y ago
Pragmatically, I don't care, because no one who owns a Tesla is using it as their sole access to a computer (similarly with playstation). Many people now only use an iPad or iPhone these days. In an ideal world I would force them (I probably wouldn't for a Tesla because diy software on a car...) to have some basic ability to load programs.
- dpkonofa 6y ago
  Why don't they just do the same with Apple, then? Force them to have some basic ability to load programs. You can even make it easy for users and put an icon on the home screen. To make it obvious that you can load apps and programs for it, they would just need to label it as "App Store" or something like that. Problem solved!
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    Because you don't have to pay Linus Torvalds money to run a program on a Linux installation - that should be the standard.
    - dpkonofa 6y ago
      What does that have to do with anything? You never said anything about paying money. I don't have to pay anything to run Mint or Mario Run on my phone so what's your point?
      - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        You have to pay Apple a minimum of $100 a year to install apps on an iPhone, unless you're okay with the apps being automatically disabled every seven days and never need to install more than three custom apps at a time. You didn't realize this when you bought Mario Run, because Nintendo paid Apple for you. And if Nintendo tries to sell you something to recuperate that cost, they have to give Apple 30%.
        6y ago
kqvamxurcagg 6y ago
Apple's iPhone is now systemically important to commerce, business and consumers unlike Playstation and Tesla. Given their size and scale they should be subject to higher standards.
kevingadd 6y ago
As someone who's released multiple retail games on the PS4 store: Sony should allow sideloading. Microsoft does for the XBox (and has since the 360 era), and at one point Sony allowed it in the 'other OS' environment for the PS3 until they decided to take out that feature after using it to advertise their console.
harha 6y ago
Unless they buy back the hardware, why not? Companies change over time, it’s unrealistic to have the same service for ever (typically the product might be discontinued and not supported after some time, sometimes also the attitude when it comes to service changes). At the same time the platform was bought not rented and producing it and getting rid of it has its own cost. I would argue it’s fair to demand open access to it. I have an old iPad (3rd gen), since it can’t access iCloud properly or sync bookmarks with safari (a function that it originally had) or install Firefox, it’s essentially useless and I’m very unhappy with that, a whole car would be much worse though. I’ve learned to think about that before buying, but many don’t and often there’s no choice.
jayd16 6y ago
I think burden to the platform is relevant. Part of the security model on the console platforms is that no user code can be run. To support side loading, many assumptions would change overnight. This is a significant burden to Sony and the game devs. Apple and iOS, on the other hand, support side loaded code. It's just a matter of who pays for what.
hacknat 6y ago
A game console and most peoples' primary computer is definitely an apple and oranges comparison. I don't know where the line is exactly but it's pretty clear where each of your examples lie.

mikepurvis 6y ago

TBH I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft is gearing up for this fight with Sony, given that every Xbox Series does in fact allow sideloading once placed into the included-and-supported developer mode.

mywittyname 6y ago
MS is ahead of the curve here. Rather than trying to combat homebrew, they are embracing it within some predefined boundaries. The 360 allowed for homebrew as well. I think they learned a lot from XBMC.
- IntelMiner 6y ago
  What? The 360 never had any homebrew enabled
  - kevingadd 6y ago
    It was called XBox Live Indie Games, you could sideload anything you wanted once you paid the initial fee, and then you could put it on the store and accept purchases if it got through a peer review system.
  - mywittyname 6y ago
    Sure you could! I used XNA Game Studio to produce games and apps that would run on my 360. They couldn't take full advantage of the hardware. But if you paid a fee, you could sell your game on XBL much like the App Store or Steam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA_Game_Studio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA_Game_Studio
throwaway48201 6y ago
Maybe not gearing up for a fight with, but rather making sure they don't get lumped in with Google have made it very clear that you have options other than the Play Store in recent dev docs

efraim 6y ago

General purpose computing. A game console or Tesla computer is not made for general programs, they have specific purposes. It's also a case of "you know it when you see it", iPhone wasn't a big platform when it launched but now it's the primary platform for many peoples computer needs, it should not be exclusively run by a private company.

ericmay 6y ago
> it should not be exclusively run by a private company. Why? If you don't like the iPhone there are other general purpose computers that you can use, ranging from a laptop to a Pixel smart phone... > General purpose computing. If you want to call it a general purpose computer, then you also have to include tablets, laptops, desktop computers, and Android phones. All of a sudden there is quite a bit of choice for customers here. To name a few: Google Microsoft Samsung LG Dell HP Huawei Amazon ... The fact that Apple may very well make the best one, doesn't mean there isn't competition or that it isn't a competitive market.
- efraim 6y ago
  It's dishonest to pretend that smart phones are not a very large and important portion of the digital market today and very hard to be without. They are used for payment, identification, messaging etc that a laptop or desktop can not replace. Having the choice between apple or google is not much of a choice. And a company that wan't to reach the public must have a smart phone app and therefore must have a ios app. Your list of manufacturers does not take the platforms into consideration. None of those are allowed to use apples platform unless they follow their strict rules. There isnt't a competitive market unless ther's free movement and perfect information and the two smart phone platforms have large lock-in effects today so it hardly qualifies. The portion of the market that is android or windows are competitive markets, it's easy to switch from a samsung phone to a lg phone.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    I'm not sure what I'm being dishonest about? If you're to say that the iPhone is a general purpose computing device then you have to also compare it to other general purpose computing devices and take into consideration the general purpose computing market. Maybe it's simply the best one with the best features? I mean, I know that if I had to choose to only have one (a laptop or iPhone) I'd choose the laptop because it has features that the iPhone doesn't. But they also have overlapping features, complementary features, and sometimes mutually exclusive features. You mention payments - I can pay for things using my laptop, or if I have a credit or debit card (ya know, the thing you're using for payments) I can just use that at the store normally. Messaging - yep you can send messages from your laptop. I could go on. The killer feature of the iPhone is that it's in your pocket, but it's also a limiting factor. You can live without one, easily, however. Doom scrolling Facebook (sorry, keeping in touch with friends and family - totally not addiction) is not important and living without that is very easy. > Your list of manufacturers does not take the platforms into consideration. None of those are allowed to use apples platform unless they follow their strict rules. I can't use any of those manufacturer's platforms without following their rules. I'm not sure what you're trying to explain. > There isnt't a competitive market unless ther's free movement and perfect information and the two smart phone platforms have large lock-in effects today so it hardly qualifies. You can debate whether it's a competitive market, but I'm not sure what you're explaining here is part of the considerations, or at least these may map to larger overall considerations. But you have to be careful to be specific about what you are talking about. Are we talking about the iOS App Store, or the general purpose computer market? It matters. > The portion of the market that is android or windows are competitive markets, it's easy to switch from a samsung phone to a lg phone. You can easily switch from iPhone to Android as well. One of my friends does it at least once a year because he wants to be "all-in" on either Google or Apple but finds flaws in each.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

> What about platforms like Playstation or the computers built into Teslas etc, should we allow sideloading on those? I think we should, yes. Not necessarily by default, but there should be a switch advanced users can flip. Re: Tesla, there is in fact a long history of people fixing and modifying their cars. Why not the computers in those cars?

ben_w 6y ago
Hm. Hypothetical: if you modify the software in a Tesla, and your modification allows a hacker to remote control it, and this power is used to commit vehicular homicide, how much of the burden of responsibility do you have? I’m not a lawyer, so while I can throw out phrases like “endangering others through negligence”, I don’t know what the threshold is or even if that’s the right concept in this case. With regards to game consoles, I tend to agree with you — no good reason for them to be allowed to prevent side-loading. With regards to phones however, I explicitly want the devices heavily locked down by law, to the extent that other people should not be allowed to put random software on them. This is because they are powerful sensor packages that almost everyone carries almost all the time, so the mere possibility of malware turning them into blackmail spy boxes is a problem for all of society — everyone, given what I’ve heard about “three felonies per day” [0] — and not just the person who installs the dodgy app. I say this despite not liking that the action of American cultural hegemony in the App Store means those stores have a bigger problem with nipples than with violence. And likewise, I have a problem with the law that requires me (a British citizen working in Germany) to keep the U.S. government informed about my app’s use of encryption in case I “export” something they can’t break, which is insane in my opinion. Security is important and app stores help, but trust can be chained and delegated, and it is possible to have alternative App Stores which Apple/Google audit for security. [0] https://kottke.org/13/06/you-commit-three-felonies-a-day https://kottke.org/13/06/you-commit-three-felonies-a-day
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  > Hypothetical: if you modify the software in a Tesla, and your modification allows a hacker to remote control it, and this power is used to commit vehicular homicide, how much of the burden of responsibility do you have? If you were negligent, I'd say you were responsible, just like if you hit someone because you took off the breaks and couldn't stop. Although... response question: Let's say in ten years, Tesla stops providing security updates for their old cars. If you continue driving the car anyway, and it gets hacked and kills someone, who is responsible? Which is to say, I'm not super into this whole internet-connected-car thing. ;) > With regards to phones however, I explicitly want the devices heavily locked down by law, to the extent that other people should not be allowed to put random software on them. This is because they are powerful sensor packages that almost everyone carries almost all the time. What if I decide to carry around a Raspberry Pi, or wear a wire? I understand the concern, but I don't think controlling what everyone else uses is a reasonable solution in a free society.

tfehring 6y ago

Or Fortnite, for that matter? Why should I be forced to buy skins with Epic’s in-game currency instead of loading my own?

parthdesai 6y ago
Fortnite is a free game, I pay to own my iPhone.
- tfehring 6y ago
  Should it be different for similar games that aren’t free (gratis) then? Should I be required by law to be able to load third-party items in Call of Duty?
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    There needs to be different rules for products that are essential to modern life, like smartphones. We have more rules and regulations for things like food services, airlines, banking and farming than we do for a store like GameStop or a jewelry products.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  Then if you care so much about running whatever software you want on it, perhaps you should have bought a phone that lets you do that instead? I'm not personally in favor of walled gardens myself, but everyone who bought an iPhone knew that's what they were getting and did it anyway.
  - kevingadd 6y ago
    "everyone who bought an iPhone knew that's what they were getting and did it anyway" is an incredibly strong assertion you're not making an effort to support here. Are you seriously claiming that every owner of an iPhone understood the nuances of Apple's app store policies before they bought the phone?

mhh__ 6y ago

Pragmatically, I don't care, because no one who owns a Tesla is using it as their sole access to a computer (similarly with playstation). Many people now only use an iPad or iPhone these days. In an ideal world I would force them (I probably wouldn't for a Tesla because diy software on a car...) to have some basic ability to load programs.

dpkonofa 6y ago
Why don't they just do the same with Apple, then? Force them to have some basic ability to load programs. You can even make it easy for users and put an icon on the home screen. To make it obvious that you can load apps and programs for it, they would just need to label it as "App Store" or something like that. Problem solved!
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Because you don't have to pay Linus Torvalds money to run a program on a Linux installation - that should be the standard.
  - dpkonofa 6y ago
    What does that have to do with anything? You never said anything about paying money. I don't have to pay anything to run Mint or Mario Run on my phone so what's your point?
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      You have to pay Apple a minimum of $100 a year to install apps on an iPhone, unless you're okay with the apps being automatically disabled every seven days and never need to install more than three custom apps at a time. You didn't realize this when you bought Mario Run, because Nintendo paid Apple for you. And if Nintendo tries to sell you something to recuperate that cost, they have to give Apple 30%.
      - 6y ago

kqvamxurcagg 6y ago

Apple's iPhone is now systemically important to commerce, business and consumers unlike Playstation and Tesla. Given their size and scale they should be subject to higher standards.

kevingadd 6y ago

As someone who's released multiple retail games on the PS4 store: Sony should allow sideloading. Microsoft does for the XBox (and has since the 360 era), and at one point Sony allowed it in the 'other OS' environment for the PS3 until they decided to take out that feature after using it to advertise their console.

harha 6y ago

Unless they buy back the hardware, why not? Companies change over time, it’s unrealistic to have the same service for ever (typically the product might be discontinued and not supported after some time, sometimes also the attitude when it comes to service changes). At the same time the platform was bought not rented and producing it and getting rid of it has its own cost. I would argue it’s fair to demand open access to it. I have an old iPad (3rd gen), since it can’t access iCloud properly or sync bookmarks with safari (a function that it originally had) or install Firefox, it’s essentially useless and I’m very unhappy with that, a whole car would be much worse though. I’ve learned to think about that before buying, but many don’t and often there’s no choice.

jayd16 6y ago

I think burden to the platform is relevant. Part of the security model on the console platforms is that no user code can be run. To support side loading, many assumptions would change overnight. This is a significant burden to Sony and the game devs. Apple and iOS, on the other hand, support side loaded code. It's just a matter of who pays for what.

hacknat 6y ago

A game console and most peoples' primary computer is definitely an apple and oranges comparison. I don't know where the line is exactly but it's pretty clear where each of your examples lie.