10 ms·

It is still absolutely fascinating to me how we have arrived at a point where in order to use one's own device properly, one has to ask a US company nicely or b

It is still absolutely fascinating to me how we have arrived at a point where in order to use one's own device properly, one has to ask a US company nicely or be unable to do so - and people pay money for it. On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple. 30% of the world's population would, if their government cut a deal with Apple, be unable to install a certain app at the flip of a button (check Spain's Catalonia referendum or Hong Kong, etc.). I really do hope that some EU regulation will force device manufacturers above a certain market size to allow a) sideloading apps and b) allow different browser engines as boycotts seem to no longer work after a certain amount of market penetration.

emteycz 6y ago
EU will sooner ban encryption than do this. And who cares then...
zepto 6y ago
The solution you are proposing is worse than the problem. If Apple were forced to allow multiple stores or sideloading, governments that right now have no leverage with Apple would force their citizens to install government stores and apps.
- karlshea 6y ago
  This isn't speculation, there's literally an article on 9to5mac today about how the new iOS update will be pre-selecting apps provided by the Russian government on device setup to comply with a new law there. For now you can deselect/remove them.
- akmarinov 6y ago
  That's really not an issue right now. Governments ARE forcing Apple to preinstall government apps right now. https://9to5mac.com/2021/03/16/russia-pre-install-iphone-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2021/03/16/russia-pre-install-iphone-app...
  - zepto 6y ago
    That article completely proves my point. 1. Russia has sufficient leverage. Most smaller countries do not. 2. “These pre-installed apps will also be deletable after setup is complete, just like any other third-party app that is downloaded from the App Store.” That’s as far as Apple was willing to go. The Apps also don’t have privileged access to anything private. If the US or EU forces Apple to allow alternate stores, both of these protections will be gone, forever. And once they are gone on Apple devices, why would anyone imagine we’ll ever again have a widespread platform that doesn’t have government mandated software? Apple’s dominance is at best a transient problem. Let’s not trade it for a permanent one that is far worse.
    - wlesieutre 6y ago
      > 2. “These pre-installed apps will also be deletable after setup is complete, just like any other third-party app that is downloaded from the App Store.” They aren't even preinstalled. You get a prompt during setup and they're pre-selected to be installed after setup, but you can uncheck them. "All apps in the list are pre-selected to be installed as part of setup; however, users are able to deselect apps individually if they don’t want them."
jsperson 6y ago
On the other hand, I spend 0% of my time managing iOS devices for my parents and am constantly bombarded with issues from my in-laws with Android phones. I agree that some of Apple's behavior is monopolistic and has some unfortunate, possibly unforeseen consequences, but the end result is pretty nice for the consumers who are willing to accept the compromise.
- Jyaif 6y ago
  Do you think that you spending 0% of your time managing iOS devices has something to do with apps not being able to use their own payment system?
  - random5634 6y ago
    This is one of the major features yes. On iOS apps are totally prohibited from their own payment flows in app / on platform - it's completely banned. This is extremely noticeable in a couple of areas. Subscription - you get an email from apple BEFORE renewal, and can easily cancel subscriptions - all located in one place - no phone calls or other stupidity (try cancelling a myheritage account by contrast!) They have integrated monitoring so if you delete an app, it will ask if you also want to cancel out the subscription for the app. The prompting for purchase and trials is VERY explicit. So for example, NY Times has a banner (not on ios) saying signup for $1/week. Great, you do it. Then you find out that in a month it switches to something like $15/month- I mean, the scams and tricks are endless off app store. Especially with elderly relatives or younger folks or just folks who don't want to be hassled with this game playing, these features are what make using apple so nice and help drive the premium users are willing to pay (which can be ridiculous!). One tip - if you have elderly folks, scan their bank statement / cc statement 1x per year, you usually can save them thousands on auto-renewing stuff they no longer use.
    - spideymans 6y ago
      >The prompting for purchase and trials is VERY explicit. So for example, NY Times has a banner (not on ios) saying signup for $1/week. Great, you do it. Then you find out that in a month it switches to something like $15/month- I mean, the scams and tricks are endless off app store. I really wish government or credit card companies would impose rules on merchants that prohibit this kind of behaviour. It's very easy to get bitten by subscription scams, even from companies that appear legitimate. The lack of regulation on this matter just leaves Apple with justification to act as a payment gatekeeper.
LeoPanthera 6y ago
> On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple. Citation needed? I don't believe this is true. Tunnelblick and qemu both exist on macOS independently of Apple's approval.
- nucleardog 6y ago
  Also would like a citation. Onboarding mac users at work is "here's your .ovpn file, go install Tunnelblick and import it, start connection, and go".
  - tgragnato 6y ago
    Tunnelblick uses OpenVPN under the hood, which means it's using a TUN/TAP virtual NIC. LeoPantera is referring to the new way of creating VPNs in macOS and iOS, the Network Extension framework. You need an entitlement to develop with that framework, and sideloading is not possible. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/entitlements/com_apple_developer_networking_networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/en... I have no idea if Apple is committed to support tun/tap in the future, but I doubt.
    - alerighi 6y ago
      Well the Wireguard app exists both for macOS and iOS so I guess is not that big deal to support VPN on these systems. Also services like this one to circumvent the Apple policy couldn't just give you a Wireguard configuration file and say to you "just install the Wireguard app and import the config"? It would work and of course Apple couldn't do anything (beside removing the whole Wireguard app from the store).
      - tgragnato 6y ago
        That’s what I do too. Not having entitlements or not being able to sideload is more of an issue while trying to tweak or patch an existing code base. E.g.: contributing to WireGuard or iCepa, ...
3grdlurker 6y ago
The only way to prevent large, billion+ dollar corporations from existing is via highly intrusive state regulation, so people who are appalled by the monopolistic and authoritarian behaviors of big tech should really be asking themselves (1) whether they are against capitalism, because there isn’t a model of optimizing economies for market freedom and profit that disallows the existence of billion/trillion dollar companies, and (2) whether they are okay with breaking up the concept of a “nation-state”, since its size requires it to have large economies.
- anonymou2 6y ago
  What I find amazing is that in this capitalist world, these companies are really against private property (yours, not theirs) I am not sure if private property is in the definition of capitalism, probably not, so there may be no contradiction. But still it is really amazing.
  - pmontra 6y ago
    Capitalism is about using capital to produce something. Capital and the means of production are privately owned. This is the opposite of communism, which lets people own things but not the production system (actual implementations might vary.) It's in the spirit of capitalism to be competitive so don't be surprised if those companies want all those things from us.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    It's ironic, because the delineation[1] between personal and private property is often blurred by capitalism, yet it is laid bare in this example. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property#Personal_versus_private_property https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property#Personal_ver...
ctdonath 6y ago
I’m paying for a walled garden. I own the hardware, and with it bought software which I want to aggressively maintain it. If you don’t like the product, don’t buy it. Don’t compel them to satisfy your whim via police power of the state.
- kmeisthax 6y ago
  Walled gardens are also legally enforced by police power of the state. Otherwise, Epic would just distribute their own jailbreaks and tell Fortnite users to jailbreak their phones. Furthermore, I find it really frustrating how my desire for the ability to go a little bit outside of certain walled gardens is construed as me demanding you go outside the walled garden at all times. 95% of the walled garden is perfectly fine - it's the 5% of apps that won't fit inside of it that are the problem.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - google234123 6y ago
    Epic is free to distribute a jailbreak. Apple is also free to update their phone to cover that security vulnerability.
    - mhh__ 6y ago
      They're also probably free to get sued
  - ctdonath 6y ago
    It’s not “construed as me demanding you go outside the walled garden at all times”, it’s that you’re making demands on a private company thru the police power of the state, rather than just not buying the product - and that such demands have consequences that reduce security and degrade via other unintended consequences.
reaperducer 6y ago
in order to use one's own device properly It boils down to someone's personal definition of "properly." You are on HN. Your definition of using a device "properly" is very different from the vast majority of the other human beings on the planet. You're not Apple's target audience, and that's OK. The more of you there are, the more force there is for creating other options. But don't pretend that there is only one "proper" way to use a device.
- mplewis 6y ago
  Exactly. Many users don't have a concept of how to use a phone "wrong." For example, they blame the phone when they follow internet instructions to sideload an app which causes bugs.
- anfilt 6y ago
  Let’s not fall into the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Just because a majority of people don't understand how a phone/computer works does not mean their property rights are not being infringed.
  - google234123 6y ago
    You want to restrict Apple's right to sell a limited computing device. I would argue that you are infringing on their freedom.
    - anfilt 6y ago
      You don't normally sell things with limited ownership rights. Selling something generally involves the transfer of all rights in real/tangible property. Here apple is reserving some rights even after sale. Last I checked apple was not leasing devices or something similar.
      - google234123 6y ago
        You are free to try and jail break your device if you want. Also, your statement is false: buying most things don't involves the transfer of all rights. You aren't free to make copies and resell. The app store is a service that comes with the phone.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
> On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple No it’s not. It’s impossible if you don’t want to require your customers to change some security settings. We can have a discussion about whether that’s practical for a developer, but either way, the user has control over their Mac. Completely different situation from iOS.
- naringas 6y ago
  > the user has control over their Mac. for now, because observing the current trends, they'll likely won't for much longer... all for the sake of safety and convenience.
  - messe 6y ago
    People have been saying the same thing since the Mac App store came out. And yet, here we are in exactly the same position.
    - Daho0n 6y ago
      Clearly we are not. The amount of changes Apple have made are plenty. VPNs are harder to use, side loading is harder, adblockers are ineffective, etc.
      - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        None of those things are true on macOS. Maybe you could argue sideloading is harder, but only insofar as it requires a three word Terminal command. One I know by heart. `sudo spctl --master-disable`.
someonehere 6y ago
Not everyone is a developer or reader of HN. Apple has evolved their software to make users safe. I get fewer problems managing friends and family on Apple products vs Android/Microsoft products. I work in enterprise and am a lot happier managing macOS devices than PCs. I get the whole “I own it and shouldn’t have to have it walled/leased/owned by the developer,” but the success for Apple when Jobs returned was simplifying the product lineup and making products that just work. I agree I don’t like being locked into a hardware manufacturers box, but not everyone can build a kernel from source or use Gnome/KDE/whatever desktop manager there is out there. It should turn on, be easy to use, and be a safe experience for everyone.
google234123 6y ago
So Apple is suppose to break the law of China? Why don't you go there and start openly distributing illegal material and see what happens.

emteycz 6y ago

EU will sooner ban encryption than do this. And who cares then...

zepto 6y ago

The solution you are proposing is worse than the problem. If Apple were forced to allow multiple stores or sideloading, governments that right now have no leverage with Apple would force their citizens to install government stores and apps.

karlshea 6y ago
This isn't speculation, there's literally an article on 9to5mac today about how the new iOS update will be pre-selecting apps provided by the Russian government on device setup to comply with a new law there. For now you can deselect/remove them.
akmarinov 6y ago
That's really not an issue right now. Governments ARE forcing Apple to preinstall government apps right now. https://9to5mac.com/2021/03/16/russia-pre-install-iphone-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2021/03/16/russia-pre-install-iphone-app...
- zepto 6y ago
  That article completely proves my point. 1. Russia has sufficient leverage. Most smaller countries do not. 2. “These pre-installed apps will also be deletable after setup is complete, just like any other third-party app that is downloaded from the App Store.” That’s as far as Apple was willing to go. The Apps also don’t have privileged access to anything private. If the US or EU forces Apple to allow alternate stores, both of these protections will be gone, forever. And once they are gone on Apple devices, why would anyone imagine we’ll ever again have a widespread platform that doesn’t have government mandated software? Apple’s dominance is at best a transient problem. Let’s not trade it for a permanent one that is far worse.
  - wlesieutre 6y ago
    > 2. “These pre-installed apps will also be deletable after setup is complete, just like any other third-party app that is downloaded from the App Store.” They aren't even preinstalled. You get a prompt during setup and they're pre-selected to be installed after setup, but you can uncheck them. "All apps in the list are pre-selected to be installed as part of setup; however, users are able to deselect apps individually if they don’t want them."

jsperson 6y ago

On the other hand, I spend 0% of my time managing iOS devices for my parents and am constantly bombarded with issues from my in-laws with Android phones. I agree that some of Apple's behavior is monopolistic and has some unfortunate, possibly unforeseen consequences, but the end result is pretty nice for the consumers who are willing to accept the compromise.

Jyaif 6y ago
Do you think that you spending 0% of your time managing iOS devices has something to do with apps not being able to use their own payment system?
- random5634 6y ago
  This is one of the major features yes. On iOS apps are totally prohibited from their own payment flows in app / on platform - it's completely banned. This is extremely noticeable in a couple of areas. Subscription - you get an email from apple BEFORE renewal, and can easily cancel subscriptions - all located in one place - no phone calls or other stupidity (try cancelling a myheritage account by contrast!) They have integrated monitoring so if you delete an app, it will ask if you also want to cancel out the subscription for the app. The prompting for purchase and trials is VERY explicit. So for example, NY Times has a banner (not on ios) saying signup for $1/week. Great, you do it. Then you find out that in a month it switches to something like $15/month- I mean, the scams and tricks are endless off app store. Especially with elderly relatives or younger folks or just folks who don't want to be hassled with this game playing, these features are what make using apple so nice and help drive the premium users are willing to pay (which can be ridiculous!). One tip - if you have elderly folks, scan their bank statement / cc statement 1x per year, you usually can save them thousands on auto-renewing stuff they no longer use.
  - spideymans 6y ago
    >The prompting for purchase and trials is VERY explicit. So for example, NY Times has a banner (not on ios) saying signup for $1/week. Great, you do it. Then you find out that in a month it switches to something like $15/month- I mean, the scams and tricks are endless off app store. I really wish government or credit card companies would impose rules on merchants that prohibit this kind of behaviour. It's very easy to get bitten by subscription scams, even from companies that appear legitimate. The lack of regulation on this matter just leaves Apple with justification to act as a payment gatekeeper.

LeoPanthera 6y ago

> On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple. Citation needed? I don't believe this is true. Tunnelblick and qemu both exist on macOS independently of Apple's approval.

nucleardog 6y ago
Also would like a citation. Onboarding mac users at work is "here's your .ovpn file, go install Tunnelblick and import it, start connection, and go".
- tgragnato 6y ago
  Tunnelblick uses OpenVPN under the hood, which means it's using a TUN/TAP virtual NIC. LeoPantera is referring to the new way of creating VPNs in macOS and iOS, the Network Extension framework. You need an entitlement to develop with that framework, and sideloading is not possible. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/entitlements/com_apple_developer_networking_networkextension https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/en... I have no idea if Apple is committed to support tun/tap in the future, but I doubt.
  - alerighi 6y ago
    Well the Wireguard app exists both for macOS and iOS so I guess is not that big deal to support VPN on these systems. Also services like this one to circumvent the Apple policy couldn't just give you a Wireguard configuration file and say to you "just install the Wireguard app and import the config"? It would work and of course Apple couldn't do anything (beside removing the whole Wireguard app from the store).
    - tgragnato 6y ago
      That’s what I do too. Not having entitlements or not being able to sideload is more of an issue while trying to tweak or patch an existing code base. E.g.: contributing to WireGuard or iCepa, ...

3grdlurker 6y ago

The only way to prevent large, billion+ dollar corporations from existing is via highly intrusive state regulation, so people who are appalled by the monopolistic and authoritarian behaviors of big tech should really be asking themselves (1) whether they are against capitalism, because there isn’t a model of optimizing economies for market freedom and profit that disallows the existence of billion/trillion dollar companies, and (2) whether they are okay with breaking up the concept of a “nation-state”, since its size requires it to have large economies.

anonymou2 6y ago
What I find amazing is that in this capitalist world, these companies are really against private property (yours, not theirs) I am not sure if private property is in the definition of capitalism, probably not, so there may be no contradiction. But still it is really amazing.
- pmontra 6y ago
  Capitalism is about using capital to produce something. Capital and the means of production are privately owned. This is the opposite of communism, which lets people own things but not the production system (actual implementations might vary.) It's in the spirit of capitalism to be competitive so don't be surprised if those companies want all those things from us.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  It's ironic, because the delineation[1] between personal and private property is often blurred by capitalism, yet it is laid bare in this example. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property#Personal_versus_private_property https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property#Personal_ver...

ctdonath 6y ago

I’m paying for a walled garden. I own the hardware, and with it bought software which I want to aggressively maintain it. If you don’t like the product, don’t buy it. Don’t compel them to satisfy your whim via police power of the state.

kmeisthax 6y ago
Walled gardens are also legally enforced by police power of the state. Otherwise, Epic would just distribute their own jailbreaks and tell Fortnite users to jailbreak their phones. Furthermore, I find it really frustrating how my desire for the ability to go a little bit outside of certain walled gardens is construed as me demanding you go outside the walled garden at all times. 95% of the walled garden is perfectly fine - it's the 5% of apps that won't fit inside of it that are the problem.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- google234123 6y ago
  Epic is free to distribute a jailbreak. Apple is also free to update their phone to cover that security vulnerability.
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    They're also probably free to get sued
- ctdonath 6y ago
  It’s not “construed as me demanding you go outside the walled garden at all times”, it’s that you’re making demands on a private company thru the police power of the state, rather than just not buying the product - and that such demands have consequences that reduce security and degrade via other unintended consequences.

reaperducer 6y ago

in order to use one's own device properly It boils down to someone's personal definition of "properly." You are on HN. Your definition of using a device "properly" is very different from the vast majority of the other human beings on the planet. You're not Apple's target audience, and that's OK. The more of you there are, the more force there is for creating other options. But don't pretend that there is only one "proper" way to use a device.

mplewis 6y ago
Exactly. Many users don't have a concept of how to use a phone "wrong." For example, they blame the phone when they follow internet instructions to sideload an app which causes bugs.
anfilt 6y ago
Let’s not fall into the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Just because a majority of people don't understand how a phone/computer works does not mean their property rights are not being infringed.
- google234123 6y ago
  You want to restrict Apple's right to sell a limited computing device. I would argue that you are infringing on their freedom.
  - anfilt 6y ago
    You don't normally sell things with limited ownership rights. Selling something generally involves the transfer of all rights in real/tangible property. Here apple is reserving some rights even after sale. Last I checked apple was not leasing devices or something similar.
    - google234123 6y ago
      You are free to try and jail break your device if you want. Also, your statement is false: buying most things don't involves the transfer of all rights. You aren't free to make copies and resell. The app store is a service that comes with the phone.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

> On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple No it’s not. It’s impossible if you don’t want to require your customers to change some security settings. We can have a discussion about whether that’s practical for a developer, but either way, the user has control over their Mac. Completely different situation from iOS.

naringas 6y ago
> the user has control over their Mac. for now, because observing the current trends, they'll likely won't for much longer... all for the sake of safety and convenience.
- messe 6y ago
  People have been saying the same thing since the Mac App store came out. And yet, here we are in exactly the same position.
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    Clearly we are not. The amount of changes Apple have made are plenty. VPNs are harder to use, side loading is harder, adblockers are ineffective, etc.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      None of those things are true on macOS. Maybe you could argue sideloading is harder, but only insofar as it requires a three word Terminal command. One I know by heart. `sudo spctl --master-disable`.

someonehere 6y ago

Not everyone is a developer or reader of HN. Apple has evolved their software to make users safe. I get fewer problems managing friends and family on Apple products vs Android/Microsoft products. I work in enterprise and am a lot happier managing macOS devices than PCs. I get the whole “I own it and shouldn’t have to have it walled/leased/owned by the developer,” but the success for Apple when Jobs returned was simplifying the product lineup and making products that just work. I agree I don’t like being locked into a hardware manufacturers box, but not everyone can build a kernel from source or use Gnome/KDE/whatever desktop manager there is out there. It should turn on, be easy to use, and be a safe experience for everyone.

google234123 6y ago

So Apple is suppose to break the law of China? Why don't you go there and start openly distributing illegal material and see what happens.