3 ms·

I also "don’t want government committees dictating the security model", but IMHO it's a big leap from that to advocating against consumer choice within a genera

I also "don’t want government committees dictating the security model", but IMHO it's a big leap from that to advocating against consumer choice within a general purpose product.

cmorgan31 5y ago
Why is it a big leap? Consumers also choose to buy Apple and the assumption is we're too stupid to know we can buy something else and do more with it. It's just as big an insult. If I can't get your app on iOS then I just won't use your app. I don't care if it's on Android because I didn't buy an iPhone to use your specific app. If you want to legislate for consumer choice do so but can we stop pretending this is some battle for choice when it's literally about two behemoth corporations arguing over how they split our money.
- procombo 5y ago
  We agree that, properly empowered, consumers will make the best choice for themselves. We disagree about what constitutes "properly empowered".
  - cmorgan31 5y ago
    Yes that's a fair break down of the situation. We're mostly not aligned on how to properly empower individuals.
simonh 5y ago
I don’t think it’s a big leap at all. On summers have a choice if they buy a product. They don’t get to dictate what products a company is allowed to make. Safety and consumer protection, fine, but I don’t see this as about consumer protection. It’s about some people wishing Apple would change their phones to suit their preferences, but there’s no obligation on Apple to do so. People have always wished Apple would sell computers with this or that feature, this or that peripheral or option. That’s not how it works though. If they don’t sell a device that suits your needs, you have the same recourse the rest of us have. But do you really think they would stop with specifications for side loading and App Store APIs, security profiles and associated OS services? How about specs for police and security services back doors, tracking and surveillance. They won’t be able to help themselves. And if the US can pass laws demanding these things, that creates a precedent for Russia, China, Saudi Arabia etc to follow suit.
TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
So you get Apple dictating both the security model and the commercial model, to developer detriment. It's clearly monopolistic - exploitative, monolithic, controlling. The app store is the biggest source of friction standing between app developers and their customers. Now - this wouldn't be a problem if Apple did the job they claim they do, improved search so it worked well, provided easy visibility for relevant apps, and threw out the scams and the trash. That isn't what's happening. And that is a problem. The security angle is a non-issue. Returning the app ecosystem to some semblance of functionality and fairness would is an orthogonal issue. Apple can keep its walled garden. But it needs to start treating it like a valuable garden, not like a pile of burning trash that happens to generate huge amounts of free money.
- simonh 5y ago
  >That isn’t happening. When Apple says they rejected 1 million app submissions in 2020 and cancelled 470,000 developer accounts for fraud in the same period, do you think they’re lying? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/11/apple-rejected-nearly-1-million-new-apps-in-2020-heres-why.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/11/apple-rejected-nearly-1-mill...

I also "don’t want government committees dictating the security model", but IMHO it's a big leap from that to advocating against consumer choice within a general purpose product.

cmorgan31 5y ago

Why is it a big leap? Consumers also choose to buy Apple and the assumption is we're too stupid to know we can buy something else and do more with it. It's just as big an insult. If I can't get your app on iOS then I just won't use your app. I don't care if it's on Android because I didn't buy an iPhone to use your specific app. If you want to legislate for consumer choice do so but can we stop pretending this is some battle for choice when it's literally about two behemoth corporations arguing over how they split our money.

procombo 5y ago
We agree that, properly empowered, consumers will make the best choice for themselves. We disagree about what constitutes "properly empowered".
- cmorgan31 5y ago
  Yes that's a fair break down of the situation. We're mostly not aligned on how to properly empower individuals.

simonh 5y ago

I don’t think it’s a big leap at all. On summers have a choice if they buy a product. They don’t get to dictate what products a company is allowed to make. Safety and consumer protection, fine, but I don’t see this as about consumer protection. It’s about some people wishing Apple would change their phones to suit their preferences, but there’s no obligation on Apple to do so. People have always wished Apple would sell computers with this or that feature, this or that peripheral or option. That’s not how it works though. If they don’t sell a device that suits your needs, you have the same recourse the rest of us have. But do you really think they would stop with specifications for side loading and App Store APIs, security profiles and associated OS services? How about specs for police and security services back doors, tracking and surveillance. They won’t be able to help themselves. And if the US can pass laws demanding these things, that creates a precedent for Russia, China, Saudi Arabia etc to follow suit.

TheOtherHobbes 5y ago

So you get Apple dictating both the security model and the commercial model, to developer detriment. It's clearly monopolistic - exploitative, monolithic, controlling. The app store is the biggest source of friction standing between app developers and their customers. Now - this wouldn't be a problem if Apple did the job they claim they do, improved search so it worked well, provided easy visibility for relevant apps, and threw out the scams and the trash. That isn't what's happening. And that is a problem. The security angle is a non-issue. Returning the app ecosystem to some semblance of functionality and fairness would is an orthogonal issue. Apple can keep its walled garden. But it needs to start treating it like a valuable garden, not like a pile of burning trash that happens to generate huge amounts of free money.

simonh 5y ago
>That isn’t happening. When Apple says they rejected 1 million app submissions in 2020 and cancelled 470,000 developer accounts for fraud in the same period, do you think they’re lying? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/11/apple-rejected-nearly-1-million-new-apps-in-2020-heres-why.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/11/apple-rejected-nearly-1-mill...