3 ms·

It eventual comes to point where people have to take personal responsibility for their actions. If you have effectively informed the user of something and they

by anfilt 5y ago

It eventual comes to point where people have to take personal responsibility for their actions. If you have effectively informed the user of something and they still proceed its on them. Especially, at the expense of everyone else's property rights by allowing a corporation to effectively infringe upon their property rights via extralegal means. Further, its not just doom and gloom on other systems where being able to install software from any source as you please is the default.

JimDabell 5y ago
> It eventual comes to point where people have to take personal responsibility for their actions. You’re missing the original point I was making though. In this scenario, Facebook removes their application from Apple’s App Store and almost everybody sideloads it. Ultimately, what happens to the people who do that is their own responsibility. Yeah, I get that. Where does this leave the people who want to use Facebook under Apple’s rules but refuse to sideload it? They have had something taken away from them. Sideloading affects them even if they choose not to sideload. It affects the entire ecosystem, not just the people who sideload. “Just don’t sideload” advice doesn’t work.
- anfilt 5y ago
  Like in theory Facebook could try something like that. This is a what if scenario still. If we look at android they have not pulled their Apps from googles store. So what is the basis they would do this for iOS? Moreover, depending how apple theoretically would release grip the have on other people's devices also plays into effect. If apple just let you load a signing key for the boot-rom and left it at that. The amount technical friction would likely be too high to be easily abused at large.
- ThatPlayer 5y ago
  >Where does this leave the people who want to use Facebook under Apple’s rules but refuse to sideload it? You can use Safari If Facebook pulled their app from the Apple App Store right now, would you be forced to use Android? You'd say they can't, because they'd lose the entire iOS marketshare, which is exactly the problem: Apple are forcing people to use their Apple App Store using their iOS monopoly power marketshare. Which is anti-competitive.

by anfilt 5y ago

JimDabell 5y ago

> It eventual comes to point where people have to take personal responsibility for their actions. You’re missing the original point I was making though. In this scenario, Facebook removes their application from Apple’s App Store and almost everybody sideloads it. Ultimately, what happens to the people who do that is their own responsibility. Yeah, I get that. Where does this leave the people who want to use Facebook under Apple’s rules but refuse to sideload it? They have had something taken away from them. Sideloading affects them even if they choose not to sideload. It affects the entire ecosystem, not just the people who sideload. “Just don’t sideload” advice doesn’t work.

anfilt 5y ago
Like in theory Facebook could try something like that. This is a what if scenario still. If we look at android they have not pulled their Apps from googles store. So what is the basis they would do this for iOS? Moreover, depending how apple theoretically would release grip the have on other people's devices also plays into effect. If apple just let you load a signing key for the boot-rom and left it at that. The amount technical friction would likely be too high to be easily abused at large.
ThatPlayer 5y ago
>Where does this leave the people who want to use Facebook under Apple’s rules but refuse to sideload it? You can use Safari If Facebook pulled their app from the Apple App Store right now, would you be forced to use Android? You'd say they can't, because they'd lose the entire iOS marketshare, which is exactly the problem: Apple are forcing people to use their Apple App Store using their iOS monopoly power marketshare. Which is anti-competitive.