9 ms·

Their ethics are terrible. You pay $1000 for a computer, and you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to. You can only pa

Their ethics are terrible. You pay $1000 for a computer, and you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to. You can only pay for software on their own store. Complete bullshit, and it makes me sad that so many here on HN and elsehwere, tech people who learned to program because their 8088 was completely open and free to let you actually create things and learn about computing, so many of you will defend this terrible situation.

yamtaddle 4y ago
> You pay $1000 for a computer, and you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to. For i-devices, yeah, true. > You can only pay for software on their own store. As nice as exposing the App store to more market effects might be, the app store monopoly enables them to force other companies to be less shitty on the platform (or else abandon it—but it's lucrative, so most don't), so it's a feature to me. I'd rather some of the behaviors they ban were simply illegal everywhere, but until then I like having the option to live the libertarian dream of paying for a private regulatory agency (Apple, that is). Beats having no option of that sort.
- ASalazarMX 4y ago
  That also enables unreasonable monopolistic behavior, like not allowing ANY browser besides Safari. Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? What about native ad blockers? Why not encourage privacy-friendly apps that don't collect data by lowering/waiving their fees?
  - vbezhenar 4y ago
    Because everyone will use Chrome and websites will not support Safari. It happened with IE.
  - lemonberry 4y ago
    "like not allowing ANY browser besides Safari" are you saying this is potentially an issue? Because I have Chrome and Firefox installed on my iPhone and MacBook Air. I also have DuckDuckGo's browser on my iPhone.
    - madars 4y ago
      Any browser on iPhone is just a skin for Mobile Safari. In particular, you can't install uBlock Origin/similar there. Every time I browse web on an iDevice I feel like I'm losing 20 IQ points.
    - teraflop 4y ago
      Apple doesn't allow any other browser engines on iOS except Webkit. Despite the branding, "Chrome for iOS" and "Firefox for iOS" are fundamentally different products than their Android or desktop counterparts. They're both just wrappers around the same bundled version of Webkit that Safari uses.
    - skissane 4y ago
      What the parent means to say, is not allowing any browser engine other than WebKit. Chrome, Firefox, Brave, etc, are just wrapping WebKit. The big issue, as I understand it, is JIT. You can run any browser engine you like on iOS, but only WebKit (its JavaScriptCore component) is allowed to JIT JavaScript. Without JIT, the JavaScript performance will be bad; and considering the contemporary JavaScript-heavy nature of the web, that makes any alternative browser engine a non-starter. (I wonder how it is implemented. I'm guessing that WebKit runs out-of-process, and that process has the JIT entitlement, whereas the host app process doesn't.)
      - yamtaddle 4y ago
        > The big issue, as I understand it, is JIT. You can run any browser engine you like on iOS, but only WebKit (its JavaScriptCore component) is allowed to JIT JavaScript. Without JIT, the JavaScript performance will be bad; and considering the contemporary JavaScript-heavy nature of the web, that makes any alternative browser engine a non-starter. IDK how it is now, but Apple used not to allow e.g. alternative Javascript engines in apps—you had to use Webkit's. Having developed an app-building engine for Android in the days when some vendors shipped different engines to supply webview functionality (is that a thing? I actually don't know if they ever stopped) I can say I'm extremely in favor of this part of their policy. God that was a pain in the ass.
  - dwaite 4y ago
    > Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? It isn't just a privacy argument. Browsers need security exceptions for full performance, such as compilation of Javascript/WebAssembly. The browsers may also not have enough process infrastructure to support their native sandboxing strategy on iOS. Someone can make arguments on whether Blink's rendering engine would have business motivation for an iOS port. However, the sandboxing and javascript differences were large motivating technical factors in Blink forking from WebKit in the first place.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    > Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? A few reasons for me, personally: 1) I like the consistency of all web pages being rendered by the same engine and having access to similar capabilities, no matter if it's a web-view inside an app, or in a browser. 2) Safari's a pretty great default for mobile devices, so I don't feel like I'm losing out by being "stuck" with it. 3) From a big-picture perspective, Apple forcing Safari on iOS is the only reason the entire Web client space isn't completely dominated by Google and subject to that—omitting some words I might choose to describe them, for civility's sake—company's every whim (instead it's only mostly dominated by Google) 4) Conveniently for me, I also happen to have no interest in having other browser engines on my phone or tablets, since this one's pretty good, and in some ways best-available, anyway. I have zero clue why I'd want another browser engine on my i-devices, and I've been doing this whole Web thing a while, long enough that I happily adopted and evangelized Firefox back when it was still called Phoenix—normal users have even less reason than I might. As in, I can't think of a single reason being able to install other browser engines would make my time using the devices better. Better battery life? LOL no, it'd be worse. Features I want? Nope, but several I actively do not want developers to even have as an option. I'd rather keep those capabilities away so developers can't start depending on them, so start forcing me to choose between using sites I want to use and avoiding things I don't think browsers should be able to do in the first place (I'm sad Safari's given up as much ground on this as they have, frankly, but again, it's only because of their i-device browser engine monopoly that they have any leverage at all here). 5) Meanwhile, this doesn't get in the way of my using the actually-important features of other browsers, they'll just have Safari's engine under the hood. Not a big deal, or even a small one (to me).
    - ohbtvz 4y ago
      > 1) I like the consistency of all web pages being rendered by the same engine and having access to similar capabilities, no matter if it's a web-view inside an app, or in a browser. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences? > 2) Safari's a pretty great default for mobile devices, so I don't feel like I'm losing out by being "stuck" with it. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences? > 4) Conveniently for me, I also happen to have no interest in having other browser engines on my phone or tablets, since this one's pretty good, and in some ways best-available, anyway. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences?
- fasthands9 4y ago
  I'm pretty torn on all this. Obviously the 30% is exorbitant. But the positive effects from it are very hard to see once you are used to everything working.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Yeah, the 30% sucks and is one of many things I wish Apple'd do differently. But... where else am I gonna go? Ultimately, I really wish they had significant, competent competitors for the specific sort of thing they do. I like Apple because government has entirely failed to regulate absolutely horrible behavior by software vendors, so at least I can pay Apple to enforce some basic and largely no-brainer regulations instead, but I hate that the OS/platform market is so screwed-up that there's effectively no alternative that offers anything like what Apple does, and not just when it comes to defending against all-too-common bad actors.
  - shagie 4y ago
    Most developers aren't paying 30%. From a bit ago: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-store-small-business-program/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-s... > The new App Store Small Business Program will benefit the vast majority of developers who sell digital goods and services on the store, providing them with a reduced commission on paid apps and in-app purchases. Developers can qualify for the program and a reduced, 15 percent commission if they earned up to $1 million in proceeds during the previous calendar year. --- If you are making more than $1M, then its 30%. If you are making less than $1M, its 15%. For subscriptions... https://appleinsider.com/articles/16/06/08/apple-announces-it-will-offer-app-store-subscriptions-take-smaller-15-cut https://appleinsider.com/articles/16/06/08/apple-announces-i... > Although the company's current 30 percent revenue cut will remain in most cases, once a customer maintains a subscription for over a year, that cut fall to 15 percent, giving developers a larger share of revenue for long-term subscribers, Schiller told The Verge. Subscriptions are also opening up to all kinds of apps, including games, instead of just categories like music services and magazines.
    - fasthands9 4y ago
webinvest 4y ago
- skeaker 4y ago
  Apple quite literally had a scandal where it was exposed in court that they deliberately slow older devices down to prematurely make them appear obsolete so that users will discard them sooner. I'm sure there are Android devices that do this too, but Apple really shouldn't be applauded for the longevity of their devices.
  - falcolas 4y ago
    Their reasoning behind this debacle wasn't entirely braindead (maintaining battery life at the expense of processing power on a degraded battery). What was braindead was not giving customers information and control over if the slowdown was enabled.
  - imwillofficial 4y ago
    It was a battery life mitigation solution, that almost all major manufacturers did as well. One which I think is sensible.
  - spinningarrow 4y ago
    Wasn't it the other way round? They slowed them down to make them last longer?
    - derrasterpunkt 4y ago
      That’s what they did. They just didn’t told anybody why they were doing it.
  - School-Cotton 4y ago
    You are free to believe that that was their motivation, but no such thing was ever “exposed in court”.
  - vbezhenar 4y ago
userbinator 4y ago
The PC is sadly moving in the same direction.
- tonystarch 4y ago
  Can you expand on what you mean by this? Outside of video games I feel that any operating system can do 99% of tasks I need it to.
  - voldacar 4y ago
    secure boot with keys outside your control, mandatory TPM chips, remote attestation, etc
    - tonystarch 4y ago
      - giobox 4y ago
        This is over simplifying matters. The technologies used to be optional, but in many cases is now mandatory to use an OS. Windows 11 mandates a TPM, for example - Windows 10 did not and works fine on any system without. There has been a huge amount of discussion here and elsewhere about the Windows 11 mandatory security changes, which themselves are similar to the changes Apple have made to how their own systems boot over the years.
        tonystarch 4y ago
        I don’t mean to oversimplify, but you’re also conflating “PC” with “windows”. Linux and BSD are viable alternatives as well, in my opinion. Do they lack the user land polish of windows? Sure! But really at the end of the day you’re storing files and opening applications, and the eternal web browser. (Of which, you have 2 engine choices!)
        4y ago
tonystarch 4y ago
- madeofpalk 4y ago
  There's plenty of Apple criticism on this site. So much so that I find it rather rote and boring to be honest - there's usually very little new or interesting brought up in these conversations, just the same criticism up over and over again. HN is heavily moderated to promote what it sees as "high quality discussions", and Apple flamewars tend to be pretty low quality, so they're deranked.
  - tonystarch 4y ago
    - madeofpalk 4y ago
      I agree, meta conversations of Hacker News on Hacker News are rote and boring. Edit: People not liking what you have to say is not draconian censorship.
- dang 4y ago
  I'd like to see links. I'll bet it's either a case of (1) the post was breaking the site guidelines; or (2) someone mistakenly concluded we censored it. I say that because #1 is the reason we moderate HN posts and #2 happens all the time in the fervid internet imagination.
snoot 4y ago
> tech people who learned to program because their 8088 was completely open and free to let you actually create things and learn about computing, so many of you will defend this terrible situation. There is nothing terrible about Apple making devices my 80+ year old mother can safely and easily use. I have a Mac, and I also have Linux machines. Nothing is stopping people learning about computers. Why would anyone spend $1000 on a computer from Apple if it’s not what they want?
- gambiting 4y ago
  >>There is nothing terrible about Apple making devices my 80+ year old mother can safely and easily use. I just don't understand this argument. Never did and I don't think I ever will. If apple allowed you to install custom apps, it would change NOTHING for your 80+ year old mother. Literally nothing. Her device would still be just as safe and secure as ever before.
  - snoot 4y ago
    Clearly not true. A lot of spyware and malware masquerades as legitimate software.
    - gambiting 4y ago
      And literally none of it would be allowed on the app store, just like it isn't now. Again, it would change absolutely nothing. Scammers would sooner convince his 80+ year old mother to tell them her bank details than they would walk her through the process of installing a dodgy app through sideloading.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - klodolph 4y ago
    Apple lets you install custom apps on Macs, it’s just iOS devices where it’s a pain. On iOS devices, you have to use a developer account to sideload the app and it only works for a short time, IIRC. I’m fuzzy on the details because the places where I’ve worked, it mostly just worked although the experience was way, way better on Android. At one point I was on a team that ran a system for deploying apps for sideloading, and for years I’ve been carrying both an Android and iOS phone, so I feel like I have a handle on these differences, but I also am missing out on some of the problems that our team already solved. On macOS, you can download an app and run it. Depending on the provenance of the app and the security settings, you may get a message like “this app is from an unknown developer” with no apparent way forward. The solution is to right-click the app and select open from the context menu. When you open an app by right clicking on it, the OS gives you an option to open the app. This depends on security settings, but I think this is allowed by default. There’s a lot of malware out there these days and I think it is good and correct that it should not be obvious how to run arbitrary software you downloaded. We know people will just click through dialog boxes to try and get where they’re going, which is way (for example) there’s no button to visit an HTTPS site with a broken certificate in most browsers these days. Some things should not come with instructions, because the risks are too great for unskilled users.
tristor 4y ago
This exact situation is why this year was the first Thanksgiving that I didn’t spend 3/4 of my visit to my parents doing tech support and cleaning up malware. I bought them Apple hardware last Christmas and I’d do it again. In 2022 the Internet is a hostile landscape where trillions of dollars are made on the back of malicious adtech by some of the largest companies in the world and there is no pathway for the average user to truly control their own system. At least Apple’s walled garden is better than Microsoft’s brothel and Google’s crackhouse.
throwthere 4y ago
How does that look like bad ethics? You know you’re buying a walled garden with an Apple. If you care, then don’t buy Apple. That doesn't make Apple's ethics bad. It just goes against your prefences.
- sngz 4y ago
  i don't think walled garden is the correct term to describe what OP was describing.
- ls15 4y ago
  I am instead looking forward to the EU forcing Apple to allow third-party app stores on iOS. https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/01/eu-force-third-party-app-stores-on-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/01/eu-force-third-party-app-stor...
buffington 4y ago
> you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to This isn't accurate. macOS' default security settings (System > Security & Privacy) have "Allow apps downloaded from:" set to "App Store" by default. Selecting "App Store and identified developers" allows you to install anything from the App store, or anything that's been code signed. If you want to execute unsigned code, you can disable SIP (System Integrity Protection) and relive all your 8088 glory days. > You can only pay for software on their own store. Also entirely inaccurate. Almost all of the macOS software I've purchased was done so outside of the App store, paying developers directly.
- WaitWaitWha 4y ago
  I am not intimately familiar with the Apple ecosystem. This still reads like all or nothing. All as in "App Store and identified developers", or user can turn off "System Integrity Protection" completely. Turning off SIP eliminates any protection. Is that what it means to disable SIP?
  - virtualritz 4y ago
    If you want run an unsigned installer you just right click in Finder and select 'Open' instead of double clicking. I'm not aware of any Mac user among my friends who isn't aware of this. Most OSS installers but even many commerical ones aren't code signed because devs don't want to pay the Apple tax.
    - shepherdjerred 4y ago
      > I'm not aware of any Mac user among my friends who isn't aware of this. I don't think any of my non-tech friends would know this.
      - billti 4y ago
        I think that's the point though. Our non-tech friends are exactly the people who shouldn't be downloading and installing random (unsigned) binaries. As much as I love to hack and tinker with my OS, I also appreciate the safety inherent in the Apple ecosystem. That's why even as a life-long Windows user, I bought my Dad an iPad - I know the chance of him getting p0wned via some social engineering attack and having his banking password stolen are a lot lower than with a Windows or Android tablet.
compiskey 4y ago
That’s an overly reductive to prove a biased point. Typical users do not have the same motivations as programmers. The market for connected devices does not have to conform to your expectations. It’s really exhausting pointing out how your argument would effectively force others to produce what satisfies your sensibilities and to protect what you feel is sacrosanct. Programming is “just math”. I don’t need an 8088 to prove its adding, subtracting, comparing memory addresses. All the cognitive structure and literalness of the past has nothing to do with software and everything to do with hardware engineering. That the industry has not clung to your nostalgic ideal does not mean there is a tyrannical conspiracy. It means the industry evolved. Perhaps you’re just on the wrong career path?
- sam0x17 4y ago
  > Typical users do not have the same motivations as programmers. This is actually very untrue in my experience. I can't tell you how many "normal users" ask me whether there is an open source equivalent they can use so they don't have to pay for X, for example, and many have shown interest in doing what they can to optimize their setup and/or reduce their financial burden by getting smarter about how things are set up.
  - compiskey 4y ago
    Oooh anecdata time; I can’t tell you how many times software engineers have just put libs in a dep file to avoid recreating the wheel. Reusing existing software is not equivalent to expecting users who want share pics to learn from 8088 on up. In fact it’s quite the opposite; it’s good engineering to not waste time recreating the wheel.
  - grumple 4y ago
    > I can't tell you how many "normal users" ask me whether there is an open source equivalent they can use so they don't have to pay for X I don't think I've ever had a non-dev ask me about "open source". Asking for free alternatives, sure, but it's very rare that I'd recommend open source alternatives for whatever normal people are doing.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
shepherdjerred 4y ago
> You can only pay for software on their own store. I would love to see Apple adopt a more open ecosystem, and I could see it happening in the net 5-10 years. But, nobody cares about this aside from the tech community. The average smartphone user is fine with the status quo.
S201 4y ago
Completely agree with you here. Even in my circle of engineer friends I'm generally viewed as the open source zealot for only buying Pixel phones purely because I can unlock the bootloader on them and root them still. I only have one app that actually uses it (for making backups of installed apps) but it's the principle of the thing: if I bought and paid for a device I should be allowed to run whatever darn code I want on it, not only code that the manufacturer says I'm allowed to run. It's my device, not theirs. Apparently that's a radical position to have these days and I find it irresponsible that software folks of all people won't stand up more for the right to run their code on their own devices without the approval of the manufacturer. As you said, the existence of our industry is due in large part to the openness of previous systems. We owe it to ourselves and those that will come after to ensure this level of openness persists.
- bradgessler 4y ago
  The perception of "Free Software" is that it's a lot of extra work, which most people don't want to deal with on a day-to-day basis. I don't know many engineers who actually like how Apple locks down their platform—it's just to them the perceived trade-off of "Apple's polish" vs "configuring free OSS software" isn't worth it. If we're being realistic, most people I encounter want Apple to loosen their grip a bit so they can run software without Apple's permission or paying their 30% App Store tax.
  - S201 4y ago
    Right, but my point isn't that "we all need to use only Free Software" (even though I think it would be great if we did), but rather that these companies, let's take Apple for example, consist of engineers like ourselves. Why are we not fighting harder internally that these products & platforms should be less restrictive? There's a myriad of arguments about "security" and whatever else that can be made, but even something like in the case of Apple with macOS just having a checkbox that lets you run unsigned code and if you select that then you acknowledge the risks would go a long way in my book. It's similar to how Pixel devices work. There's a barrier to unlocking the bootloader that requires the user to acknowledge what they're doing, but it is possible. It doesn't need to be everyone using Free Software, but we should at the very least be far more insistent that these companies give us the option to use our devices as if they are truly our devices.
esskay 4y ago
- LordDragonfang 4y ago
  If you're referring to what I think you're referring, one of those "hoops" is paying Apple $100 a year.
  - esskay 4y ago
    Oh you can pay them if you like - thats one option. I was thinking more like AltStore which doesn't cost anything.
- TheDong 4y ago
  > Worth noting that you can actually install any 3rd party app you like on an iPhone these days. You just have a fair few hoops to jump through to do it. Can you describe those hoops to me? I have a totally up-to-date iPhone, a linux computer (no macOS), and a usb cable that can connect the linux computer to my iPhone. I found an ipa file I would like to run (say, this MAME emulator here: https://github.com/yoshisuga/MAME4iOS/releases/tag/2002.4 https://github.com/yoshisuga/MAME4iOS/releases/tag/2002.4 ) What set of steps do I take in order to install that on my iPhone?
  - esskay 4y ago
    This is a pretty good guide on how to do it: https://www.getbasicidea.com/how-to-install-ipa-files-using-altstore-ios/ https://www.getbasicidea.com/how-to-install-ipa-files-using-... Although I think you have to use a slightly different method if you're on Linux. Info on that here: https://www.idownloadblog.com/2022/04/03/altserver-linux-gui/ https://www.idownloadblog.com/2022/04/03/altserver-linux-gui...
zanethomas 4y ago
I recently abandoned Apple, went with a frame.work laptop running Ubuntu.
substation13 4y ago
Asahi Linux will be the best of both worlds. I can't wait!
bell-cot 4y ago
75% of my non-techie relatives who have retired from office jobs in the past 15 years - from workplaces where using MS Windows, Office, etc., etc. was required every working hour - have downsized to having only a iPad and iPhone. And they're completely happy that they did so. They mostly just want a web browser and e-mail. They buy ~zero non-free apps. And they want the "freedom" you're selling about as much as they want the "authenticity" of living off the land in rural Alaska.
lairv 4y ago
I have always been surprised by the popularity of Apple products in the programming community, I feel like Apple's philosophy is something no one [from the tech world] should want the programming community to move towards.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

yamtaddle 4y ago

> You pay $1000 for a computer, and you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to. For i-devices, yeah, true. > You can only pay for software on their own store. As nice as exposing the App store to more market effects might be, the app store monopoly enables them to force other companies to be less shitty on the platform (or else abandon it—but it's lucrative, so most don't), so it's a feature to me. I'd rather some of the behaviors they ban were simply illegal everywhere, but until then I like having the option to live the libertarian dream of paying for a private regulatory agency (Apple, that is). Beats having no option of that sort.

ASalazarMX 4y ago
That also enables unreasonable monopolistic behavior, like not allowing ANY browser besides Safari. Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? What about native ad blockers? Why not encourage privacy-friendly apps that don't collect data by lowering/waiving their fees?
- vbezhenar 4y ago
  Because everyone will use Chrome and websites will not support Safari. It happened with IE.
- lemonberry 4y ago
  "like not allowing ANY browser besides Safari" are you saying this is potentially an issue? Because I have Chrome and Firefox installed on my iPhone and MacBook Air. I also have DuckDuckGo's browser on my iPhone.
  - madars 4y ago
    Any browser on iPhone is just a skin for Mobile Safari. In particular, you can't install uBlock Origin/similar there. Every time I browse web on an iDevice I feel like I'm losing 20 IQ points.
  - teraflop 4y ago
    Apple doesn't allow any other browser engines on iOS except Webkit. Despite the branding, "Chrome for iOS" and "Firefox for iOS" are fundamentally different products than their Android or desktop counterparts. They're both just wrappers around the same bundled version of Webkit that Safari uses.
  - skissane 4y ago
    What the parent means to say, is not allowing any browser engine other than WebKit. Chrome, Firefox, Brave, etc, are just wrapping WebKit. The big issue, as I understand it, is JIT. You can run any browser engine you like on iOS, but only WebKit (its JavaScriptCore component) is allowed to JIT JavaScript. Without JIT, the JavaScript performance will be bad; and considering the contemporary JavaScript-heavy nature of the web, that makes any alternative browser engine a non-starter. (I wonder how it is implemented. I'm guessing that WebKit runs out-of-process, and that process has the JIT entitlement, whereas the host app process doesn't.)
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      > The big issue, as I understand it, is JIT. You can run any browser engine you like on iOS, but only WebKit (its JavaScriptCore component) is allowed to JIT JavaScript. Without JIT, the JavaScript performance will be bad; and considering the contemporary JavaScript-heavy nature of the web, that makes any alternative browser engine a non-starter. IDK how it is now, but Apple used not to allow e.g. alternative Javascript engines in apps—you had to use Webkit's. Having developed an app-building engine for Android in the days when some vendors shipped different engines to supply webview functionality (is that a thing? I actually don't know if they ever stopped) I can say I'm extremely in favor of this part of their policy. God that was a pain in the ass.
- dwaite 4y ago
  > Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? It isn't just a privacy argument. Browsers need security exceptions for full performance, such as compilation of Javascript/WebAssembly. The browsers may also not have enough process infrastructure to support their native sandboxing strategy on iOS. Someone can make arguments on whether Blink's rendering engine would have business motivation for an iOS port. However, the sandboxing and javascript differences were large motivating technical factors in Blink forking from WebKit in the first place.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  > Why not allow alternative browser engines that follow strict privacy practices? A few reasons for me, personally: 1) I like the consistency of all web pages being rendered by the same engine and having access to similar capabilities, no matter if it's a web-view inside an app, or in a browser. 2) Safari's a pretty great default for mobile devices, so I don't feel like I'm losing out by being "stuck" with it. 3) From a big-picture perspective, Apple forcing Safari on iOS is the only reason the entire Web client space isn't completely dominated by Google and subject to that—omitting some words I might choose to describe them, for civility's sake—company's every whim (instead it's only mostly dominated by Google) 4) Conveniently for me, I also happen to have no interest in having other browser engines on my phone or tablets, since this one's pretty good, and in some ways best-available, anyway. I have zero clue why I'd want another browser engine on my i-devices, and I've been doing this whole Web thing a while, long enough that I happily adopted and evangelized Firefox back when it was still called Phoenix—normal users have even less reason than I might. As in, I can't think of a single reason being able to install other browser engines would make my time using the devices better. Better battery life? LOL no, it'd be worse. Features I want? Nope, but several I actively do not want developers to even have as an option. I'd rather keep those capabilities away so developers can't start depending on them, so start forcing me to choose between using sites I want to use and avoiding things I don't think browsers should be able to do in the first place (I'm sad Safari's given up as much ground on this as they have, frankly, but again, it's only because of their i-device browser engine monopoly that they have any leverage at all here). 5) Meanwhile, this doesn't get in the way of my using the actually-important features of other browsers, they'll just have Safari's engine under the hood. Not a big deal, or even a small one (to me).
  - ohbtvz 4y ago
    > 1) I like the consistency of all web pages being rendered by the same engine and having access to similar capabilities, no matter if it's a web-view inside an app, or in a browser. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences? > 2) Safari's a pretty great default for mobile devices, so I don't feel like I'm losing out by being "stuck" with it. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences? > 4) Conveniently for me, I also happen to have no interest in having other browser engines on my phone or tablets, since this one's pretty good, and in some ways best-available, anyway. Then use Safari and don't install another browser. Why should other people be prevented from installing other browsers based on your preferences?
fasthands9 4y ago
I'm pretty torn on all this. Obviously the 30% is exorbitant. But the positive effects from it are very hard to see once you are used to everything working.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Yeah, the 30% sucks and is one of many things I wish Apple'd do differently. But... where else am I gonna go? Ultimately, I really wish they had significant, competent competitors for the specific sort of thing they do. I like Apple because government has entirely failed to regulate absolutely horrible behavior by software vendors, so at least I can pay Apple to enforce some basic and largely no-brainer regulations instead, but I hate that the OS/platform market is so screwed-up that there's effectively no alternative that offers anything like what Apple does, and not just when it comes to defending against all-too-common bad actors.
- shagie 4y ago
  Most developers aren't paying 30%. From a bit ago: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-store-small-business-program/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-s... > The new App Store Small Business Program will benefit the vast majority of developers who sell digital goods and services on the store, providing them with a reduced commission on paid apps and in-app purchases. Developers can qualify for the program and a reduced, 15 percent commission if they earned up to $1 million in proceeds during the previous calendar year. --- If you are making more than $1M, then its 30%. If you are making less than $1M, its 15%. For subscriptions... https://appleinsider.com/articles/16/06/08/apple-announces-it-will-offer-app-store-subscriptions-take-smaller-15-cut https://appleinsider.com/articles/16/06/08/apple-announces-i... > Although the company's current 30 percent revenue cut will remain in most cases, once a customer maintains a subscription for over a year, that cut fall to 15 percent, giving developers a larger share of revenue for long-term subscribers, Schiller told The Verge. Subscriptions are also opening up to all kinds of apps, including games, instead of just categories like music services and magazines.
  - fasthands9 4y ago

webinvest 4y ago

skeaker 4y ago
Apple quite literally had a scandal where it was exposed in court that they deliberately slow older devices down to prematurely make them appear obsolete so that users will discard them sooner. I'm sure there are Android devices that do this too, but Apple really shouldn't be applauded for the longevity of their devices.
- falcolas 4y ago
  Their reasoning behind this debacle wasn't entirely braindead (maintaining battery life at the expense of processing power on a degraded battery). What was braindead was not giving customers information and control over if the slowdown was enabled.
- imwillofficial 4y ago
  It was a battery life mitigation solution, that almost all major manufacturers did as well. One which I think is sensible.
- spinningarrow 4y ago
  Wasn't it the other way round? They slowed them down to make them last longer?
  - derrasterpunkt 4y ago
    That’s what they did. They just didn’t told anybody why they were doing it.
- School-Cotton 4y ago
  You are free to believe that that was their motivation, but no such thing was ever “exposed in court”.
- vbezhenar 4y ago

userbinator 4y ago

The PC is sadly moving in the same direction.

tonystarch 4y ago
Can you expand on what you mean by this? Outside of video games I feel that any operating system can do 99% of tasks I need it to.
- voldacar 4y ago
  secure boot with keys outside your control, mandatory TPM chips, remote attestation, etc
  - tonystarch 4y ago
    - giobox 4y ago
      This is over simplifying matters. The technologies used to be optional, but in many cases is now mandatory to use an OS. Windows 11 mandates a TPM, for example - Windows 10 did not and works fine on any system without. There has been a huge amount of discussion here and elsewhere about the Windows 11 mandatory security changes, which themselves are similar to the changes Apple have made to how their own systems boot over the years.
      - tonystarch 4y ago
        I don’t mean to oversimplify, but you’re also conflating “PC” with “windows”. Linux and BSD are viable alternatives as well, in my opinion. Do they lack the user land polish of windows? Sure! But really at the end of the day you’re storing files and opening applications, and the eternal web browser. (Of which, you have 2 engine choices!)
        4y ago

tonystarch 4y ago

madeofpalk 4y ago
There's plenty of Apple criticism on this site. So much so that I find it rather rote and boring to be honest - there's usually very little new or interesting brought up in these conversations, just the same criticism up over and over again. HN is heavily moderated to promote what it sees as "high quality discussions", and Apple flamewars tend to be pretty low quality, so they're deranked.
- tonystarch 4y ago
  - madeofpalk 4y ago
    I agree, meta conversations of Hacker News on Hacker News are rote and boring. Edit: People not liking what you have to say is not draconian censorship.
dang 4y ago
I'd like to see links. I'll bet it's either a case of (1) the post was breaking the site guidelines; or (2) someone mistakenly concluded we censored it. I say that because #1 is the reason we moderate HN posts and #2 happens all the time in the fervid internet imagination.

snoot 4y ago

> tech people who learned to program because their 8088 was completely open and free to let you actually create things and learn about computing, so many of you will defend this terrible situation. There is nothing terrible about Apple making devices my 80+ year old mother can safely and easily use. I have a Mac, and I also have Linux machines. Nothing is stopping people learning about computers. Why would anyone spend $1000 on a computer from Apple if it’s not what they want?

gambiting 4y ago
>>There is nothing terrible about Apple making devices my 80+ year old mother can safely and easily use. I just don't understand this argument. Never did and I don't think I ever will. If apple allowed you to install custom apps, it would change NOTHING for your 80+ year old mother. Literally nothing. Her device would still be just as safe and secure as ever before.
- snoot 4y ago
  Clearly not true. A lot of spyware and malware masquerades as legitimate software.
  - gambiting 4y ago
    And literally none of it would be allowed on the app store, just like it isn't now. Again, it would change absolutely nothing. Scammers would sooner convince his 80+ year old mother to tell them her bank details than they would walk her through the process of installing a dodgy app through sideloading.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- klodolph 4y ago
  Apple lets you install custom apps on Macs, it’s just iOS devices where it’s a pain. On iOS devices, you have to use a developer account to sideload the app and it only works for a short time, IIRC. I’m fuzzy on the details because the places where I’ve worked, it mostly just worked although the experience was way, way better on Android. At one point I was on a team that ran a system for deploying apps for sideloading, and for years I’ve been carrying both an Android and iOS phone, so I feel like I have a handle on these differences, but I also am missing out on some of the problems that our team already solved. On macOS, you can download an app and run it. Depending on the provenance of the app and the security settings, you may get a message like “this app is from an unknown developer” with no apparent way forward. The solution is to right-click the app and select open from the context menu. When you open an app by right clicking on it, the OS gives you an option to open the app. This depends on security settings, but I think this is allowed by default. There’s a lot of malware out there these days and I think it is good and correct that it should not be obvious how to run arbitrary software you downloaded. We know people will just click through dialog boxes to try and get where they’re going, which is way (for example) there’s no button to visit an HTTPS site with a broken certificate in most browsers these days. Some things should not come with instructions, because the risks are too great for unskilled users.

tristor 4y ago

This exact situation is why this year was the first Thanksgiving that I didn’t spend 3/4 of my visit to my parents doing tech support and cleaning up malware. I bought them Apple hardware last Christmas and I’d do it again. In 2022 the Internet is a hostile landscape where trillions of dollars are made on the back of malicious adtech by some of the largest companies in the world and there is no pathway for the average user to truly control their own system. At least Apple’s walled garden is better than Microsoft’s brothel and Google’s crackhouse.

throwthere 4y ago

How does that look like bad ethics? You know you’re buying a walled garden with an Apple. If you care, then don’t buy Apple. That doesn't make Apple's ethics bad. It just goes against your prefences.

sngz 4y ago
i don't think walled garden is the correct term to describe what OP was describing.
ls15 4y ago
I am instead looking forward to the EU forcing Apple to allow third-party app stores on iOS. https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/01/eu-force-third-party-app-stores-on-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/01/eu-force-third-party-app-stor...

buffington 4y ago

> you are only allowed to install software on it that Apple says you are allowed to This isn't accurate. macOS' default security settings (System > Security & Privacy) have "Allow apps downloaded from:" set to "App Store" by default. Selecting "App Store and identified developers" allows you to install anything from the App store, or anything that's been code signed. If you want to execute unsigned code, you can disable SIP (System Integrity Protection) and relive all your 8088 glory days. > You can only pay for software on their own store. Also entirely inaccurate. Almost all of the macOS software I've purchased was done so outside of the App store, paying developers directly.

WaitWaitWha 4y ago
I am not intimately familiar with the Apple ecosystem. This still reads like all or nothing. All as in "App Store and identified developers", or user can turn off "System Integrity Protection" completely. Turning off SIP eliminates any protection. Is that what it means to disable SIP?
- virtualritz 4y ago
  If you want run an unsigned installer you just right click in Finder and select 'Open' instead of double clicking. I'm not aware of any Mac user among my friends who isn't aware of this. Most OSS installers but even many commerical ones aren't code signed because devs don't want to pay the Apple tax.
  - shepherdjerred 4y ago
    > I'm not aware of any Mac user among my friends who isn't aware of this. I don't think any of my non-tech friends would know this.
    - billti 4y ago
      I think that's the point though. Our non-tech friends are exactly the people who shouldn't be downloading and installing random (unsigned) binaries. As much as I love to hack and tinker with my OS, I also appreciate the safety inherent in the Apple ecosystem. That's why even as a life-long Windows user, I bought my Dad an iPad - I know the chance of him getting p0wned via some social engineering attack and having his banking password stolen are a lot lower than with a Windows or Android tablet.

compiskey 4y ago

That’s an overly reductive to prove a biased point. Typical users do not have the same motivations as programmers. The market for connected devices does not have to conform to your expectations. It’s really exhausting pointing out how your argument would effectively force others to produce what satisfies your sensibilities and to protect what you feel is sacrosanct. Programming is “just math”. I don’t need an 8088 to prove its adding, subtracting, comparing memory addresses. All the cognitive structure and literalness of the past has nothing to do with software and everything to do with hardware engineering. That the industry has not clung to your nostalgic ideal does not mean there is a tyrannical conspiracy. It means the industry evolved. Perhaps you’re just on the wrong career path?

sam0x17 4y ago
> Typical users do not have the same motivations as programmers. This is actually very untrue in my experience. I can't tell you how many "normal users" ask me whether there is an open source equivalent they can use so they don't have to pay for X, for example, and many have shown interest in doing what they can to optimize their setup and/or reduce their financial burden by getting smarter about how things are set up.
- compiskey 4y ago
  Oooh anecdata time; I can’t tell you how many times software engineers have just put libs in a dep file to avoid recreating the wheel. Reusing existing software is not equivalent to expecting users who want share pics to learn from 8088 on up. In fact it’s quite the opposite; it’s good engineering to not waste time recreating the wheel.
- grumple 4y ago
  > I can't tell you how many "normal users" ask me whether there is an open source equivalent they can use so they don't have to pay for X I don't think I've ever had a non-dev ask me about "open source". Asking for free alternatives, sure, but it's very rare that I'd recommend open source alternatives for whatever normal people are doing.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

shepherdjerred 4y ago

> You can only pay for software on their own store. I would love to see Apple adopt a more open ecosystem, and I could see it happening in the net 5-10 years. But, nobody cares about this aside from the tech community. The average smartphone user is fine with the status quo.

S201 4y ago

Completely agree with you here. Even in my circle of engineer friends I'm generally viewed as the open source zealot for only buying Pixel phones purely because I can unlock the bootloader on them and root them still. I only have one app that actually uses it (for making backups of installed apps) but it's the principle of the thing: if I bought and paid for a device I should be allowed to run whatever darn code I want on it, not only code that the manufacturer says I'm allowed to run. It's my device, not theirs. Apparently that's a radical position to have these days and I find it irresponsible that software folks of all people won't stand up more for the right to run their code on their own devices without the approval of the manufacturer. As you said, the existence of our industry is due in large part to the openness of previous systems. We owe it to ourselves and those that will come after to ensure this level of openness persists.

bradgessler 4y ago
The perception of "Free Software" is that it's a lot of extra work, which most people don't want to deal with on a day-to-day basis. I don't know many engineers who actually like how Apple locks down their platform—it's just to them the perceived trade-off of "Apple's polish" vs "configuring free OSS software" isn't worth it. If we're being realistic, most people I encounter want Apple to loosen their grip a bit so they can run software without Apple's permission or paying their 30% App Store tax.
- S201 4y ago
  Right, but my point isn't that "we all need to use only Free Software" (even though I think it would be great if we did), but rather that these companies, let's take Apple for example, consist of engineers like ourselves. Why are we not fighting harder internally that these products & platforms should be less restrictive? There's a myriad of arguments about "security" and whatever else that can be made, but even something like in the case of Apple with macOS just having a checkbox that lets you run unsigned code and if you select that then you acknowledge the risks would go a long way in my book. It's similar to how Pixel devices work. There's a barrier to unlocking the bootloader that requires the user to acknowledge what they're doing, but it is possible. It doesn't need to be everyone using Free Software, but we should at the very least be far more insistent that these companies give us the option to use our devices as if they are truly our devices.

esskay 4y ago

LordDragonfang 4y ago
If you're referring to what I think you're referring, one of those "hoops" is paying Apple $100 a year.
- esskay 4y ago
  Oh you can pay them if you like - thats one option. I was thinking more like AltStore which doesn't cost anything.
TheDong 4y ago
> Worth noting that you can actually install any 3rd party app you like on an iPhone these days. You just have a fair few hoops to jump through to do it. Can you describe those hoops to me? I have a totally up-to-date iPhone, a linux computer (no macOS), and a usb cable that can connect the linux computer to my iPhone. I found an ipa file I would like to run (say, this MAME emulator here: https://github.com/yoshisuga/MAME4iOS/releases/tag/2002.4 https://github.com/yoshisuga/MAME4iOS/releases/tag/2002.4 ) What set of steps do I take in order to install that on my iPhone?
- esskay 4y ago
  This is a pretty good guide on how to do it: https://www.getbasicidea.com/how-to-install-ipa-files-using-altstore-ios/ https://www.getbasicidea.com/how-to-install-ipa-files-using-... Although I think you have to use a slightly different method if you're on Linux. Info on that here: https://www.idownloadblog.com/2022/04/03/altserver-linux-gui/ https://www.idownloadblog.com/2022/04/03/altserver-linux-gui...

zanethomas 4y ago

I recently abandoned Apple, went with a frame.work laptop running Ubuntu.

substation13 4y ago

Asahi Linux will be the best of both worlds. I can't wait!

bell-cot 4y ago

75% of my non-techie relatives who have retired from office jobs in the past 15 years - from workplaces where using MS Windows, Office, etc., etc. was required every working hour - have downsized to having only a iPad and iPhone. And they're completely happy that they did so. They mostly just want a web browser and e-mail. They buy ~zero non-free apps. And they want the "freedom" you're selling about as much as they want the "authenticity" of living off the land in rural Alaska.

lairv 4y ago

I have always been surprised by the popularity of Apple products in the programming community, I feel like Apple's philosophy is something no one [from the tech world] should want the programming community to move towards.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]