6 ms·

Any argument in favour of the iPhone being so locked down needs to contend with the fact that Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable. All I want i

Any argument in favour of the iPhone being so locked down needs to contend with the fact that Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable. All I want is the for the iPhone to be as open as a Mac. Let me run binaries signed by legit devs!

klabb3 4y ago
> Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable Apple has been working tirelessly for years to retrofit the iOS model to Mac. It's probably just a matter of time, unfortunately.
- schipplock 4y ago
  True, they make it harder for the average Joe, but you can still do anything on macOS, even install 3rd party kernel extensions. But yes, it's quite clear they want you to use an iPad instead of a MacBook :).
- scarface74 4y ago
  Yes HN chicken littles have been saying that Apple is going to force all apps to go through the Mac App Store since it was introduced in 2010.
  - bayindirh 4y ago
    We "HN chicken littles" were also saying that Microsoft is gonna force Secure Boot harder and harder to close the hardware ecosystem for Linux, and we're almost there. Being skeptical, and critical is important. This skepticism, criticizing and warning caused Apple to at least postpone their CSAM scan and reconsider their algorithms. We need to talk, and talk indeed openly about the things we don't like. Otherwise we'll be the real chickens at the end of the day.
    - danaris 4y ago
      Microsoft is not Apple. Their corporate culture is different, their revenue sources are different, and their incentives and motivations are different. "But we said Microsoft would do this bad thing, and then they did it!" is not a valid argument for why we should believe "But we've been saying for 12 years that Apple will do this bad thing Any Day Now™! They haven't yet, but it'll definitely happen Very Soon, just you wait!"
      - bayindirh 4y ago
        I can find you a dozen comments rehashing "The New Microsoft (TM)" which allegedly won't do such thing as forcing Secure Boot further because they have changed, the culture have changed, they now "Love Linux (TM)" and whatnot. Companies are companies. I'd love the future to sucker punch me and prove completely otherwise.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        You mean like the lock downed Xbox where even physical games have to pay a license fee and you have to buy digital games through the store?
    - jonny_eh 4y ago
      > and we're almost there. Meanwhile the only PC I own is a Steam Deck.
vineyardmike 4y ago
Macs are a much smaller target though iOS would instantly be the biggest target for crapware ever. Enough companies want out from under apple that you’d be almost forced to use sideloading to install mainstream apps (Facebook, Fortnite, Spotify, etc), so users would expose themselves to all sorts of scams very quickly.
schipplock 4y ago
At work I need to sign executables with a very expensive code signing certificate. I can sign anything with it though. I still have no idea how that makes the executables more legit :). You seem to be a power user, and I get what you want, but pleeeease no signed binaries! :D For me a setting "I know what I'm doing" would be good enough :) (like on Android smartphones). That way I can install anything I want, and you can install only signed binaries.
- prox 4y ago
  No but isn’t this a case of “more eyes + more gates” , by making the system more complex in number of passing checks, you also make it more robust. Perhaps some middle ground can be achieved.
- mort96 4y ago
  > I still have no idea how that makes the executables more legit :) I think the idea is that if Apple finds you signing software with malware, they can invalidate your certificate, and then your software won't run anymore on anyone's mac. And you know that you will lose your certificate and have a hard time creating a new one if you sign malware, so you probably won't do it. You also know that by default, your users won't be able to run malicious versions of your software, so your reputation won't be damaged by stories of "I installed the Schipplock Frobnicator App and my machine got infected". In effect, it's a decent system to allow other distribution methods than the App Store without opening the flood-gates for malware and trojans. I 100% agree though that there should be some obscure option to run unsigned software, it should be a system acting on behalf of the user to protect the user, not a system acting on behalf of Apple to control the user.
bayindirh 4y ago
> Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable. As a user of portable Macs, I concur. I use Linux desktops, Mac laptops and iOS mobile devices. > All I want is the for the iPhone to be as open as a Mac. Let me run binaries signed by legit devs! That should be nice, indeed. It'll take us to the good old PalmOS days.
MrScruff 4y ago
My parents use a Mac, it’s still occasionally a hostile environment for them. The iPhone has vastly more users, who are installing many more apps. People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac!
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  >People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac! Maybe users should be more mindful and more educated on the pros and cons of dumping their entire private lives in the devices they don't control and are instead controlled by publicly listed trillion dollar corporations who's sole purpose is revenue growth and shareholder ROI. Just a thought.
  - motoxpro 4y ago
    I don't like this argument. It's like saying everyone should be a race car driver because they drive to the grocery store. Tech for most people is like the sidewalk, it's just a means to an end. Also, the more control you have, the more dangerous the device. i.e. a race car. An iPhone is a Honda Civic and I hope it stays that way.
    - MrScruff 4y ago
      Yes exactly. If I thought Apple was trying to lock down the Mac in the same way, or shift away from the Mac I'd feel differently. But I see no evidence of that. I'm quite happy for my phone to remain an appliance.

klabb3 4y ago

> Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable Apple has been working tirelessly for years to retrofit the iOS model to Mac. It's probably just a matter of time, unfortunately.

schipplock 4y ago
True, they make it harder for the average Joe, but you can still do anything on macOS, even install 3rd party kernel extensions. But yes, it's quite clear they want you to use an iPad instead of a MacBook :).
scarface74 4y ago
Yes HN chicken littles have been saying that Apple is going to force all apps to go through the Mac App Store since it was introduced in 2010.
- bayindirh 4y ago
  We "HN chicken littles" were also saying that Microsoft is gonna force Secure Boot harder and harder to close the hardware ecosystem for Linux, and we're almost there. Being skeptical, and critical is important. This skepticism, criticizing and warning caused Apple to at least postpone their CSAM scan and reconsider their algorithms. We need to talk, and talk indeed openly about the things we don't like. Otherwise we'll be the real chickens at the end of the day.
  - danaris 4y ago
    Microsoft is not Apple. Their corporate culture is different, their revenue sources are different, and their incentives and motivations are different. "But we said Microsoft would do this bad thing, and then they did it!" is not a valid argument for why we should believe "But we've been saying for 12 years that Apple will do this bad thing Any Day Now™! They haven't yet, but it'll definitely happen Very Soon, just you wait!"
    - bayindirh 4y ago
      I can find you a dozen comments rehashing "The New Microsoft (TM)" which allegedly won't do such thing as forcing Secure Boot further because they have changed, the culture have changed, they now "Love Linux (TM)" and whatnot. Companies are companies. I'd love the future to sucker punch me and prove completely otherwise.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      You mean like the lock downed Xbox where even physical games have to pay a license fee and you have to buy digital games through the store?
  - jonny_eh 4y ago
    > and we're almost there. Meanwhile the only PC I own is a Steam Deck.

vineyardmike 4y ago

Macs are a much smaller target though iOS would instantly be the biggest target for crapware ever. Enough companies want out from under apple that you’d be almost forced to use sideloading to install mainstream apps (Facebook, Fortnite, Spotify, etc), so users would expose themselves to all sorts of scams very quickly.

schipplock 4y ago

At work I need to sign executables with a very expensive code signing certificate. I can sign anything with it though. I still have no idea how that makes the executables more legit :). You seem to be a power user, and I get what you want, but pleeeease no signed binaries! :D For me a setting "I know what I'm doing" would be good enough :) (like on Android smartphones). That way I can install anything I want, and you can install only signed binaries.

prox 4y ago
No but isn’t this a case of “more eyes + more gates” , by making the system more complex in number of passing checks, you also make it more robust. Perhaps some middle ground can be achieved.
mort96 4y ago
> I still have no idea how that makes the executables more legit :) I think the idea is that if Apple finds you signing software with malware, they can invalidate your certificate, and then your software won't run anymore on anyone's mac. And you know that you will lose your certificate and have a hard time creating a new one if you sign malware, so you probably won't do it. You also know that by default, your users won't be able to run malicious versions of your software, so your reputation won't be damaged by stories of "I installed the Schipplock Frobnicator App and my machine got infected". In effect, it's a decent system to allow other distribution methods than the App Store without opening the flood-gates for malware and trojans. I 100% agree though that there should be some obscure option to run unsigned software, it should be a system acting on behalf of the user to protect the user, not a system acting on behalf of Apple to control the user.

bayindirh 4y ago

> Macs are just as reliable, but far more configurable. As a user of portable Macs, I concur. I use Linux desktops, Mac laptops and iOS mobile devices. > All I want is the for the iPhone to be as open as a Mac. Let me run binaries signed by legit devs! That should be nice, indeed. It'll take us to the good old PalmOS days.

MrScruff 4y ago

My parents use a Mac, it’s still occasionally a hostile environment for them. The iPhone has vastly more users, who are installing many more apps. People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac!

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>People put all of their digital lives into these devices. I really don’t want iPhones to be as a open as a Mac! Maybe users should be more mindful and more educated on the pros and cons of dumping their entire private lives in the devices they don't control and are instead controlled by publicly listed trillion dollar corporations who's sole purpose is revenue growth and shareholder ROI. Just a thought.
- motoxpro 4y ago
  I don't like this argument. It's like saying everyone should be a race car driver because they drive to the grocery store. Tech for most people is like the sidewalk, it's just a means to an end. Also, the more control you have, the more dangerous the device. i.e. a race car. An iPhone is a Honda Civic and I hope it stays that way.
  - MrScruff 4y ago
    Yes exactly. If I thought Apple was trying to lock down the Mac in the same way, or shift away from the Mac I'd feel differently. But I see no evidence of that. I'm quite happy for my phone to remain an appliance.