4 ms·

Only because Mac is the only place in the Apple ecosystem you still own your device. Everywhere else it would be "our loss".

bitwize 4y ago
Sigh. To quote from another of today's Hackernewsstories, people don't want a dishwasher, they want clean dishes. People don't want a computer or smartphone, they want the things those devices afford them. From a security perspective, the much vaunted "general purpose computing" reduces to "arbitrary code execution". It's very dangerous, and without some sort of allowlist-based restriction on what may be run on the average consumer's hardware, it becomes a playground for hackers, thieves, and malicious state actors. The era of general purpose computing with consumer hardware is dead. Millions of customers are delighted with their restricted devices. Stop whining and move on with your lives, people.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  > People don't want a computer or smartphone, they want the things those devices afford them. They're entitled to it, I say. Hell, I even think other companies are entitled to make it for them. What they cannot do is turn this layer of abstraction into an excuse for infinite profitability. People don't want coffee makers, they want coffee! That doesn't mean Keurig is necessarily allowed to stop other people from selling pods, though. Especially if they become the primary way that people get their coffee. We have a democratically controlled legal system that holds these people in check - particularly when the market doesn't behave. You can still be right here, but if Apple is taking advantage of this situation to fleece people beyond what can be considered reasonable, then we have to litigate them regardless. Hopefully in the future, Apple finds a way to prioritize things like security while also respecting the user's choice and agency. It's time for armchair analysts and AAPL investors to take a hike. Some of us want Apple to succeed regardless of their monopolistic intent, and helping them requires us to prune their ugliest branches. We staved off half a decade of change with this "free market will fix things" mantra, and nothing improved. If Apple won't do what's right, then we'll be forced to.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    At least in the American system, as long as people have an alternative computing platform (and they have several), there aren't a lot of backstops on what Apple can do to its users in terms of money charged or constraints placed on the devices they manufacture. The market is "computers" and if Apple tightens its grip too far, they run people off to another solution. Everything else is economics as far as the American system is concerned.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      In the American system, you're right. Apple is an international company though, and if enough countries insist that Apple play fair, how can they deny them? The American system led us to a situation where Apple's global presence is exploitative. If Apple wants to get increasingly petty with their compliance, global regulators are apt to get increasingly petty with their regulation. Considering how Apple shrugged off Dutch regulators, it shouldn't surprise people when EU commissions move in with bigger demands. If those demands are unreasonable, then maybe Apple can run off to another market. Nobody will stop you from framing this as a free market issue, but it's a comically small piece of the puzzle.
      - shadowgovt 4y ago
        As long as Apple's a US company, the US law will dominate its actions because they might make less money in the world but the world won't jail them (well, can't jail anyone who really matters to the owners). If they think they can keep providing a better alternative with a heavy hand, they will, right up to regulation constraints. This leaves us with your previous observaation > If Apple won't do what's right, then we'll be forced to. And I agree. And in a (mostly) free-market system structure like the US, the solution is obvious... There's a reason I haven't used Apple as my primary compute platform for approximately 15 years.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  > move on with your lives, people. Without a GP computer? That's a pretty large ask on a developer's site.
sneak 4y ago
You can't install WireGuard outside of MAS because the VPN entitlements will not be granted by Apple for self-distributed apps; i.e. Macs have certain APIs that are already App-Store-only. Imagine having to ID yourself to be allowed to install and use privacy software. What the actual fuck? "Privacy is a human right" is about as sincere as "don't be evil" these days.
- sneak 4y ago
  Oh, there are other issues with self-distributed apps too. I use the Bitwarden desktop app (not the MAS version, as I don't use an Apple ID any longer) and the feature where it can cross-communicate to the Bitwarden firefox extension to enable TouchID login is not available in the self-distributed one. Apple is slowly boiling the frog; every year there are more APIs in the OS that you can't use unless you are distributing via the MAS, which demands a phone number for an Apple ID even to download free apps. I wish the FTC would come down hard on them, but unfortunately Apple has too much money and is too important of a bargaining chip in the coming Chinese trade war.

bitwize 4y ago

Sigh. To quote from another of today's Hackernewsstories, people don't want a dishwasher, they want clean dishes. People don't want a computer or smartphone, they want the things those devices afford them. From a security perspective, the much vaunted "general purpose computing" reduces to "arbitrary code execution". It's very dangerous, and without some sort of allowlist-based restriction on what may be run on the average consumer's hardware, it becomes a playground for hackers, thieves, and malicious state actors. The era of general purpose computing with consumer hardware is dead. Millions of customers are delighted with their restricted devices. Stop whining and move on with your lives, people.

smoldesu 4y ago
> People don't want a computer or smartphone, they want the things those devices afford them. They're entitled to it, I say. Hell, I even think other companies are entitled to make it for them. What they cannot do is turn this layer of abstraction into an excuse for infinite profitability. People don't want coffee makers, they want coffee! That doesn't mean Keurig is necessarily allowed to stop other people from selling pods, though. Especially if they become the primary way that people get their coffee. We have a democratically controlled legal system that holds these people in check - particularly when the market doesn't behave. You can still be right here, but if Apple is taking advantage of this situation to fleece people beyond what can be considered reasonable, then we have to litigate them regardless. Hopefully in the future, Apple finds a way to prioritize things like security while also respecting the user's choice and agency. It's time for armchair analysts and AAPL investors to take a hike. Some of us want Apple to succeed regardless of their monopolistic intent, and helping them requires us to prune their ugliest branches. We staved off half a decade of change with this "free market will fix things" mantra, and nothing improved. If Apple won't do what's right, then we'll be forced to.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  At least in the American system, as long as people have an alternative computing platform (and they have several), there aren't a lot of backstops on what Apple can do to its users in terms of money charged or constraints placed on the devices they manufacture. The market is "computers" and if Apple tightens its grip too far, they run people off to another solution. Everything else is economics as far as the American system is concerned.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    In the American system, you're right. Apple is an international company though, and if enough countries insist that Apple play fair, how can they deny them? The American system led us to a situation where Apple's global presence is exploitative. If Apple wants to get increasingly petty with their compliance, global regulators are apt to get increasingly petty with their regulation. Considering how Apple shrugged off Dutch regulators, it shouldn't surprise people when EU commissions move in with bigger demands. If those demands are unreasonable, then maybe Apple can run off to another market. Nobody will stop you from framing this as a free market issue, but it's a comically small piece of the puzzle.
    - shadowgovt 4y ago
      As long as Apple's a US company, the US law will dominate its actions because they might make less money in the world but the world won't jail them (well, can't jail anyone who really matters to the owners). If they think they can keep providing a better alternative with a heavy hand, they will, right up to regulation constraints. This leaves us with your previous observaation > If Apple won't do what's right, then we'll be forced to. And I agree. And in a (mostly) free-market system structure like the US, the solution is obvious... There's a reason I haven't used Apple as my primary compute platform for approximately 15 years.
JohnFen 4y ago
> move on with your lives, people. Without a GP computer? That's a pretty large ask on a developer's site.

sneak 4y ago

You can't install WireGuard outside of MAS because the VPN entitlements will not be granted by Apple for self-distributed apps; i.e. Macs have certain APIs that are already App-Store-only. Imagine having to ID yourself to be allowed to install and use privacy software. What the actual fuck? "Privacy is a human right" is about as sincere as "don't be evil" these days.

sneak 4y ago
Oh, there are other issues with self-distributed apps too. I use the Bitwarden desktop app (not the MAS version, as I don't use an Apple ID any longer) and the feature where it can cross-communicate to the Bitwarden firefox extension to enable TouchID login is not available in the self-distributed one. Apple is slowly boiling the frog; every year there are more APIs in the OS that you can't use unless you are distributing via the MAS, which demands a phone number for an Apple ID even to download free apps. I wish the FTC would come down hard on them, but unfortunately Apple has too much money and is too important of a bargaining chip in the coming Chinese trade war.