4 ms·

I think it's great that they're working to provide some sort of protection against spyware like Pegasus, and investing into cyber security and rewarding bug bou

I think it's great that they're working to provide some sort of protection against spyware like Pegasus, and investing into cyber security and rewarding bug bounties more liberally. It makes me wonder if they'll spend time formally verifying the most critical components of their software for further security assurances. The part about why Apple is against the EU making them allow users to sideload apps, I didn't quite understand. Could someone who understands what Krstić meant please reword it? These last two paragraphs I don't understand, and the first is just for context. Krstić does not agree, and Apple has been explicit in its opposition to sideloading. The idea that people are being given an extra choice – including the choice of sticking with the App Store and keeping its protections – is a false one, he says with some frustration. “That’s a great misunderstanding – and one we have tried to explain over and over. The reality of what the alternative distribution requirements enable is that software that users in Europe need to use – sometimes business software, other times personal software, social software, things that they want to use – may only be available outside of the store, alternatively distributed. “In that case, those users don’t have a choice to get that software from a distribution mechanism that they trust. And so, in fact, it is simply not the case that users will retain the choice they have today to get all of their software from the App Store.”

isodev 3y ago
It means that by forcing Apple to allow sideloading, there will be app makers who won’t publish their apps to the store. As a result, people who must use such an app will be forced to sideload it without the option to use the safer download from the App Store.
- trealira 3y ago
  Thanks for the summary. That makes sense as an argument.
- gloryjulio 3y ago
  Or I could use firefox which is a safer option
  - isodev 3y ago
    No it isn’t, because we’re talking about apps. And regarding the browser ;-), without WebKit, it will probably take Mozilla a decade before they make an iOS engine that doesn’t try to melt your phone (remember how long it took for Firefox on the Mac to not make your fans spin up)
    - lopis 3y ago
      Mozilla has been working on an iOS port for years, waiting for EU to force the platform open. They just can't release it. And their engine on android has been rewritten recently, so I don't understand why it would take them decades.
      - isodev 3y ago
        I was being sarcastic - At a point in time I used to be a Firefox user but after years of suboptimal experience on macOS I was happy to move on. No idea what Mozilla is up to these days, I hear Google kind of owns them, so Firefox on iOS will be whatever big G asks them to be.
        gloryjulio 3y ago
        > At a point in time I used to be a Firefox user but after years of suboptimal experience on macOS I was happy to move on. You might not be using it but the there are still many people that do. Firefox is fine especially when you have multiple OSes and you could have a single profile with extensions synced. How are you using ublock and the sorts of the privacy extensions on chrome? > Firefox on iOS will be whatever big G asks them to be. Has firefox removed manifest v3 or implemented web integrity api because of Google? Or are you saying firefox is gonna do those just for the ios version? Isn't that assumption more ridiculous?
    - gloryjulio 3y ago
      But webkit already ran on m1 macos? It's likely they already have a version working just that they couldn't put it in the app store

isodev 3y ago

It means that by forcing Apple to allow sideloading, there will be app makers who won’t publish their apps to the store. As a result, people who must use such an app will be forced to sideload it without the option to use the safer download from the App Store.

trealira 3y ago
Thanks for the summary. That makes sense as an argument.
gloryjulio 3y ago
Or I could use firefox which is a safer option
- isodev 3y ago
  No it isn’t, because we’re talking about apps. And regarding the browser ;-), without WebKit, it will probably take Mozilla a decade before they make an iOS engine that doesn’t try to melt your phone (remember how long it took for Firefox on the Mac to not make your fans spin up)
  - lopis 3y ago
    Mozilla has been working on an iOS port for years, waiting for EU to force the platform open. They just can't release it. And their engine on android has been rewritten recently, so I don't understand why it would take them decades.
    - isodev 3y ago
      I was being sarcastic - At a point in time I used to be a Firefox user but after years of suboptimal experience on macOS I was happy to move on. No idea what Mozilla is up to these days, I hear Google kind of owns them, so Firefox on iOS will be whatever big G asks them to be.
      - gloryjulio 3y ago
        > At a point in time I used to be a Firefox user but after years of suboptimal experience on macOS I was happy to move on. You might not be using it but the there are still many people that do. Firefox is fine especially when you have multiple OSes and you could have a single profile with extensions synced. How are you using ublock and the sorts of the privacy extensions on chrome? > Firefox on iOS will be whatever big G asks them to be. Has firefox removed manifest v3 or implemented web integrity api because of Google? Or are you saying firefox is gonna do those just for the ios version? Isn't that assumption more ridiculous?
  - gloryjulio 3y ago
    But webkit already ran on m1 macos? It's likely they already have a version working just that they couldn't put it in the app store