4 ms·
If you’re required to install software on your phone for work then your employer should be legally required to pay for your phone. And then if you want your own
by waprin 3y ago
If you’re required to install software on your phone for work then your employer should be legally required to pay for your phone. And then if you want your own phone you pay for it yourself. And if your employers IT team lets corporate devices get malware that’s on them. This is a weird edge case to get hung up on.
You’re making a very simple issue way more complicated than it needs to be. Having Apple spin out EU specific new corporate entities with unclear relationships to its parent company sounds extremely complex.
Requiring Apple to allow people to install apps they want on their own device is pretty simple and should be a fundamental expectation of a free society.
If normal user wants the walled garden Apple experience, that’s fine. Make it unintuitive to install third party apps. Require checking a big red disclaimer that you might brick your phone. But just have some sort of path where if party A made an app and party B wants it on the device they paid a lot of money for, they can do that without some unqualified drone in Cupertino blocking it .
Countless examples of the App Store review being broken , and just on principle, Apple has what’s effectively a monopoly on mobile phones in that you can’t make a mobile app and ignore iPhone and for them to unilaterally decide all software that’s allowed is way too much power.
Somehow Microsoft went to the Supreme Court for putting IE on the desktop but Apple is off the hook for a complete lockdown. At least you could download Netscape on Windows 95! What Apple is doing is like if AOL and AOL keywords became the only entry point to the web. Then you go on Hacker News and people say that’s s good thing because AOL only allows quality websites and otherwise people make malware and scam websites. It doesn’t matter, it’s too much power for one company and mobile phones are more critical to society in 2023 than the web was in the 90s. Mobile phones are not appliances.
It’s still unfathomable to me this is even a conversation on this website. Apples complete lockdown of the most important computing devices is plainly bad for consumers and society.
- quitit 3y agoI'm making a pretty valid point(note Android's outsized malware share) and we'll get to see it play out next year in the EU. It's interesting to me that your core argument is about making a choice whether or not to embrace side-loading and 3rd party app stores. However aren't users making this choice when they buy the phone to begin with. Side loading and 3rd party app stores aren't a secret, many Android manufacturers use this as a selling point and include their own stores baked-in. I'm somehow to believe that users are simultaneously clever and dumb - and I'm not buying it.
- Guvante 3y agoI like how you call users dumb for choosing Apple and clever for wanting to sideload. Or how else do you claim there is two sides here? Pretending that Apple is protecting consumers is silly, they have repeatedly said internally the lock is for revenue alone. No claim of security protection has lasted past "wouldn't sideloaded apps be sandboxed the same as App Store apps and thus have the same security overall"? (Apple failed to counter that point)
- quitit 3y ago>I like how you call users dumb for choosing Apple and clever for wanting to sideload. That's clearly not what is written, don't invent a false narrative with your lack of comprehension skills. Also going to need a citation for this beauty: >"they [apple] have repeatedly said internally the lock is for revenue alone" But judging from your reading skills earlier, I don't have confidence in it being forthcoming.
- Guvante 3y agoPoking fun at the bad phrase. There was no dumb in that choice. The reality is the author dismissed Apple supporting side loading as fundamentally impossible in a thread talking about how Apple should offer more choices. Calling users dumb for wanting side loading on Apple is ridiculous on its face. Users didn't choose Apple to side load they might have sacrificed side loading to get Apple but calling them dumb for making a choice is ridiculous. Apple makes $86 billion from the App Store a year. That is a quarter of their revenue from iPhone sales. No shot a 25% increase in revenue with phenomenally higher margins isn't of extreme importance to Apple.
- seec 3y agoThis guy is a dangerous zealot. He attacked your "reading comprehension" because he doesn't have any real argument that is not about protecting their trillion dollars master no matter what. It's a bit unreal seeing people like him exist everywhere.
- 3y ago
- judge2020 3y ago> If you’re required to install software on your phone for work then your employer should be legally required to pay for your phone. And then if you want your own phone you pay for it yourself. And if your employers IT team lets corporate devices get malware that’s on them. This is a weird edge case to get hung up on. I'll support any sideloading regulation that includes all of these protections. As it stands this is only a law in some countries/regions and certainly not something everyone will be protected by if they happen to be outside of EU (and maybe US) jurisdiction.