4 ms·

Yeah, this is the fundamental issue at play here. I don't care what fees or rules Apple puts in place for developer access to its app store. I care that I'm dig

Yeah, this is the fundamental issue at play here. I don't care what fees or rules Apple puts in place for developer access to its app store. I care that I'm digitally restricted from running anything other than software approved by Apple on my device. If that problem was solved and Apple had to compete with other app stores on a level playing field, that would naturally resolve any issues with their rules or fee structure. The DMA (seemingly) didn't target root of the problem, so Apple was able to easily just sidestep the legislation by saying "okay, you can use alternative app stores now, but the app stores and all software on them still has to be reviewed and approved by us, and we're going to continue to impose conditions (including payment) on that approval". If they had been completely stripped of the ability to exclude software from my device, then they wouldn't have the leverage to impose these new rules in the first place.

turtlebits 3y ago
It's just a different business model. See: game consoles.
- LamaOfRuin 3y ago
  This is generally viewed as okay for game consoles because they are sold at cost or at loss for a large portion of their lifetime. This is very much not true of any Apple hardware.
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    They also are not as crucial as mobile internet devices for people’s daily lives, or at the center of wide ranging critical ecosystems.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  You can play games on an iPhone, but I hardly consider a gaming console.
- Ajedi32 3y ago
  Hot take: I don't think this is okay for game consoles either. If I want to install a GameCube emulator on my PS5 I should be able to and there's nothing Sony should be able to do to stop me. If that means they eventually end up having to charge more for their hardware to make up for reduced software sales, so be it. If they really insist on trying to force their customers to only install stuff through their app store, they can make them sign an explicit contract to that effect. Doing the same thing implicitly via extralegal means isn't an improvement.
  - wilg 3y ago
    Why does this matter when you can buy other computers that allow you to install whatever software you want? Why do all computers have to work the way you want instead of you just purchasing ones that have the features you want?
    - Ajedi32 3y ago
      The computers themselves generally do work the way I want, my issue is that the manufacturers have put in place artificial restrictions to prevent me from using them in any way other than the way they want. I don't mind reasonably justifiable technical limitations. Just don't "sell" me a product and then put a lock on it that I the supposed owner am not allowed to open. As for why it matters... companies get away with all sort of anti-consumer nonsense due to these limitations. Samsung putting ads on my TV's main menu[1] wouldn't be as big an issue if there was an easy way for me to install custom firmware. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/assholedesign/comments/co5aw4/unremovable_ads_on_my_2500_samsung_smart_tv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/assholedesign/comments/co5aw4/unrem...
      - lurking_swe 3y ago
        i’m frustrated by the situation too, but your argument falls short for me. to play devils advocate - you knew all of this when you bought your iphone. Further, apple lets customers return a product within 2 weeks if they are unhappy with it. Your argument would be more convincing if apple suddenly started restricting the device in a different way AFTER purchase. That being said, i’d LOVE being able to install my own apps without apples approval.
lxgr 3y ago
This is a problem, agreed, but I’m not sure if it’s the problem with iOS devices. I doubt that being able to install Linux on their iPhones would address many of the complaints against Apple: Many people do like using iOS, after all, just not Apple’s tight control over (sandboxes!) application-layer software running on it. For example, I use a Mac, and I’d be furious if Apple were to prevent sideloading of unsigned binaries there on macOS, even though I could always run Asahi Linux (using an officially blessed bootloader signature path).
- anfilt 3y ago
  The thing is via Asahi Linux you could use it to boot a modified version of MacOS that would allow sideloading in this scenario. The ability for you to still do that is there even if more difficult. A full locked down boot rom takes that right away altogether unless you can find a bug in the process to jail break it. This is why locked down hardware is such a problem in my honest opinion. My point being apple should not have the right of exclusion after they sell the hardware. The owner should. Apple does not have to make the OS easy to side load on because modern copyright is it's own mess. If the boot rom is completely locked down they are violating your property rights. Further if the owner has access to the keys of their boot ROM they still have ultimate say. Now to take full advantage of that it may not be easy since it's low level code, but you could still take advantage of code some else wrote in such an instance, and considering how popular apple devices someone probably will. Heck jail breaks exist and a lot people applying them never have written such code themselves. They just want to get out the box apple put them in to customize things and install other software.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    > via Asahi Linux you could use it to boot a modified version of MacOS that would allow sideloading in this scenario. [...] Further if the owner has access to the keys of their boot ROM they still have ultimate say. Not if they use attestation! Locking down the bootloader and being able to implement DRM in a hardware-assisted sandbox supporting attestation are largely orthogonal. You can have full hardware access to your OS, but the measurements would still differ depending on how you kick off your boot chain, and Apple could just refuse to deliver certain iOS features to you on a modified OS.

turtlebits 3y ago

It's just a different business model. See: game consoles.

LamaOfRuin 3y ago
This is generally viewed as okay for game consoles because they are sold at cost or at loss for a large portion of their lifetime. This is very much not true of any Apple hardware.
- Nevermark 3y ago
  They also are not as crucial as mobile internet devices for people’s daily lives, or at the center of wide ranging critical ecosystems.
withinboredom 3y ago
You can play games on an iPhone, but I hardly consider a gaming console.
Ajedi32 3y ago
Hot take: I don't think this is okay for game consoles either. If I want to install a GameCube emulator on my PS5 I should be able to and there's nothing Sony should be able to do to stop me. If that means they eventually end up having to charge more for their hardware to make up for reduced software sales, so be it. If they really insist on trying to force their customers to only install stuff through their app store, they can make them sign an explicit contract to that effect. Doing the same thing implicitly via extralegal means isn't an improvement.
- wilg 3y ago
  Why does this matter when you can buy other computers that allow you to install whatever software you want? Why do all computers have to work the way you want instead of you just purchasing ones that have the features you want?
  - Ajedi32 3y ago
    The computers themselves generally do work the way I want, my issue is that the manufacturers have put in place artificial restrictions to prevent me from using them in any way other than the way they want. I don't mind reasonably justifiable technical limitations. Just don't "sell" me a product and then put a lock on it that I the supposed owner am not allowed to open. As for why it matters... companies get away with all sort of anti-consumer nonsense due to these limitations. Samsung putting ads on my TV's main menu[1] wouldn't be as big an issue if there was an easy way for me to install custom firmware. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/assholedesign/comments/co5aw4/unremovable_ads_on_my_2500_samsung_smart_tv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/assholedesign/comments/co5aw4/unrem...
    - lurking_swe 3y ago
      i’m frustrated by the situation too, but your argument falls short for me. to play devils advocate - you knew all of this when you bought your iphone. Further, apple lets customers return a product within 2 weeks if they are unhappy with it. Your argument would be more convincing if apple suddenly started restricting the device in a different way AFTER purchase. That being said, i’d LOVE being able to install my own apps without apples approval.

lxgr 3y ago

This is a problem, agreed, but I’m not sure if it’s the problem with iOS devices. I doubt that being able to install Linux on their iPhones would address many of the complaints against Apple: Many people do like using iOS, after all, just not Apple’s tight control over (sandboxes!) application-layer software running on it. For example, I use a Mac, and I’d be furious if Apple were to prevent sideloading of unsigned binaries there on macOS, even though I could always run Asahi Linux (using an officially blessed bootloader signature path).

anfilt 3y ago
The thing is via Asahi Linux you could use it to boot a modified version of MacOS that would allow sideloading in this scenario. The ability for you to still do that is there even if more difficult. A full locked down boot rom takes that right away altogether unless you can find a bug in the process to jail break it. This is why locked down hardware is such a problem in my honest opinion. My point being apple should not have the right of exclusion after they sell the hardware. The owner should. Apple does not have to make the OS easy to side load on because modern copyright is it's own mess. If the boot rom is completely locked down they are violating your property rights. Further if the owner has access to the keys of their boot ROM they still have ultimate say. Now to take full advantage of that it may not be easy since it's low level code, but you could still take advantage of code some else wrote in such an instance, and considering how popular apple devices someone probably will. Heck jail breaks exist and a lot people applying them never have written such code themselves. They just want to get out the box apple put them in to customize things and install other software.
- lxgr 3y ago
  > via Asahi Linux you could use it to boot a modified version of MacOS that would allow sideloading in this scenario. [...] Further if the owner has access to the keys of their boot ROM they still have ultimate say. Not if they use attestation! Locking down the bootloader and being able to implement DRM in a hardware-assisted sandbox supporting attestation are largely orthogonal. You can have full hardware access to your OS, but the measurements would still differ depending on how you kick off your boot chain, and Apple could just refuse to deliver certain iOS features to you on a modified OS.