4 ms·

Overruling one of the worlds richest companies that produce one of the phoneOS duopoly, can absolutely benefit society. In this instance, you can still give Ap

Overruling one of the worlds richest companies that produce one of the phoneOS duopoly, can absolutely benefit society. In this instance, you can still give Apple your money - NOT sideload anything - and live life exactly as before. People - lots of people - just want an option. I love what the EU has done for standardising charging bullshittery. I hope it can make an impact here.

roenxi 2y ago
Not so; I'd pay more to have my family using phones without the option. They don't know what they are doing. I don't want them to have options and neither do they. Indeed we did pay more. They bought Apple phones.
- _carbyau_ 2y ago
  Honestly, this just sounds like another option. Some people want sideloading. Some people want "lock it down so I can't fuck it up". They are just software options. Why can't we all just have what we want? Edit: added commentary below Other general purpose computers have Adminstrator/root vs standard user accounts. Why is this not a thing for phones?
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    Any option will be social engineered into enabling. > Why can't we all just have what we want? We have it. I compiled and installed an open source app on my iphone. There is a barrier which is just perfect because it means no matter how hard they try no one can manage to get my mom to install some shady app that abuses private apis and such in order to hack her unless they first get this app on app store Making it an option would threaten safety and life savings of millions of people who don't give a flying duck about your or my undying love for full hardware ownership but will instantly become targets for mass hacking campaigns ("just press this button and OK 3 times to the red warning") "if you really care about it, you can do it" is a fair state of affairs. If you are dead set on it just mentally map in your head the price of a 1000$ device to 1100$ and be done with it. If you care about these things and insist on using this brand then you can afford it (I am a bit exaggerating the point but just because it seems like almost everyone is on the other side of the argument)
    - fennecfoxy 2y ago
      Hurr durr as if they can't allow you to attach your own Apple account to your grandparent's phone and put it into a supervised mode where you need to authorise for your grandparent to change settings like that.
      - throwaway290 2y ago
        Well most people don't have someone to do that for them... And even if I could do that for a relative I would rather they just had a walled garden device because I don't enjoy doing unpaid tech support
    - DownrightNifty 2y ago
      [Author of the site here] It seems we're actually in agreement here :) You say that any option will be social engineered, and then you go on to explain an option that Apple has already implemented that you don't believe is susceptible to social engineering. Grandma could theoretically install AltStore, and then proceed to install malicious apps from unknown sources, right now, if she really wanted to. But she won't, because it's too complicated. I'm not asking for an easy way to sideload. I wouldn't mind if it was made even more difficult than it is now, in fact. All I want is an officially-supported option to do so that isn't prohibitively expensive. An example I provided on the website is Google's ChromeOS. They make it difficult enough to enable developer mode that it's practically invulnerable to social engineering attacks. It's much more difficult to enable sideloading on a Chromebook than it is on an iOS device. > If you are dead set on it just mentally map in your head the price of a 1000$ device to 1100$ and be done with it No, it's $100/yr, every year into the foreseeable future, and the cost could change at any time without prior notice. If you stop paying, your apps will stop working, so if you've grown attached to and have become dependent upon your sideloaded apps, it's quite unlikely you'll stop paying. The Apple Developer Program is not intended as an option to enable sideloading on your device, and it never was. Apple only wants you signing up if you plan on submitting apps to the App Store, which is a benefit you're completely missing out on if you use it exclusively for sideloading. > "if you really care about it, you can do it" is a fair state of affairs I would 100% agree, if that were an accurate description of reality, but unfortunately it's not. If you can't afford $100/yr, then no, you cannot do it. It doesn't matter how much technical knowledge you have; you simply cannot do it. > (I am a bit exaggerating the point but just because it seems like almost everyone is on the other side of the argument) You and I must not be reading the same website? There is a very large anti-sideloading presence here on Hacker News. Most of it is based on strawman arguments and flawed assumptions, but it's there, and surfaces on almost every thread discussing the topic.
- kennysoona 2y ago
  If your family is naive enough to be duped into ignoring several big scary warnings, then they are vulnerable enough to be duped into something worse. The problem here is not the magical walled garden tech but you not educating your family sufficiently.

roenxi 2y ago

Not so; I'd pay more to have my family using phones without the option. They don't know what they are doing. I don't want them to have options and neither do they. Indeed we did pay more. They bought Apple phones.

_carbyau_ 2y ago
Honestly, this just sounds like another option. Some people want sideloading. Some people want "lock it down so I can't fuck it up". They are just software options. Why can't we all just have what we want? Edit: added commentary below Other general purpose computers have Adminstrator/root vs standard user accounts. Why is this not a thing for phones?
- throwaway290 2y ago
  Any option will be social engineered into enabling. > Why can't we all just have what we want? We have it. I compiled and installed an open source app on my iphone. There is a barrier which is just perfect because it means no matter how hard they try no one can manage to get my mom to install some shady app that abuses private apis and such in order to hack her unless they first get this app on app store Making it an option would threaten safety and life savings of millions of people who don't give a flying duck about your or my undying love for full hardware ownership but will instantly become targets for mass hacking campaigns ("just press this button and OK 3 times to the red warning") "if you really care about it, you can do it" is a fair state of affairs. If you are dead set on it just mentally map in your head the price of a 1000$ device to 1100$ and be done with it. If you care about these things and insist on using this brand then you can afford it (I am a bit exaggerating the point but just because it seems like almost everyone is on the other side of the argument)
  - fennecfoxy 2y ago
    Hurr durr as if they can't allow you to attach your own Apple account to your grandparent's phone and put it into a supervised mode where you need to authorise for your grandparent to change settings like that.
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      Well most people don't have someone to do that for them... And even if I could do that for a relative I would rather they just had a walled garden device because I don't enjoy doing unpaid tech support
  - DownrightNifty 2y ago
    [Author of the site here] It seems we're actually in agreement here :) You say that any option will be social engineered, and then you go on to explain an option that Apple has already implemented that you don't believe is susceptible to social engineering. Grandma could theoretically install AltStore, and then proceed to install malicious apps from unknown sources, right now, if she really wanted to. But she won't, because it's too complicated. I'm not asking for an easy way to sideload. I wouldn't mind if it was made even more difficult than it is now, in fact. All I want is an officially-supported option to do so that isn't prohibitively expensive. An example I provided on the website is Google's ChromeOS. They make it difficult enough to enable developer mode that it's practically invulnerable to social engineering attacks. It's much more difficult to enable sideloading on a Chromebook than it is on an iOS device. > If you are dead set on it just mentally map in your head the price of a 1000$ device to 1100$ and be done with it No, it's $100/yr, every year into the foreseeable future, and the cost could change at any time without prior notice. If you stop paying, your apps will stop working, so if you've grown attached to and have become dependent upon your sideloaded apps, it's quite unlikely you'll stop paying. The Apple Developer Program is not intended as an option to enable sideloading on your device, and it never was. Apple only wants you signing up if you plan on submitting apps to the App Store, which is a benefit you're completely missing out on if you use it exclusively for sideloading. > "if you really care about it, you can do it" is a fair state of affairs I would 100% agree, if that were an accurate description of reality, but unfortunately it's not. If you can't afford $100/yr, then no, you cannot do it. It doesn't matter how much technical knowledge you have; you simply cannot do it. > (I am a bit exaggerating the point but just because it seems like almost everyone is on the other side of the argument) You and I must not be reading the same website? There is a very large anti-sideloading presence here on Hacker News. Most of it is based on strawman arguments and flawed assumptions, but it's there, and surfaces on almost every thread discussing the topic.
kennysoona 2y ago
If your family is naive enough to be duped into ignoring several big scary warnings, then they are vulnerable enough to be duped into something worse. The problem here is not the magical walled garden tech but you not educating your family sufficiently.