5 ms·

As long as users are not allowed to install their own apps, Apple have "absurd tyrannical control" over iOS apps.

by lucian1900 13y ago

coldtea 13y ago
Well, as long as users could not care less, it doesn't count as "absurd tyrannical control" in my books.
- Touche 13y ago
  Users are mostly unaware. You'd be surprised at how many users think Apple makes all of the apps in the App Store. I think the biggest problem is truth in advertisement. If it were properly regulated, getting an iPhone would be advertised as something more akin to leasing than purchasing.
- MereInterest 13y ago
  s/users/most users/g If I want to install software on a device that I bought, I should not need to jailbreak it. If I want to install software on a device that I bought, I should not need to buy a developer's license.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    Well, in the abstract I agree. But if the platform was built by someone else, he gets to set the rules. And if the rules are lax enough, like the App Store is, and people using the platform dont mind much, then we don't have much of a case.
    - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
      That's disingenuous. Other platforms are open; Apple sets the rules because they closed the platform. Their excuse for this was to improve security and reliability(?) SO now they're curating based on subjective standards of questionable merit. If the app meets reliability and design standards, why not let the market decide? Its arrogance.
    - MereInterest 13y ago
      Every platform was built by somebody. If I buy batteries, should the engineer who designed those batteries (or, heck, Alessandro Volta) be able to place restrictions on the use of those batteries? If I buy a car, should the seller be able to place restrictions on which roads I drive on? If I buy flour, should I be able to use it in recipes only with ingredients bought from the same company? Apple should by no means ever restrict the ability to place code on a device that they sell. Restrict things from the App Store? Sure. Restrict devices to only use the App Store? Absolutely not.
erichocean 13y ago
I'm a user, I install my own apps. They're called "web apps", and if you'll recall, that was Apple's first plan. Developers hated it, of course, so now we have the App Store. But it's not like Apple has all of a sudden stopped people from bookmarking a website and using it like a built-in app.
- lucian1900 13y ago
  And they rightly should hate such plan, since it makes their apps second class. The competition even lets you replace the launcher.
  - erichocean 13y ago
    Doesn't that imply that with Firefox OS, every app is second class? And if it doesn't, then why is the app "second class" when run on an iOS device? Phones running Firefox OS do have native apps running (e.g. the browser). Is Firefox OS doing the wrong thing by preventing users from installing native apps? If it's A-okay when Mozilla does it, the same should be true when Apple does it.

As long as users are not allowed to install their own apps, Apple have "absurd tyrannical control" over iOS apps.

coldtea 13y ago

Well, as long as users could not care less, it doesn't count as "absurd tyrannical control" in my books.

Touche 13y ago
Users are mostly unaware. You'd be surprised at how many users think Apple makes all of the apps in the App Store. I think the biggest problem is truth in advertisement. If it were properly regulated, getting an iPhone would be advertised as something more akin to leasing than purchasing.
MereInterest 13y ago
s/users/most users/g If I want to install software on a device that I bought, I should not need to jailbreak it. If I want to install software on a device that I bought, I should not need to buy a developer's license.
- coldtea 13y ago
  Well, in the abstract I agree. But if the platform was built by someone else, he gets to set the rules. And if the rules are lax enough, like the App Store is, and people using the platform dont mind much, then we don't have much of a case.
  - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
    That's disingenuous. Other platforms are open; Apple sets the rules because they closed the platform. Their excuse for this was to improve security and reliability(?) SO now they're curating based on subjective standards of questionable merit. If the app meets reliability and design standards, why not let the market decide? Its arrogance.
  - MereInterest 13y ago
    Every platform was built by somebody. If I buy batteries, should the engineer who designed those batteries (or, heck, Alessandro Volta) be able to place restrictions on the use of those batteries? If I buy a car, should the seller be able to place restrictions on which roads I drive on? If I buy flour, should I be able to use it in recipes only with ingredients bought from the same company? Apple should by no means ever restrict the ability to place code on a device that they sell. Restrict things from the App Store? Sure. Restrict devices to only use the App Store? Absolutely not.

erichocean 13y ago

I'm a user, I install my own apps. They're called "web apps", and if you'll recall, that was Apple's first plan. Developers hated it, of course, so now we have the App Store. But it's not like Apple has all of a sudden stopped people from bookmarking a website and using it like a built-in app.

lucian1900 13y ago
And they rightly should hate such plan, since it makes their apps second class. The competition even lets you replace the launcher.
- erichocean 13y ago
  Doesn't that imply that with Firefox OS, every app is second class? And if it doesn't, then why is the app "second class" when run on an iOS device? Phones running Firefox OS do have native apps running (e.g. the browser). Is Firefox OS doing the wrong thing by preventing users from installing native apps? If it's A-okay when Mozilla does it, the same should be true when Apple does it.