5 ms·

I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement" -- is true. First, I don't see any such clause; second,

I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement" -- is true. First, I don't see any such clause; second, you're allowed to discuss anything that's publicly available, and you can read the agreement without signing it as part of the developer program application process, so the agreement is publicly available and thus can be discussed. You're welcome. "Require Apple to approve every security update, which means that unaddressed security bugs could linger and leave users at risk." Yes, the App Store approval process could cause lingering security problems. In practice, Android -- which has no such requirements -- is festooned with malware and iOS is not. So let's protest a hypothetical problem caused by a solution to a real problem. Apple also requires that your code with signed and checksummed before installation. How evil! "Wrap every app in the Apple store with unnecessary DRM, which limits what users can do with their apps even if the code is published as free software." How is it "unnecessary"? It's how the App Store works. It's what allows Apple to remotely disable an app that turns out to be malicious (and which has slipped through the approval process). It's part of the iOS value proposition -- pay us extra to give you a device that won't screw you.

lern_too_spel 12y ago
> I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement" -- is true. Section 10.4. It's plain English. "You may not issue any press releases or make any other public statements regarding this Agreement, its terms and conditions, or the relationship of the parties without Apple's express prior written approval, which may be withheld at Apple's discretion." Then you create a cartoonishly bad alternative and use that to justify Apple's policies. The Google Play Store isn't "festooned with malware," and nothing in Apple's review process catches malware. Similarly, every application that runs on Android must be signed, but it doesn't have to be signed by a certificate signed by Apple after paying a yearly developer fee and agreeing to an overbearing contract. The DRM is unnecessary because free software doesn't require it, and malware in the Play Store can be yanked off phones without wrapping apps in DRM, so your claim that it's for malware doesn't hold either. (The agreement doesn't restrict Apple from disabling apps for any other reason, unlike the Play Store agreement, which does. Applications installed by the user outside the Play Store are left alone.)
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

lern_too_spel 12y ago

> I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement" -- is true. Section 10.4. It's plain English. "You may not issue any press releases or make any other public statements regarding this Agreement, its terms and conditions, or the relationship of the parties without Apple's express prior written approval, which may be withheld at Apple's discretion." Then you create a cartoonishly bad alternative and use that to justify Apple's policies. The Google Play Store isn't "festooned with malware," and nothing in Apple's review process catches malware. Similarly, every application that runs on Android must be signed, but it doesn't have to be signed by a certificate signed by Apple after paying a yearly developer fee and agreeing to an overbearing contract. The DRM is unnecessary because free software doesn't require it, and malware in the Play Store can be yanked off phones without wrapping apps in DRM, so your claim that it's for malware doesn't hold either. (The agreement doesn't restrict Apple from disabling apps for any other reason, unlike the Play Store agreement, which does. Applications installed by the user outside the Play Store are left alone.)

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]