Apple CEO Tim Cook: Sideloading Apps Would 'Destroy the Security' of the iPhone

[TheSapient]

See, that's the thing. You are not forced to use only iPhone. There are Android as an option, and they are offering more phones at better prices. Competition.

I never said, nor implied, that I was forced to use an iPhone.

I explained how, given a computing platform, consumers benefit from having multiple store options. You used Steam as an example. I explained how PC users ultimately win by having Steam compete with many other options. If PC's were locked down like iPhones are, we would not even have Steam as an option. Or GOG. Or Epic. Or Humble. We'd just have Microsoft.

Yes, I do have a choice of phone operating systems. That does not limit my ability to criticize bad decisions by one option or the other. I can criticize Samsung for selling a phone that had a propensity for catching on fire. I can criticize Motorola for bad cameras. I can criticize Apple for locking out other stores. I can vote with my wallet AND my words.

 

[bluecoast]

Well that's a position also I guess. The government has clearly demonstrated it's knack to destroy businesses, imo. (I used the former AT&T as a good example of what didn't really end up being all that great for consumers). I don't buy the "distort the market". I see this as companies complaining they can't do whatever they want on Apple's ecosystem. (and they shouldn't and Apple should be the gatekeeper to it's products)

Well, we could argue this until the cows come home and probably never agree.

Legislators are going to make a call though if this thing trundles on.

Yesterday in the United States, the legal budget for the antitrust & mergers oversight was strengthened - something that Apple is probably very concerned about.

But there’s one thing we can agree on: it’s best if there’s not legislation & Apple should never allow it to get to that point, as it won’t be pretty.

It’s gone past the point where Apple will win the argument, IMHO.

It’s worth mentioning that prominent Apple commentators/‘critical friends’ like Jason Snell & John Gruber think that Apple should lower their cut, at least. There’s barely anyone left on their side.

I remember Bill Gates refusing to climb down over allowing ‘browser choice’ on Windows around 2000, as he felt that he’d won and why should smaller companies dictate what he did with his platform. It was a massive distraction for Microsoft and arguably was a big cause in having them flounder for 10 years (Ballmer didn’t help).

So, Apple could climb down and make some compromises, proactively - before they are forced to.

 

[I7guy]

Well, we could argue this until the cows come home and probably never agree.

Legislators are going to make a call though if this thing trundles on.

Yesterday in the United States, the legal budget for the antitrust & mergers oversight was strengthened - something that Apple is probably very concerned about.

But there’s one thing we can agree on: it’s best if there’s not legislation & Apple should never allow it to get to that point, as it won’t be pretty.

It’s gone past the point where Apple will win the argument, IMHO.

It’s worth mentioning that prominent Apple commentators/‘critical friends’ like Jason Snell & John Gruber think that Apple should lower their cut, at least. There’s barely anyone left on their side.

I remember Bill Gates refusing to climb down over allowing ‘browser choice’ on Windows around 2000, as he felt that he’d won and why should smaller companies dictate what he did with his platform. It was a massive distraction for Microsoft and arguably was a big cause in having them flounder for 10 years (Ballmer didn’t help).

So, Apple could climb down and make some compromises, proactively - before they are forced to.

It may be that Apple should stand ground and ensure there are changes across the board for every company that has an App Store model, else potentially they can appeal to SCOTUS. Whether Apple makes changes proactively or not remains to be seen.

 

[I7guy]

[…]

Yes, I do have a choice of phone operating systems. That does not limit my ability to criticize bad decisions by one option or the other. I can criticize Samsung for selling a phone that had a propensity for catching on fire. I can criticize Motorola for bad cameras. I can criticize Apple for locking out other stores. I can vote with my wallet AND my words.

There is no absolute right or wrong in the way Apple manages its ecosystem. There are arguments on both sides of it. However I’m with you vote with your dollars and words and the government should stay out of this.

But that’s my opinion and we’ll see what ultimately happens.

 

[exogenous]

People can already sideload on iOS.. some service illicitly sharing a developer account.

That's something fantastic to remember for Open Source adblocking or MITM apps.

 

[Zorori]

In a way, I can agree.

When you login/transact with something like your bank's website/or a crypto exchange, they now require all sorts of verification. On the other hand, when you do so with your phone there is far less in the way of "security measures", because it's deemed a more secure device.

Once you open up the device to anything, it becomes easier to add all sorts of nonsense and what will your bank do? They'll treat phones as insecure and start requiring 2FA keys via some additional device, etc.