Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
While it's good to have a solid validation process, it's not always stopping actual risks - but it's probably ultimately better to have stricter rules than looser ones nonetheless

Expecting 100% perfection 100% of the time when humans are involved is not realistic. With anything. OTOH... gravity has a pretty good track record here on planet Earth.
 
Bears responsibility for others' pure conjecture? Really?
Really. Human perception is based on experience. What we see, hear, feel, smell, etc. Rather than making a good faith attempt at self-regulating over the years, in which Apple could have made changes that served the best interest of the company while staving off overly burdensome regulation, they behaved in a manner that just invited governments to get involved. Look, I'm not saying Apple has been wrong at every turn. In fact, I love a lot of what Apple does and accomplishes. And while I do believe some of the regulations that have been tossed at Apple are indeed overly burdensome, I'm also one to remind anyone, no matter how much I love them, that their **** stinks.
 
Expecting 100% perfection 100% of the time when humans are involved is not realistic. With anything. OTOH... gravity has a pretty good track record here on planet Earth.
We don't expect perfection, we just expect common sense would prevail somehow.
 
In a world where everybody is inventing numbers and facts to support their own capitalistic agendas…

Why is Apple not allowed to do the same?
"inventing numbers and fact"...


I see the point you are making, but one cannot make up facts. That is ignorance at best, but more likely just straight up lying.
 
When I bought an app that turned out to be fraudulently described, Apple ignored the clear evidence I sent them and kept my money.
 
And yet somehow, Facebook STILL listens to my conversations and responds with targeted ads.
 
Also does a much better job of keeping iOS users safer than its competitor's users, as much as reflexive haters of closed ecosystems and the EU want to sweep that under the rug.
Fdroid has very strict requirements to be allowed at their 'store'. So you don't have to rely on Google, becaus (better) alternatives are out there. With iOS you have to trust and rely on Apple.
 
The stats are irrelevant. They have a monopoly on the only app distribution platform that is part of a duopoly in the smart phone market and as such must let third party developers steer users to outside payment systems for apps and/or subscriptions instead of forcing developers and users to pay an Apple Distribution tax and if they don’t like it then they can close down the App Store and open up iOS snd iPadOS so users can install whatever apps they want.
 
Going with an app and publisher's track record and reputation could be a start, hence common sense.

I don't understand. Can you cite a few examples?

Are you saying Apple should give a pass to some app publishers and not vet/screen their apps for meeting Apple's security/privacy standards? And instead just trust them?
 
The hard propaganda work, or what are you talking about?
I think claiming that Apple is "gaslighting" when talking about all the work they do to keep their users safe because there have been instances of bad actors getting through the review process is misleading at best, particularly when between the two mobile OS platforms Apple is clearly the safer and more secure option.

Fdroid has very strict requirements to be allowed at their 'store'. So you don't have to rely on Google, becaus (better) alternatives are out there. With iOS you have to trust and rely on Apple.
If only someone had told users that before they buy their devices, then they could make an informed decision about buying into the closed platform or the open one!
 
I don't understand. Can you cite a few examples?

Are you saying Apple should give a pass to some app publishers and not vet/screen their apps for meeting Apple's security/privacy standards? And instead just trust them?
No pass needed - nobody is/should be above the rules.

As an example, me as a publisher have had apps on the store for years - you have a track record of what was submitted/approved/rejected and a history of reports made against your apps (or, in an ideal case, no reports made against your apps).

That reputation system exists already in some way, you don't need to get your apps re-evaluated from scratch when you update them as if they are entirely new and/or as if it's the first time you publish apps.

What I'm asking for is common sense and consistency when you have a solid track record to not get your updates randomly rejected for weird reasons - flag me stuff that cause issues, work with me, don't just reject my update because someone over there deems some text that's been in the app for ages to be problematic out of the blue.

Oh did I mention that the reason for rejecting my update is not clearly explained to make sure I know what to fix in order to not suffer more delays in updating my app?

It's happened a few times where it's something along the lines of "goes against the rules for requesting access to location" - yes there are rules for requesting and using location, we know them by heart at this point, but what's suddently an issue with what I do when it wasn't a problem before isn't clear.

And this shouldn't happen with vetted publishers - unless there's proper communication on upcoming changes for us to adjust and remain compliant. But Apple doesn't do that, they don't care known/vetted publishers suffer random setbacks like that.
 
Just stop with this nonsense Apple

This is such a sad effort to try to influence opinion in their favor.
Nothing wrong with Apple marketing the advantages of purchasing on their store vs. others. I, for one, trust that Apple has more robust systems and processes in place to protect my privacy and my transactions, that some other fly by night App Store looking to make a quick buck.
 
As always, one doesn't decide Android or iOS on the basis of a single criteria.
Again, if an open ecosystem is of so much importance to you that you would use the government to force a company to change its business practices to make the system less safe for the majority of its users, then I'd humbly suggest that you should rank "open ecosystem" much higher on your list of priorities when choosing a device.
 
Ah yes, "nothing is perfect, therefore all the hard work done is pointless"
That's not what I said. Look at the words Apple uses (safe, trusted, protected, most secure). Every single one is carefully chosen to give this illusion that the App Store is 100% safe when it is not. You acknowledge this by choosing to use the word "safer"

I mean, we can see the difference between iOS and Android and it isn't even close. Now you can argue that the more dangerous option is worth it because "competition" or whatever, but it's pretty clear Apple's approach actually makes regular users safer.


Since launching in 2008, the App Store has been a safe and trusted place for users and a vibrant marketplace for developers to grow their businesses around the world. In the last five years, the App Store has protected users by preventing over $9 billion in fraudulent transactions, including over $2 billion in 2024 alone, according to Apple’s annual App Store fraud analysis. This reflects the App Store’s continued investment in fostering the most secure experience for users while providing developers with tools and resources, including a powerful commerce system that helps customers transact safely and securely in 175 regions around the globe. With an average of more than 813 million visitors a week, the App Store is a trusted destination for users to download their favorite apps and discover new ones.

Preserving the App Store’s safe and secure marketplace requires constant vigilance, as bad actors continue to evolve their tactics in an attempt to defraud users. These threats range from deceptive apps designed to steal personal information, to fraudulent payment schemes that attempt to exploit users. Apple employs a comprehensive approach to combating fraud on the App Store, with teams across the company working to detect, investigate, and prevent malicious activity before it can reach users.



I'm just pointing out what Apple won't tell us.
 
Again, if an open ecosystem is of so much importance to you
It is of importance, including a whole range of other things, the latter you constantly ignore. What you also ignore is that it is not a simple choice when there are only two imperfect options.

to make the system less safe for the majority of its users,
This statement is not based on any facts, unless you suggest iOS in itself is a leaking pot. iOS and Android do a good job on security.

I'd humbly suggest that you should rank "open ecosystem" much higher on your list of priorities when choosing a device.
kind of you to makes such suggestion, but see my my previous point (both have bits I like, both have a lot of things I don’t like).



Add to this, that I don’t have the finances to upgrade phones at any time, nor the will to do so. At the moment made even harder, since small phones are no longer released.
 
Also does a much better job of keeping iOS users safer than its competitor's users, as much as reflexive haters of closed ecosystems and the EU want to sweep that under the rug.
The same people that fall for Android scams will fall for iOS scams. I've never once felt unsafe with my Galaxy. I think in this case:
Correlation is not causation
 
Gaslighting from Apple











Wow... that's crazy.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.