Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
over 1 billion users on apple OS devices and the malware creators dont think thats a large enough pool to create malware for?
They do, just not as frequently. Most of these people are going for low hanging fruit with the largest userbase.
 
Then don't buy Apple?


I'll feel much less safe when 3rd party apps suddenly have access to my pretty locked-down phone... (Wallets, sensitive information, cameras).
Up until recently nearly 100% has NOT been Apple. Tons of people don't buy Apple for the same reason. I'm more ok with this will a tablet or phone (I'm still Android) than a computer. I've actually found a ton of use for my iPad pro.
 
How does one know which apps are safe, then?

Closed ecosystem means there are checks and balances, no? Open ecosystem means anybody can do anything?

Just use Apples own app store exclusively (like before) and you're done.
Having a choice doesn't mean you have to choose other?
 
  • Love
Reactions: ewitte
Just use Apples own app store exclusively (like before) and you're done.
Having a choice doesn't mean you have to choose other?
This 100% already it is like that already really. The Apple store isn't 100% safe either through, and they block some things just because of competition not safety.
 
Closed ecosystem means there are checks and balances, no?

No. It means the setting is a closed one — a citadel or fortress.

Shady things can and do happen inside citadels or fortresses.

Open ecosystem means anybody can do anything?

It means better public oversight over the integrity of what’s presented.

This is the bedrock of the open-source software community: the checks and balances come from being able to review the source code for portential faults, bugs, security holes, and other correctable issues.




Panning back: Apple, Google, and other tech entities relish the word “ecosystem”, but an ecosystem is, literally, a biological community of interacting organisms and their physical environment.” That’s from the Oxford Dictionary of English on your Dictionary.app. :)

Folks really need to think through those — pun not intended — roots when following what tech platforms condition users/product to conceptualize in lieu of what those things are actually said to do. They’re business platforms, not ecosystems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harry Haller
Which tax payers are asking for this? They work for us. This investigation is going nowhere and a waste. This isn't he EU

There are plenty of taxpaying companies and individuals that support the DOJ's efforts to investigate, litigate, etc. potential antitrust violations by Apple. Based on your comments, very likely a lot more than you think or want to believe there is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppliedMicro
I have no problems at all with Apple products working better with Apple products...

I just wish Siri did not suck. And it seems to be getting worse.
Yeah, imagine some company created a superior alternative to Siri and integrated it with iOS…
Oh wait, they can’t, cause Apple is gatekeeping that system integration.
The classic App Store commission rates of 30% and 15% were always in line with what the rest of the market generally charged. The claims that there was something "supracompetitive" about them has never been based in reality.

“Support for this study was provided by Apple.”

They didn’t even mention some of the biggest software ecommerce providers even once.
Of the four services that I remember buying Mac software licenses from, they mentioned none.

I betcha there will be no "Apple must allow all of this free of charge" like they did with EU DMA. They will ask Apple to allow access to these technologies, but will not force Apple to make it free for others. So Apple will just charge for access, and then Epic will send their wha-wha complaints to the DOJ and Microsoft and Spotify will join them with an amicus briefing
…because Apple has made it clear time and again that they’re going to charge prohibitive access fees/commissions that make such access by third-party providers commercially unusuable (see their 27% commission on their external link entitlement or whatever ******** it’s called in the US or NL).
If this ends up making it easier for Russia or Saudi Arabia to put spyware on my Apple devices, I will not be happy.
Do you luve in one of those two countries?
They’re most probably way less interested in you and have collected much less information on you than US services.
I hope Apple wins this. Apple brought tech innovation. Taking that away with lawsuit like this would cripple the tech industry in the US.
The US tech industry is mire than just Apple.
And anticompetitive practices by the (formerly and still almost) biggest company in history don’t bring innovation - or help the tech industry.
 
They do, just not as frequently. Most of these people are going for low hanging fruit with the largest userbase.
If the DOJ were to successfully open the ecosystem and allow third party app stores and side loading, that’s when the malware for iOS will EXPLODE.
 
How does one know which apps are safe, then?

Closed ecosystem means there are checks and balances, no? Open ecosystem means anybody can do anything?

People really got to learn the app store approval process only provide the illusion of safety and oddly enough privacy. The OS is where the real safety and privacy is. The App store part going to be blunt the reviews are a joke and more of a pain in the ass. It is not hard to get around or even hide things from the reviewers so if you want to break some security you can get the app in the wild approved then turn on said item. Reviewer never see it or it is not something that protect them.

It has been done multiple times before. The App store only puts one extra step to getting it out but that is really it.

The OS is where the security and privacy are. The App store part is only an illusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harry Haller
If the DOJ were to successfully open the ecosystem and allow third party app stores and side loading, that’s when the malware for iOS will EXPLODE.
How bad did that make MacOS? Because you CAN load software not on the app store without too much trouble. It is just a check box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Janichsan
They haven’t broken any antitrust laws— the DOJ just erroneously thinks they have. It’s a stretch— government overreach.

It will be up to a juridical body to assess whether any competition laws were violated. In the U.S., that’s the third branch of a tripartite (meaning, “three-part”) constitutional government.

Also, a reminder: a government, in a representative democracy, is the manifestation and realization of a public body, a citizenry. That means: individuals, communities, cities, and states.

If the DOJ were to successfully open the ecosystem and allow third party app stores and side loading, that’s when the malware for iOS will EXPLODE.

1) Malware can’t explode in an open-source software environment, because community developers have the direct means review that application’s source code and flag it for immediate fixes/patches if a security hole is spotted (and it, invariably, will).

Close that code — and the development process — from external developer scrutiny, and that open review apparatus is lost. That’s how viruses spread on a closed Windows, from the ’90s onward, and how malware propagates with closed platforms, APIs, and SDKs.

2) It’s a platform, not an “ecosystem”.
 
Because interoperability is better for everyone, and will enable competition.

So much is finally possible with technology these days, yet is still getting hamstrung by gatekeepers and monopolists

Even if one LOVES Apple - it's actually better for them to be in a situation where they need to compete on merits.

Over the long term this will be the better result, even for Apple and it's fans and shareholders.

Apple having to compete HARD is what created the Apple everyone loves.
Except that mobile devices aren’t the ”big thing” anymore. AI is the next big thing and Apple is behind the competition. The DOJ, as usual, is behind the times and is fighting last decade’s battles.
 
Except that mobile devices aren’t the ”big thing” anymore. AI is the next big thing and Apple is behind the competition. The DOJ, as usual, is behind the times and is fighting last decade’s battles.
While AI is going to be big it doesn't have as large an impact on people's lives the way mobile phones do. AI is likely to supplement and enhance rathe than replace the importance of mobile phones over the next few years (though in the long term some AI powered thing might fully replace phones I wouldn't bet on it being soon)
 
Except that mobile devices aren’t the ”big thing” anymore. AI is the next big thing and Apple is behind the competition. The DOJ, as usual, is behind the times and is fighting last decade’s battles.

That’s because it’s the legislative branch (with legislation) and, remedially, the executive branch (vis-à-vis executive orders), to address a new technological paradigm with regulatory oversight, firmly and early, before it turns into an anti-competitive, hydra-headed juggernaut necessitating a judicial review.

Until fairly recently, legislative oversight was lax and hands-off in many jurisdictions world-wide for tech like always-online glass phones and the app platforms on which they depend. The GPDR was, probably, among the earliest major pieces of legislation to begin to rein in the online realm with some regulatory oversight and to look after the public interest.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.