Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Privacy Chief: North Dakota Bill 'Threatens to Destroy the iPhone as You Know It'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That was their decision. They chose to violate everyone's TOS, they got shut down until they could agree.
It's as it should be.
Completely 100% false. Read up on the Netscape issue before you comment. And it wasn’t just Netscape, Sun Java issues and other anti competitive practices were brought to the table. But to name a couple:
- Microsoft approached Netscape to convince them to not develop the program.
Microsoft's first response to the threat posed by Navigator was an effort to persuade Netscape to structure its business such that the company would not distribute platform- level browsing software for Windows. Netscape's assent would have ensured that, for the foreseeable future, Microsoft would produce the only platform-level browsing software distributed to run on Windows. This would have eliminated the prospect that non-Microsoft browsing software could weaken the applications barrier to entry.
Executives at Microsoft received confirmation in early May 1995 that Netscape was developing a version of Navigator to run on Windows 95, which was due to be released in a couple of months. Microsoft's senior executives understood that if they could prevent this version of Navigator from presenting alternatives to the Internet-related APIs in Windows 95, the technologies branded as Navigator would cease to present an alternative platform to developers. Even if non-Windows versions of Navigator exposed Internet-related APIs, applications written to those APIs would not run on the platform Microsoft executives expected to enjoy the largest installed base, i.e., Windows 95. So, as long as the version of Navigator written for Windows 95 relied on Microsoft's Internet-related APIs instead of exposing its own, developing for Navigator would not mean developing cross-platform. Developers of network-centric applications thus would not be drawn to Navigator's APIs in substantial numbers. Therefore, with the encouragement and support of Gates, a group of Microsoft executives commenced a campaign in the summer of 1995 to convince Netscape to halt its development of platform-level browsing technologies for Windows 95.
- Microsoft used OEMs to favor internet explorer thus limiting the Netscape distribution.
Decision-makers at Microsoft worried that simply developing its own attractive browser product, pricing it at zero, and promoting it vigorously would not divert enough browser usage from Navigator to neutralize it as a platform. They believed that a comparable browser product offered at no charge would still not be compelling enough to consumers to detract substantially from Navigator's existing share of browser usage. This belief was due, at least in part, to the fact that Navigator already enjoyed a very large installed base and had become nearly synonymous with the Web in the public's consciousness. If Microsoft was going to raise Internet Explorer's share of browser usage and lower Navigator's share, executives at Microsoft believed they needed to constrict Netscape's access to the distribution channels that led most efficiently to browser usage.
You forgot to write "/s" at the end.
But if you aren't being sarcastic, your argument is flawed since you can simply choose where and how to pay for anything—including the freedom to exclude using secondary app stores, alternative payment methods and side-loading.
This bill doesn't take away your freedoms, it increases them.
At what price that freedom though. What is the cost of giving users that added freedom?
For example, I have explained how lower App Store revenue may compel Apple to raise the annual developer fees to cover the cost of running the App Store, which would penalise smaller developers.
When all apps have to go through the App Store, they are subject to Apple’s terms, and consumers are largely spared the behind-the-scenes drama. I don’t see having to navigate multiple app stores or contemplating which App Store to download an app from as being better for the end user.
Not once have I claimed that Apple is perfect, but I stand by my original assertion that having a single locked-down App Store would benefit way more users than they harm. It doesn’t make sense to institute a change to the detriment of the bulk of your user base just to satisfy this incredibly small group of people.
Which Ik guess is what irritates me about this “you don’t have to use it if you don’t like it” argument. It assumes that there is absolutely no opportunity cost whatsoever, or at least attempts to turn a blind eye to the possibility of there being any.
It boils down to a small group of very vocal users wailing “I want this!”
They are either naive (considering how we already have an example of how this would play out in the form of the google play store, and iOS currently dwarves it in both revenue and apps), or incredibly selfish for not sparing any thought or consideration to the bigger picture or how it may impact every one.
Everything has its price.
Let them pass the legislation. The number of people in North Dakota buying an iPhone is a rounding error for Apple. Maybe less. Stop selling it there. People who really want it will have it shipped via eBay or some other seller. Hopefully other states don’t follow suit.
Wouldn’t adding a switch to the App Store make the iPhone less safe even for users who keep it on? I would think so because right now there isn’t really a legit way into the sandbox. Sure Apple is always patching new vulnerabilities but this would be a constant target for exploits, right? Turning it on should have a legal disclaimer that needs accepting, indicating that this voids the warranty and that Apple will not provide support for devices that have been flagged. People buying used iPhones should be able to look them up in this database by the serial number too, and it should display a warning when they go to set up the used device. Can they guarantee something isn’t lurking on the device? It may have been wiped but what if the Secure Enclave was compromised or some other shady firmware was installed? Opens up can after can of worms.
Wouldn’t adding a switch to the App Store make the iPhone less safe even for users who keep it on? I would think so because right now there isn’t really a legit way into the sandbox. Sure Apple is always patching new vulnerabilities but this would be a constant target for exploits, right? Turning it on should have a legal disclaimer that needs accepting, indicating that this voids the warranty and that Apple will not provide support for devices that have been flagged. People buying used iPhones should be able to look them up in this database by the serial number too, and it should display a warning when they go to set up the used device. Can they guarantee something isn’t lurking on the device? It may have been wiped but what if the Secure Enclave was compromised or some other shady firmware was installed? Opens up can after can of worms.
our work Wifi recently suffered performance issues... due to employees bringing Android phones in that had software with virus issues. took the IT ages to log and work thru who it was. stopped our mail working for other users as well.
if you allow any old uncontrolled software on this is the risk.
if you buy an iPhone you know the app store and payment methods that exist.
don't like it? buy an Android phone. simple.
no one is MAKING you buy the iPhone.
as for this issue, if I was Apple, i'd just stop selling phones in North Dakota and wait for the people there to boot the elected officials. shouldnt take long...
if you allow any old uncontrolled software on this is the risk.
if you buy an iPhone you know the app store and payment methods that exist.
don't like it? buy an Android phone. simple.
no one is MAKING you buy the iPhone.
as for this issue, if I was Apple, i'd just stop selling phones in North Dakota and wait for the people there to boot the elected officials. shouldnt take long...
how?
how about an app with an issue on someone else's phone can AirDrop or Message you and have bad code and gain access to your phone?
why open the controlled environment to that possibility?
idiots will try to leverage every opportunity, some for fun, some for gain.
Hmmm!! Let me guess! When you paid for YOUR iPhone, you were fully aware of where you get the apps installed from, and more importantly where you DON'T get the apps installed from! In other words, you were aware that option was not provided. Even if somehow you came from a stone age and you weren't aware, there is still a 14 days return policy. I can also imagine that no one did force you to pay the money and make the purchase. You are asking for something that is not offered (and you know it isn't) If I wasn't happy with how App store operates, I would just look elswhere to buy something that is closer to my expectations.
Fair point.
Here is another example of the iOS security theater.
Apple iOS vulnerability causes connections to bypass VPN | Proton VPN
We discovered a security vulnerability in Apple’s iOS that causes connections to remain unencrypted even after connecting to VPN.
protonvpn.com
So you knew every app that you wanted to install within 14 days and nobody created an app after those 14 days that you would want to install?
I’ve been apart of the Apple family since Iphone 6s Plus I hadn’t now nor ever have any problems regarding apple’s privacy policy. Apple isn’t forcing anyone to do buy their products or use any of their services it’s being done by their own free will! Every smart phone has its terms and conditions if you don’t like whatever may be then you have the right to say you don’t want to get the service or the product. Apple wasn’t invited over night everybody’s aware when you’re buying an Apple product rather it’s IPhone, iMac, iPad it’s Apple’s way only there’s no trashy applications on the App Store there’s no third party apps or anything from unknown sources Apple simply doesn’t play that, and I don’t blame them and I gladly appreciate and love Apple for that I love all my information will be private and that I’m only using what apple recommended. Go to android if you enjoy playing with the unknown leave the App Store alone either way Apple will have the last word you can’t water down a pimp aka Apple
What I find weird lately is the fact that the US is very inclined to shoot it self in the head with all the "big tech" legislation , the US tech is BOOMING in the world , basically #1 all across the globe , once you start breaking up the companies and putting them at a disadvantage the overseas competition is going to take advantage , you think EU or China wont jump on the chance to claw back some of the tech minds and companies if they can ? while leveraging their own tech companies that wont be broken up or anything of that sort , just look at Samsung , they make everything ,TV`s , ovens , appliances , they make DRAM memories , Nand storage , displays , they fabricate CPU`s , they do it all , does Korea want to break them up and weaken it? of course not , as a nation , a strong Samsung is great for them , of course they need to regulate as they still have home competition , but I just dont see them go around and handicap their entire tech industry no matter what.
US officials need to look very closely on how they do things , if they breakup Apple and weaken it to a point where it fails (note that apple are playing the value game , so once thats gone , their small market share is in jeopardy), its a very big lose to the US economy and position in the world , the most valuable company in the world is US based , they should want to keep it that way , the world is just waiting for a chance to grab that crown back.
If the US believes that if they break up or weaken Apple + Google + Amazon + Facebook + other US Tech companies is going to make the competition stronger and thus equal the playing field , they are right but it wont be home competition that will grow stronger , it will be the other big tech companies around the world , there is almost no chance for a small time back yard company to come out and beat everyone at anything anymore , today tech is way too complex for that to work.
The alternative for Apple and Google will be Huawai ,Xiamoi , Samsung, LG , this is a global tech war , the US needs to find ways to keep winning the global tech war , they lost the fabrication war to Taiwan , ppl think , Apple and Google cant lose! , welp we thought the same about Intel.
Interesting to see how things pan out for those US based tech , fighting domestically and globally seems like hell , already the EU are putting hurdles for the US tech companies ,fining them , investigating them , suing them (as they should, trying to help their own tech companies) , CN basically banned half of them.
TLDR - Small time developers are important and should be considered , but the big picture should be more important , the global tech war is real , and if the US loses the lead to EU/CN , it almost impossible to get it back (see Intel vs TSMC), those are dangerous waters the US are navigating , breaking up and handicapping your own tech companies is a risky proposition with much more to lose then to gain in my opinion.
US officials need to look very closely on how they do things , if they breakup Apple and weaken it to a point where it fails (note that apple are playing the value game , so once thats gone , their small market share is in jeopardy), its a very big lose to the US economy and position in the world , the most valuable company in the world is US based , they should want to keep it that way , the world is just waiting for a chance to grab that crown back.
If the US believes that if they break up or weaken Apple + Google + Amazon + Facebook + other US Tech companies is going to make the competition stronger and thus equal the playing field , they are right but it wont be home competition that will grow stronger , it will be the other big tech companies around the world , there is almost no chance for a small time back yard company to come out and beat everyone at anything anymore , today tech is way too complex for that to work.
The alternative for Apple and Google will be Huawai ,Xiamoi , Samsung, LG , this is a global tech war , the US needs to find ways to keep winning the global tech war , they lost the fabrication war to Taiwan , ppl think , Apple and Google cant lose! , welp we thought the same about Intel.
Interesting to see how things pan out for those US based tech , fighting domestically and globally seems like hell , already the EU are putting hurdles for the US tech companies ,fining them , investigating them , suing them (as they should, trying to help their own tech companies) , CN basically banned half of them.
TLDR - Small time developers are important and should be considered , but the big picture should be more important , the global tech war is real , and if the US loses the lead to EU/CN , it almost impossible to get it back (see Intel vs TSMC), those are dangerous waters the US are navigating , breaking up and handicapping your own tech companies is a risky proposition with much more to lose then to gain in my opinion.
I chose this platform knowing its pros and cons. I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who chose it because it is the way it is. Besides, locking developers in app store keeps dev account inexpensive. If they had to allow external stores they'll have to increase dev account prices to keep developing xcode and swift profitable, making it unaffordable for indie devs
Not sure what you on about!! Even grandmas and grandads know how Apple store works, what they can and what they can't get from there. You want a phone that has an open platform for multy app stores, you can look elswhere or create your own.
You are wrong. In perfect world with zero vulnerabilities and secure application distribution you would be correct but then again world is far from being perfect. When Apple distributes all the software you have limited number of attack vectors. However, if anyone can distribute software the whole situation changes. We know there has been extremely clever jailbreaks even with Apples walled garden present. However, when you have freedom to use any private API and any possible attack vector the possibilities are mind blowing. Naturally you end up running some sort of antivirus application with firewalls and IPS to stop the threats but at least for me this is definitely not something I would like to do. Seriously, that would be horrible situation. Unfortunately, this situation would open up new possibilities to harvest personal information using even the regular software and almost unlimited possibilities for bad actors with deep resources.
I don't know if this topic has been covered yet, as I don't feel the need to read through 15 pages of discussion.
Apple does allow for side loading (i.e. not distributed via the AppStore) apps through two mechanisms:
1. Installing it via Xcode. This is completely free, only needing an AppleID to get Xcode and a Mac.
2. Installing it using an Enterprise developer distribution mechanism. This requires the purchase of an Enterprise developer account, but enables free distribution to all users within your organisation.
The first case could easily be employed by all Open Source applications. It's a bit messy but could probably be automated fairly simply via a store like application just like how homebrew or MacPorts works (but I guess via a nice GUI like a proper store). This application doesn't exist which is telling me that this whole issue really isn't that severe but is merely a philosophical or political discussion. Heck, this option is entirely open for Epic to use, but they chose not to. Why?
The second case is employed on large scale all around the world since the last decade through MDM system, TestFlight, and deployments like that. Millions of users are served by that mechanism, entirely bypassing the AppStore. This mechanism can't be used by Epic since the Enterprise certificate doesn't allow for their type of distribution.
I'm not saying that these two side loading scenarios are well suited for all those who complain about Apple's policies, but the narrative that Apple doesn't allow side loading at all is demonstrably false, especially in the case for open source developers and for personal use and testing. In that regard iOS (and tvOS and watchOS and iPadOS) is completely open for side loading, no-one hasn't made it particularly easy to use though, but that's not on Apple, that's on the people thinking that this is a good way to do things. But they are not doing that.. why?
Apple does allow for side loading (i.e. not distributed via the AppStore) apps through two mechanisms:
1. Installing it via Xcode. This is completely free, only needing an AppleID to get Xcode and a Mac.
2. Installing it using an Enterprise developer distribution mechanism. This requires the purchase of an Enterprise developer account, but enables free distribution to all users within your organisation.
The first case could easily be employed by all Open Source applications. It's a bit messy but could probably be automated fairly simply via a store like application just like how homebrew or MacPorts works (but I guess via a nice GUI like a proper store). This application doesn't exist which is telling me that this whole issue really isn't that severe but is merely a philosophical or political discussion. Heck, this option is entirely open for Epic to use, but they chose not to. Why?
The second case is employed on large scale all around the world since the last decade through MDM system, TestFlight, and deployments like that. Millions of users are served by that mechanism, entirely bypassing the AppStore. This mechanism can't be used by Epic since the Enterprise certificate doesn't allow for their type of distribution.
I'm not saying that these two side loading scenarios are well suited for all those who complain about Apple's policies, but the narrative that Apple doesn't allow side loading at all is demonstrably false, especially in the case for open source developers and for personal use and testing. In that regard iOS (and tvOS and watchOS and iPadOS) is completely open for side loading, no-one hasn't made it particularly easy to use though, but that's not on Apple, that's on the people thinking that this is a good way to do things. But they are not doing that.. why?
The consumers are actually asking for this, they just don't know it yet, at least that directly they would know.
Apple monopoly apps store with incredible 30% cut which is enormous margin i would say.
By introducing alternative store, it will at least push Apple to reduce the cut, hence bringing LOWER apps price to CONSUMERS.
I would imagine after the reduction to a fair cut, Apple apps store will still remain the leader.
Aye but that’s not working is it?
I did say “removed a Trojan from a friends Mac”
People like us who post here are usual tech savvy, or more so than the general public.
I get it, you feel nannied by Apple and want to make your own choices.
Fair enough but then as much as you like the apple hardware etc the platform isn’t really targeted at your demographic is it?
If you are “tech support” to family/friends as much as I am you appreciate that nannying a lot more!
Maybe because ability to use freely any app distribution method or form will definitely mean malware... Windows is excellent example of this. Not using some form of antivirus, firewall and IPS in it is no go. Argument about the safety of Mac is not real or valid. Mac’s market share is small fraction compared to Windows so Mac’s aren’t good target. On mobile device side the story is very different. iOS has massive market share and therefore it’s prime candidate for malware. It’s also true that if Apple App Store isn’t the only distribution method we end up having to download our software from multitude of sources. This is hardly ideal from consumer standpoint.
Last edited:
If Apple ends up being forced into letting people install apps from other stores and those apps wind up bricking the iPhones then I hope Apple will turn to those people and say tough **** when they come crying to them to fix everything!