Apple Privacy Chief: North Dakota Bill 'Threatens to Destroy the iPhone as You Know It'

[dk001]

Would you want to mess with Ransomware or a severely slow phone if you need to call 911? I seriously question the thought process on some people here that don't realize that a phone should have a bit more security than computers do.

This isn't a hyperbolic argument. Working in IT security you need to talk about these risks. What is an important thing an iPhone does that a computer cannot do - the ability to call (ignoring calling from Macs since its still THROUGH the phone here). What is a type of phone call that is absolutely critical - emergency services. How do we combat the risk of a phone not working due to a malicious app when someone needs to call 911 NOW - we will do our BEST (nothing is 100% even laws that should prevent murder) to create a safe store for people to get apps.

And Apple chose the right mitigation of that risk. If you don't like it, there is Android.

LMAO!!!!
Please dismount.
Next time read my post. The entire post.
I already own and use iOS, iPadOS, MacOS, Windows, (add a couple versions of Linux too).

Like I posted, fearmongering. You sir(?) are one of those.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

So is this one of ALEC's made to order pieces of 'legislation' (*COUGH* *COUGH*)?

ALEC specializes in custom written 'legislation' to address certain hot button issues of the hard right and the rapacious idle rich. 'Stand your ground' was one of their victories.

But I fail to see how hobbling Apple ends up being a win-win for anyone. It will reduce the value of having an Apple device, and likely reduce sales, and end up putting many people out of work. People like engineers, support people, sales people, management, etc... Not to mention the effects on the Google Android space, although I'm sure it will be somewhat less. It seems crazy for so many people to spend so much time trying to kill Apple.

 

[I7guy]

When is the last time you have used Windows? I haven't used anti-virus (with exception of build in Windows Defender), firewall and IPS.

I'm using windows now and admittedly have had very few viruses on windows, and none that have trashed the system. So it does happen.

Your App Store only is only way to prevent malware is invalid. There were cases where malware ended up in App Store. The very idea that once give people ability to install app using other method must leads to malware infestation is false.

This does not invalidate the app store model. Trying to suggest that because devs were dishonest, malware crept into apps in the app store or someone penetrated Apple's systems should be the cause for disbanding the Apple store is silly.

You never argue risk of being cheated, being poisoned, being sold something fake etc from real world stores.

Chicago Tylenol murders - Wikipedia

Would you argue that only government sanctioned supermarket, computer stores, car dealers? Would you argue banning all other stores?

Moving the goalposts. Apple built their entire ecosystem, that has stood legally for a number of years.

What is the difference between app sold in App Store and real world product sold in variety stores?

One is digital and one isn't. How people communicate with retailers is to shop with their wallet. The same should be said for tech companies.

 

[Aoligei]

Apple doesn't ban competitive apps and what Microsoft did was different even if some try to paint the broad stroke of big corporations bullying customers and vendors.

For an analogy you want to get a single can of some product, but you are in Costco and can only buy a case. Do you think one can legislate Costco to sell single items or do you go somewhere else to buy your product?

Basically because some developers don't like Apple's system and want access to Apple customers, infrastructure, services without paying Apple, they are for legislation. Similarly, some customers want to buy an Apple product but resent the way the ecosystem works. Third, some don't own any Apple products, but weigh on these items without any skin in the game.

In the first case, I hope Apple prevails, it is entitled to run it's ecosystem the way it sees fit. In the second case it's great there is competition.

Did Microsoft ever ban Netscape running on Windows? Yes, Microsoft did some under the table deals, but Microsoft never banned competitive software running on Windows.

But there is real risk that Apple banning software on iOS for whatever reasons. Apple has banned multiple apps, because of duplicated functionalities.

What Apple does on App Store only is no difference than what Microsoft essential using its market power to force PC vendors using Windows. Apple has market power and influence to force developer do things they are not necessary happy to.

Apple can see how their App Store operating, so does Costco. But you can't argue that only Costco is permitted to operate where all other supermarket are banned. Government can't force Costco to sell single can coke, but government can mandate coke being sold else where. Government can't force Apple sell certain apps, but government can mandate app cane sold elsewhere inside App Store. Your single can example is not logical.

Apple has market power and muscle to influence market, influence decision of smaller and medium size developer. If Apple are allowed to use its market power, then why not Microsoft.

Apple is basically monopoly within Apple's ecosystem. Not so much for other open software. Google doesn't have fully control of its own Android, Microsoft doesn't fully control Windows and Apple doesn't fully control macOS.

 

[Aoligei]

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!

Apple doesn't have to fix everything if it not their fault. Apple is doing now and there is no difference with people install apps from other stores.

Apple won't fix your phone if you have 3rd party batter, 3rd party display. Apple won't fix your phone if you have app installed from other store.

So your argument is invalid

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

When is the last time you have used Windows? I haven't used anti-virus (with exception of build in Windows Defender), firewall and IPS.

Your App Store only is only way to prevent malware is invalid. There were cases where malware ended up in App Store. The very idea that once give people ability to install app using other method must leads to malware infestation is false.

You never argue risk of being cheated, being poisoned, being sold something fake etc from real world stores. Would you argue that only government sanctioned supermarket, computer stores, car dealers? Would you argue banning all other stores?

What is the difference between app sold in App Store and real world product sold in variety stores?

I had an early Windows Phone, and am grateful that Apple has created an entire ecosystem around the iPhone to help insure things work when they are supposed to. I hated the Windows Phone system. It was unreliable, unstable, and just craptastic.

I lost my address book several times, and once on BOTH the phone and the computer. The apps hardly ever worked, and the whole experience was just so demoralizing. I actually began to believe that the Moon landing were faked, because here int he post-Apollo era, America can't even get a simple cell phone to work reliably. What a hot mess.

So, sure, strip the Apple App Store from existence. Hobble Apple. Drag all of Apple's users down into the sewer that was life without someone fighting for their customers. I value Apple's App Store. If people don't want it, there are options other than killing the iPhone for the rest of us.

 

[I7guy]

Did Microsoft ever ban Netscape running on Windows? Yes, Microsoft did some under the table deals, but Microsoft never banned competitive software running on Windows.

Is apple doing under the table deals? That is why painting the two as the same is not equivalent. But it's hard to debunk half-truths.

But there is real risk that Apple banning software on iOS for whatever reasons. Apple has banned multiple apps, because of duplicated functionalities.

There is a real risk. Meaning the probability is greater than zero. So if that is really, really the case I think there is remediation in the court systems. And again, it's Apples' platform, but I believe if they act in an anti-competitive manner they will bring injury to themselves.

What Apple does on App Store only is no difference than what Microsoft essential using its market power to force PC vendors using Windows. Apple has market power and influence to force developer do things they are not necessary happy to.

Then the developer doesn't have to enroll in the Apple developer program.

Apple can see how their App Store operating, so does Costco. But you can't argue that only Costco is permitted to operate where all other supermarket are banned. Government can't force Costco to sell single can coke, but government can mandate coke being sold else where. Government can't force Apple sell certain apps, but government can mandate app cane sold elsewhere inside App Store. Your single can example is not logical.

The above is a nonsequiter. The government is going to legislate the sale of coca-cola?

Apple has market power and muscle to influence market, influence decision of smaller and medium size developer. If Apple are allowed to use its market power, then why not Microsoft.

Who says Microsoft doesn't use it's market power?

Apple is basically monopoly within Apple's ecosystem.

Is this an opinion or legal fact?

Not so much for other open software. Google doesn't have fully control of its own Android, Microsoft doesn't fully control Windows and Apple doesn't fully control macOS.

Think this is apples and oranges comparison.

 

[Osamede]

So is this one of ALEC's made to order pieces of 'legislation' (*COUGH* *COUGH*)?

ALEC specializes in custom written 'legislation' to address certain hot button issues of the hard right and the rapacious idle rich. '

Bingo.

This is the same old legislative corruption game. Got money and don’t want to do the hard work to innovate ? Buy the laws you need to pull back innovators or rip off consumers.

Sesking of which has North Dakota legislators ever led in defending consumer interests? Nope.

So we all know what this is really about. Political corruption aimed at a fat target. This country stinks.

 

[bookofxero]

"Apple does not allow apps to be installed on iOS devices outside of the App Store and there are no alternate app store options that are available."

That is inaccurate at best. iPhone was initially intended to support webapps, which are still an option. Table any arguments about functionality of those apps as they are irrelevant to the discussion. What is relevant is that the technology and means have always been there and allowed, full stop.
In addition, as others have pointed out, Enterprises have the ability to sideload apps. I think this is a weaker stance than webapps because of the restrictions and requirements for Enterprise apps and managed devices.
Lastly, it has been thoroughly shown that Apple's fees are fairly standard across not just digital, but physical retail stores as well.
I don't have time to read through the 400+ preceding comments, so apologies if any of this has already been raised and/or discussed.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Did Microsoft ever ban Netscape running on Windows? Yes, Microsoft did some under the table deals, but Microsoft never banned competitive software running on Windows.

But there is real risk that Apple banning software on iOS for whatever reasons. Apple has banned multiple apps, because of duplicated functionalities.

What Apple does on App Store only is no difference than what Microsoft essential using its market power to force PC vendors using Windows. Apple has market power and influence to force developer do things they are not necessary happy to.

Apple can see how their App Store operating, so does Costco. But you can't argue that only Costco is permitted to operate where all other supermarket are banned. Government can't force Costco to sell single can coke, but government can mandate coke being sold else where. Government can't force Apple sell certain apps, but government can mandate app cane sold elsewhere inside App Store. Your single can example is not logical.

Apple has market power and muscle to influence market, influence decision of smaller and medium size developer. If Apple are allowed to use its market power, then why not Microsoft.

Apple is basically monopoly within Apple's ecosystem. Not so much for other open software. Google doesn't have fully control of its own Android, Microsoft doesn't fully control Windows and Apple doesn't fully control macOS.

Microsoft gave their own programs access to secret API's. They gave special deals to computer vendors to try to sell more copies of Office. They did almost everything they could to provide an advantage to their own programs over those from their competitors. As if many of them were really in competition. Microsoft used their muscle to squash perceived competitors like someone stomping on an ant on a sidewalk. They abused their status as OS creator.

They were sued. The case was going against them, until a change in government allowed them a way out of accountability. The incoming administration blinked, and Microsoft largely walked away from their crimes.

There isn't much comparison between Microsoft and Apple.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Bingo.

This is the same old legislative corruption game. Got money and don’t want to do the hard work to innovate ? Buy the laws you need to pull back innovators or rip off consumers.

Sesking of which has North Dakota legislators ever led in defending consumer interests? Nope.

So we all know what this is really about. Political corruption aimed at a fat target. This country stinks.

I agree with you. Political corruption seems to be the number one occupation of some politicians. It's damn sad that some states are almost literally third world countries, and the electorate keeps sending the same idiots back to DC, and their state houses. You would think that they would eventually wake up and realize the people holding their faces in the toilet are the people making millions off of their tenure. It's them that insure the electorate is ignorant, unemployed, sick, angry, poor, and very well armed...

 

[michaeljk]

The North Dakota Senate this week introduced a new bill that would prevent Apple and Google from requiring developers to use their respective app stores and payment methods, paving the way for alternative app store options, reports The Bismarck Tribune.

According to Senator Kyle Davison, who introduced Senate Bill 2333 yesterday, the legislation is designed to "level the playing field" for app developers in North Dakota and shield customers from "devastating, monopolistic fees imposed by big tech companies," which refers to the cut that Apple and Google take from developers.

Specifically, the bill would prevent Apple from requiring a developer to use a digital application distribution platform as the exclusive mode of distributing a digital product, and it would keep the company from requiring developers to use in-app purchases as the exclusive mode of accepting payment from a user. There's also wording preventing Apple from retaliating against developers who choose alternate distribution and payment methods.

Apple Chief Privacy Engineer Erik Neuenschwander spoke out against the bill, saying that it "threatens to destroy the iPhone as you know it" by requiring changes that would "undermine the privacy, security, safety, and performance" of the iPhone.

Neuenschwander said that Apple "works hard" to keep bad apps from the App Store, and North Dakota's bill would "require us to let them in."

Apple does not allow apps to be installed on iOS devices outside of the App Store and there are no alternate app store options that are available. Apple reviews every app that is made available for its customers to download, something that would not happen with a third-party app store option.

Apple also does not let app developers accept payments through methods other than in-app purchase except in select situations, a policy that has led to Apple's legal fight with Epic Games. Epic Games added an alternate payment method to Fortnite last year, leading the app to be banned from the App Store.

Basecamp co-founder David Heinemeier Hansson, who was also embroiled in a legal fight with Apple over email app "HEY" last year, testified in favor of SB 2333 and said that it gives him hope that "tech monopolies aren't going to rule the world forever."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1359203441827078145

In 2020, Apple faced a U.S. antitrust inquiry into its App Store fees and policies, which resulted in a 450 page report calling for new antitrust laws focused on promoting fair competition in digital markets, strengthening laws related to mergers and monopolization, and restoring vigorous oversight and enforcement of antitrust law.

No federal legislation has been introduced as of yet, and the North Dakota Senate committee did not take action on the bill. Senator Jerry Klein said that there's "still some mulling to be done" in reference to the bill.

Article Link: Apple Privacy Chief: North Dakota Bill 'Threatens to Destroy the iPhone as You Know It'

Easy solution: Apple requires any iPhone user to agree that, if they decide to download apps from a nonApple App Store, they waive the right to technical support from Apple. There'd still be basic hardware support, but that's it.

 

[Denzo]

This is fineJust have the regular App Store and then have another app for secondary market developers I think it’s fair Apple gets there cut since they have to manage all the customer service but if the secondary market proves better support and better prices than why not

 

[dk001]

I'm using windows now and admittedly have had very few viruses on windows, and none that have trashed the system. So it does happen.

This does not invalidate the app store model. Trying to suggest that because devs were dishonest, malware crept into apps in the app store or someone penetrated Apple's systems should be the cause for disbanding the Apple store is silly.

Chicago Tylenol murders - Wikipedia


Moving the goalposts. Apple built their entire ecosystem, that has stood legally for a number of years.

One is digital and one isn't. How people communicate with retailers is to shop with their wallet. The same should be said for tech companies.

One aspect I have not seen mentioned and wonder how it plays out across the user base. Overall device use - evolution.

iOS has some issues (ongoing bugs) and there are things I need to do, well, not need, rather want to do that iOS makes difficult. A big set of reasons my main device is Android. So while I own and like my iPhone, it is no longer my main because of Apple’s limitations; call them privacy or protection or. The apps aren’t there or limitations in iOS itself. I don’t Jailbreak anywhere near what I used to. It isn’t that Apple tries to make it harder or places like Cydia don’t have the app/function I am looking for, rather I can get the functions / apps I want elsewhere. That is usually the Google Play or “direct from the mfg”.

I wonder how many users have moved or reduced their use of iOS …

Someone also mentioned about phone calls. I do about as much calling from my pc as I do my mobiles.

 

[macjoshua]

I'm ok with it, if Apple is allowed to completely sandbox apps that aren't from the App Store (e.g. camera, gps, system settings, Messages...) - and if Apple can void your warranty or deny support due to unauthorized software.

 

[Ethosik]

It depends on what developers do with that freedom.

Some say it works well as it is on the Mac, but I don't totally agree. I think the locked approach provides a better experience.

For example, to use Photoshop, you're forced to install the Creative Cloud app to update it. I don't like having apps running in the background that doesn't serve any other purpose than managing a single company's apps.

But with some other apps, like JetBrains apps, each app is standalone and has its own updater, which is perfectly fine.

Agreed. Why do you think my entire family wanted to have my Grandma use Windows 10 S which IS locked down. We got tired of calls every week for issues.

 

[subi257]

This is comedy. 🤡

So long as Android exists, there's a reasonable opportunity for Apple to say "there's a choice."

Take that a step further....as long as Samsung, Google, Xiaomi, Huawei, etc make smart phones, Apple is not a monopoly.

 

[subi257]

Yes, yes, I have heard this one before, but why do we accept it on our phones but not on our computers?

Write your own OS, create your own phone, create your own social network, create your own web hosting service, create your own data center, create your own power company, create your own internet.

Where does it end? Create your own....country?

Oh yeah, and don't expect to be able to make those expenses back in use cost to the customer

 

[coachgq]

No sarcasm here

But I kinda expect that if we give people that option, some will manage to mess up their devices and then will complain that the Apple ecosystem has become messy / confusing / unsafe.

I'm all for it as long as people know what are the risks and promise not to complain, so Apple won't waste any time dealing with these issues and can continue to fully focus on the App store for all of us that don't need to use an alternative store.

That’s a great response and solution. Because people would. They will mess their stuff up and then expect Apple to fix it.

 

[Erik Martino]

“ Devastating fees “ ? Lol... the App Store has paved the path for millions of the developers to make more money than they would have ever dreamed of .... millions and in some cases billions of dollars!!!
On top it provides the piece of mind for those who choose to be on Apple’s secure walled garden platform! A distinguishing factor most of us are willing to pay a premium for!

Payment options and alternative app stores should be separated here. There is absolutely no reason only to have one payment option and one with extremely high fees that is only viable because it holds a monopoly. This situation is holding back technologies like peer to peer payment systems and takes a deep cut of profits from app developers and content providers.

About app stores. This is more complicated. However as long as there are restrictions that for example disallows alternative browser engines, then some kind of change is needed.

 

[ignatius345]

And it is just easy when I get my new computer to go to the Apple App Store and click "download, download, download" dozens of times instead of logging in to dozens of websites and downloading separately.

I know, every time I'm constantly setting up one of my many brand new computers without restoring it from a backup, this saves me a great deal of time.

 

[spullum]

This is a really good thing. This would stop some of their monopolistic practices, which would be good for both consumers and developers. Apple allows registered developers to install their own software on their iPhones for testing purposes. Apple could simply release a version of iOS without all their security features, and users could install it at their peril.

“They could simply release a version of iOS without all their security features...”

Which would defeat the entire purpose of iOS being a safe and successful place to do business.

Yes Apple is a rich company, but that doesn’t mean it should just alter a key aspect of its product, which could hurt its reputation and future business, because other companies want to sell on top of its hardware products.

There is a whole other platform with an entirely different way of doing business that others can use here. No one is actually limited to using an iPhone.

Game consoles should be concerned if someone forces Apple to open because their models are very similar.

Epic, the big driver of this stuff, really just wants the App Store cut. They don’t actually care about other app stores or the Apple platforms, Apple developers, or Apple customers.

 

[ignatius345]

Yes because hosting apps, CDN, reviewing apps, being customer support between customer and developer, and many more things cost $0 for Apple huh?

Oh, won't someone please think of the multi-trillion-dollar company in all this? Shame on those greedy independent developers!

 

[IG88]

One of the things that’s always concerned me about this is the high risk of fragmentation, requiring folks to deal with a variety of different stores to get the apps they want.

How is sideloading a signed app directly from a developer's website any risk of fragmention, forks, etc? MacOS, Windows, Linux all seem to exist just fine allowing this?

The mental gymnastics that people go through to defend Apple's app install monopoly are astounding.

 

[I7guy]

How is sideloading a signed app directly from a developer's website any risk of fragmention, forks, etc? MacOS, Windows, Linux all seem to exist just fine allowing this?

The mental gymnastics that people go through to defend Apple's app install monopoly are astounding.

The mental gymnastics that people go through to argue against Apple's ecosystem, glee at Apple losing and glee at Apple being broken up by legislation are equally astounding.