Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
Proton Product Manager acted as most would do in this situation:
Most certainly not. I've got app rejections several times and neither I nor my company ever did anything ridiculous like this. And I must say, pissing on Apple is not a good strategy if you make a living selling software on the AppStore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0982786

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
Is it just me, or does no else have a problem with the fact that Apple is openly admitting support for Myanmar's military junta here?
What exactly is Apple "openly admitting" here? Proton violated the App Store rules, got rejected because of it, fixed the violation, got accepted. Proton didn't mention Myanmar in the line of text that caused the rejection, Apple didn't mention Myanmar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deevey and 0982786

code-m

macrumors 68040
Apr 13, 2006
3,638
3,399
What I don't understand is, if ProtonVPN is so pro-human rights, then why not just educate their customers to manually set their VPN? iOS allows manual-set VPN. Just list the instructions with the server addresses, etc. Empowering your customers with the actual know-how is the better action.

And do other VPN apps have problems? That's the benchmark imo. If other VPN apps have no issues, then the issue is not with Apple, no?
This is not the complete story, while Apple does permit a user to add a VPN connection in iOS it has a limited amount of protocols. Presently IKEv2, IPSec and L2TP.

I am hopeful that Apple adds OpenVPN (UDP and TCP) plus others in an update or next iOS version.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
Apple's defence is awful here.

Apple explicitly said that it would no longer block bug fixes over these issues months ago, but has here, in clear breach of it's guidelines.

It's defence that the app remained available is untenable, when it potentially contained bug fixes that prevented discovery by dystopian governments.

App stores are fundamentally evil.
You are way way way off here. There was one day between app rejection, change by Proton, and app acceptance. Plus two days between app acceptance an Proton releasing the app. Apple doesn't "block bug fixes", they accept new versions or they don't. Whatever bugs were there have been there for ages. So: Three months or whatever for Proton to fix bugs. 1 day review by Apple and rejection. 1 day for new review by Apple and acceptance. Two days Proton sitting on their backside and not releasing. So you should really blame Proton for taking so long with their fixes and not releasing ASAP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0982786

DVD9

macrumors 6502a
Feb 18, 2010
817
581
Alex_Jones.jpg
 

atropos

macrumors regular
Jul 26, 2003
115
91
Ottawa, ON; Alhambra, CA
It seems most of you guys forgot, Apple deliberately delete "freedom" apps in Hong Kong, and say it was just follow the local law.... Apple actually has tons of history to fav on the local government(especially china... but not so much in US) by delete and block Apps, music and book publishing
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidjytang

WiseAJ

macrumors 65816
Sep 8, 2009
1,212
3,955
PDX
Isn't Proton part of Epic's coalition of whiners?

I take everything from anyone on that list as complete PR BS and avoid their apps like the plague (or COVID)
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,453
24,253
Gotta be in it to win it
It seems most of you guys forgot, Apple deliberately delete "freedom" apps in Hong Kong, and say it was just follow the local law.... Apple actually has tons of history to fav on the local government(especially china... but not so much in US) by delete and block Apps, music and book publishing
Are you saying Apple should not follow the official guidance from government across the globe?
 

laz232

macrumors 6502a
Feb 4, 2016
736
1,391
At a café near you
Are you saying Apple should not follow the official guidance from government across the globe?
Although we don't know all the facts in this case, with regard to your (rhetorical?) question: when Tim Cook takes the moral grandstand at every opportunity, then yes, selective application is highly disingenuous.

Note there is a legal difference between government guidance and government laws (also: is the current government legally recognised internationally?).

Lastly, the Nuremberg defense of "only following orders" rings hollow when Apple's gross revenue in 2019 of 260B USD is many times greater than Myanmar's GDP in 2019 of 76B USD...
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,453
24,253
Gotta be in it to win it
Although we don't know all the facts in this case, with regard to your (rhetorical?) question: when Tim Cook takes the moral grandstand at every opportunity, then yes, selective application is highly disingenuous.

Note there is a legal difference between government guidance and government laws (also: is the current government legally recognised internationally?).

Lastly, the Nuremberg defense of "only following orders" rings hollow when Apple's gross revenue in 2019 of 260B USD is many times greater than Myanmar's GDP in 2019 of 76B USD...

The way I view it, there are billions of people looking at apple. They include: customers, shareholders, critics, fans, observers. Tim Cook is going to do what he does. I'm actually glad he takes a stand and a helping hand. To his critics, he can do no right. To his fans, he can do no wrong. There is probably a middle ground here, where there is an honest conversation about his strengths and weaknesses, but so far it hasn't surfaced on MacRumors.

But I tend to give Cook the benefit of the doubt as there are things that are not known, rather than immediately jumping in with hypocrite (or disingenuous). But it really doesn't matter, no one is changing anybody's mind here. And the usual disclaimer goes of, YMMV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: laz232

ksec

macrumors 68020
Dec 23, 2015
2,246
2,605
The problem here is Apple suddenly decide to enforce a rule that it had neglected for years. And doing so at a time when the App is most popular in certain region due to certain politcal reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wolfme

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,453
24,253
Gotta be in it to win it
The problem here is Apple suddenly decide to enforce a rule that it had neglected for years. And doing so at a time when the App is most popular in certain region due to certain politcal reasons.
That's the problem as you see it? The problem more seems to be, is the Proton tried to break a rule in existence to politicize something and got caught for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 708692

deevey

macrumors 65816
Dec 4, 2004
1,359
1,422
Epic did the other way around as only some can do ...
1) Hired Expensive Lawyers
2) Hired marketing people to create anti Apple Advert and Campaign
3) Got the update rejected on purpose

4) Complained the ruling
5) Update was rejected again
6) Released Anti Apple Video and Marketing Campaign
7) Decided not to do what they don’t want neither feel the need and go to courts
8) Apple tried to strong hold their neck by voiding all licensing agreements across all their products ... an attitude rejected in court.
9) ... story still going on

So I can only conclude that the people criticizing any of these procedures actually believe that Apple App Store modus operandi is beyond approach.

The truth is that Apple power over digital services and business is absolutely incredible. This power is mainly empowered by a combination of device market share and App Store policies (one in two Americans use one at least).
Fixed
Greater power than Facebook or Google. They can curve the digital service market to fit their own agenda anyway they please at the moment.
It's not like proton is the only VPN app on the store. Proton They rules and got away with it for a while. They were caught during the update.

If my tinted windows are too dark and I never get a ticket at checkpoints, that doesn't make them perpetually "legal" .. it just means that someone didn't look hard enough the first time round.
 

deevey

macrumors 65816
Dec 4, 2004
1,359
1,422
Also, most probable that Both Apple and Proton were well aware in advance that the UN were going to "promote" the App which brought more scrutiny to the description.
 

springsup

macrumors 65816
Feb 14, 2013
1,237
1,230
Apple's defence is awful here.

Apple explicitly said that it would no longer block bug fixes over these issues months ago, but has here, in clear breach of it's guidelines.

It's defence that the app remained available is untenable, when it potentially contained bug fixes that prevented discovery by dystopian governments.

App stores are fundamentally evil.

Dude. Apple delayed the update by a single day because they wanted a minor change to the description. Keep things in perspective.

They don’t actually give hard deadlines for App approval - it could take hours or days, depending on how busy the reviewers are. A single day is within the timeframe any review could take. And then Proton themselves delayed the update much longer.

One reviewer will judge things one way, another reviewer may be a bit stricter. It happens. They’re human beings. Ultimately, it’s not really “proper” for any business to advertise that they let you skirt local law enforcement, even if that law enforcement is corrupt - that’s the part you’re not supposed to say out loud. It’s perfectly fine for Apple to ask them to reword that part of the description.

sheesh, people will scream ”conspiracy!” at anything these days. This is totally business-as-usual, nothing spectacular or newsworthy at all.
 

Nuno Lopes

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2011
1,279
1,181
Lisbon, Portugal
And the VPNs aren't supposed to run afoul of local laws.

They aren’t.
Fixed

It's not like proton is the only VPN app on the store. Proton They rules and got away with it for a while. They were caught during the update.

If my tinted windows are too dark and I never get a ticket at checkpoints, that doesn't make them perpetually "legal" .. it just means that someone didn't look hard enough the first time round.

Given their market share Apple or anyone should NOT have the power to block installing apps, native or not on devices they don’t own. they are effectively blocking users from installing apps with the threat of voiding the iOS license. That should be illegal provided their market share. Apple, Google, MS or whoever. With great power comes greater responsibilities.

Either your stance, Apple stance or mine are not technical, are fundamentally political, of policy. Even though Apple prefers to mingle both.

I remember when MS was stating in courts that technically IE could not be separated from Windows. The line of argumentation was similar to Apple. Security, privacy, would destroy Windows as the future of the Internet etc etc.

If I was Apple would be trying to come up with more convincing PWA support. Through that, they may be able to convince the separation of the App Store from the OS is not necessary. But if they persist the conclusion sooner or later will be regulated.

Customers would of course still be able to choose to make App Store only installs. It’s fine, it’s their choice.

Now if certain apps stop being in the store, developers would be not to blame. Apple would need to try to convince them that the App Store effectively increases their conversation following regular competitive approaches rather than unilateral policy making.
 
Last edited:

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,453
24,253
Gotta be in it to win it
They aren’t.


Given their market share Apple or anyone should NOT have the power to block installing apps, native or otheon devices they don’t own. they are effectively blocking user from installing apps with the threat of voiding the iOS license, that should be illegal provided they market share m. Apple, Google, MS or whoever. With great power comes greater responsibilities.
Apple should not have the power to change the rules as they go. Don't neuter them from enforcing the current rules even if you don't agree with the current rules.
Either your stance, Apple stance or mine are not technical, are fundamentally political, of policy. Even though Apple prefers iniciando both.

I remember onere MS stating that technically IE could not be separated from Windows. The line of argumentation was similar to Apple. Security, privacy, would destroy Windows as the future of the Internet etc etc.

If I was Apple would be trying to come up with more convincing PWA support. Through that they may be able to convincing the separation of the App Store from the OS is not necessary. But if they persist I. This root, it might take less or a bit more time. But they will be required to separate.

Customer would be able to choose to make App Store only installs. It’s fine, it’s their choice. Now I’d certain apps stop being in the store, developers would be not to blame. Apple would need to try to convince them that it’s better following regular competitive approaches rather than unilateral policy making.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Stewie

deevey

macrumors 65816
Dec 4, 2004
1,359
1,422
Apple should not have the power to change the rules as they go. Don't neuter them from enforcing the current rules even if you don't agree with the current rules.
In this instance though they didn't. It appears they just enforced already existing rules due to the app suddenly coming into the limelight, no ?
 

Nuno Lopes

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2011
1,279
1,181
Lisbon, Portugal
Apple should not have the power to change the rules as they go. Don't neuter them from enforcing the current rules even if you don't agree with the current rules.

One cannot go without the other. If you can set the rules how ever you want irrespective of your ability to steer the market in your favor, you can also change them as you please in such circumstances.

In effect Apple controls what software can or not be installed, what digital services can or not be installed (i mean literally) in devices that it does not own. In the US context, this means give or take, one in two devices on peoples pockets. That is how the App Store manages to gather 70B in revenue.

Now, some lawyer would probably argue that such thing is not true. Indeed people can install whatever they want on iPhone ... Jail break etc etc. But they fail to mention that such action would be voiding the OS licence, but also voids the warranty of the hardware. So no one would risk doing it while under warranty ... They also fail to mention that Apple can basically refuse to fix, as it does, even simple things has replacing a broken display glass. So indeed, the device and the OS are managed in tandem, meaning they have full control over what can or not be installed on the device and what digital services can be accessed outside the Safari keyhole.

You know my stance well enough as I know yours. I would be inclined to support your stance within the context of a small market share. But the large market share along with the policies give them an incredible ability to siphon the digital market place on top of the devices they sell. That is how they reach 70B revenue with the App Store.

It would be interesting to know the revenue of the Mac App Store in relationship with its macOS device market share and compare that with iOS with relationship their device market share. Through that one would have the idea of the impact in the App Store revenue when faced with a more open market policy. But they don’t provide these metrics, just present the all thing as the App Store revenue.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy

deevey

macrumors 65816
Dec 4, 2004
1,359
1,422
Now, some lawyer would probably argue that such thing is not true. Indeed people can install whatever they want on iPhone ... Jail break etc etc. But they fail to mention that such action would be voiding the OS licence, but also voids the warranty of the hardware. So no one would risk doing it while under warranty ... They also fail to mention that Apple can basically refuse to fix, as it does, even simple things has replacing a broken display glass. So indeed, the device and the OS are managed in tandem, meaning they have full control over what can or not be installed on the device and what digital services can be accessed outside the Safari keyhole.
Most manufacturers will void the warranty on hardware if you upload a modified OS, Bios or Firmware.

Many of us choose iOS because of those limitations, not in spite of them.
 

pasamio

macrumors 6502
Jan 22, 2020
355
297
It's just you. The only people mentioning Myanmar is Proton, as a form of clickbait. A complete dog act designed to make out Apple was doing something evil simply because Myanmar was in the news. As if Apple would be talking to the junta in Myanmar! there is no information that the good citizens of Myanmar are even aware of proton VPN until the UN said something about VPNs (after the app was approved, btw).
now Apple might have got overzealous with the "Challenging governments” phrasing in the app, probably thinking about their friends in Washington, but the escalation by proton after their app was approved is pretty dodgy marketing to say the least.
I'm sure they're worried about the "challenging governments" phrase but I don't think it's Washington, or even Myanmar, that they're most worried about.
 

Nuno Lopes

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2011
1,279
1,181
Lisbon, Portugal
Many of us choose iOS because of those limitations, not in spite of them.

The App Store policy for its suppliers is irrelevant to why people choose the iPhone. So the issue at hand is not why people choose the iPhone but the App Store policy to its suppliers.

The most invasive policy in the App Store is concerning in app dev to customer communication. Apple could allow for instance developers offer promotions on its website while having along side the App Store one click buy option.

Don’t think people choosing the iPhone would mind that as an option at all, but Apple. Some people might prefer the App Store one click to buy, there are some advantages in that for the iPhone user, other might fell inclined to accept the dev offer/promotion or whatever.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,453
24,253
Gotta be in it to win it
One cannot go without the other. If you can set the rules how ever you want irrespective of your ability to steer the market in your favor, you can also change them as you please in such circumstances.

In effect Apple controls what software can or not be installed, what digital services can or not be installed (i mean literally) in devices that it does not own. In the US context, this means give or take, one in two devices on peoples pockets. That is how the App Store manages to gather 70B in revenue.

Now, some lawyer would probably argue that such thing is not true. Indeed people can install whatever they want on iPhone ... Jail break etc etc. But they fail to mention that such action would be voiding the OS licence, but also voids the warranty of the hardware. So no one would risk doing it while under warranty ... They also fail to mention that Apple can basically refuse to fix, as it does, even simple things has replacing a broken display glass. So indeed, the device and the OS are managed in tandem, meaning they have full control over what can or not be installed on the device and what digital services can be accessed outside the Safari keyhole.

You know my stance well enough as I know yours. I would be inclined to support your stance within the context of a small market share. But the large market share along with the policies give them an incredible ability to siphon the digital market place on top of the devices they sell. That is how they reach 70B revenue with the App Store.

It would be interesting to know the revenue of the Mac App Store in relationship with its macOS device market share and compare that with iOS with relationship their device market share. Through that one would have the idea of the impact in the App Store revenue when faced with a more open market policy. But they don’t provide these metrics, just present the all thing as the App Store revenue.
Jailbreaking does not void the warranty. If the phone needs server and it's operational the jailbreak can be removed and the phone restored as needed.

I do agree with you that Apple controls 100% of the iphone manufacturing market. They control 100% of the IOS distribution market. They control 100% of the Apple Music market. They control 100% of the icloud market. They control 100% of the IOS App Store market. Why does Apple control 100%, because all of the previous items are Apple inventions. And in the context of it all, Apple by market share % is a minority player.

I'm okay with all of the above as my opinion. Now, maybe law makers and governments aren't happy to see Apple's success and when that happens, consumers lose, imo. See the chronology of the breakup of AT&T and the sorry state and expense of cell phone service in the US, for an example of where this could be headed. I don't want Apple to turn into a dumpster fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WiseAJ and deevey

Nuno Lopes

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2011
1,279
1,181
Lisbon, Portugal
Jailbreaking does not void the warranty. If the phone needs server and it's operational the jailbreak can be removed and the phone restored as needed.

Try and get servicing on an Apple Store with a jailbroken iOS. The device needs servicing because it’s not 100% operational.
 
Last edited:

Nuno Lopes

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2011
1,279
1,181
Lisbon, Portugal
Jailbreaking does not void the warranty. If the phone needs server and it's operational the jailbreak can be removed and the phone restored as needed.

I do agree with you that Apple controls 100% of the iphone manufacturing market. They control 100% of the IOS distribution market. They control 100% of the Apple Music market. They control 100% of the icloud market. They control 100% of the IOS App Store market. Why does Apple control 100%, because all of the previous items are Apple inventions. And in the context of it all, Apple by market share % is a minority player.

I'm okay with all of the above as my opinion. Now, maybe law makers and governments aren't happy to see Apple's success and when that happens, consumers lose, imo. See the chronology of the breakup of AT&T and the sorry state and expense of cell phone service in the US, for an example of where this could be headed. I don't want Apple to turn into a dumpster fire.
I’m ok with all the above also. I’m not OK when it’s used by Apple to control how third parties communicate and get payed for their services on the devices chosen by their customers, siphoning the digital service marketplace through the iOS market share

There is a difference.

Don’t taint your mind like someone else is not happy with Apple success, all down to losers envy. That kind of sentiment would be ridiculous. If that is what you think it’s the foundation behind the critiques than it’s misses the mark entirely.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.