Biden Administration Report Recommends Sweeping Changes to Apple's Ecosystem

[fenderbass146]

Every day, I dislike the government more and more. Both parties are thoroughly corrupt and serve special interests, as donors aim to enrich politicians and technocrats, making them more powerful and wealthy. Honestly, I don't see any change unless the people start revolting against this corrupt system.

Same, I generally align with those closer to the right in terms of policy, but I have become so disillusioned by our Government it really makes me sad and discouraged. The people in Government are no longer representing the average American. The best clear example I can think of is in Texas, only like 15% of the population supported total abortion restrictions, and most were for moderate restrictions and exceptions, yet Texas has become a place where no abortions are allowed in almost any situation. Beyond my personal beliefs on that topic, that is not in any way democratic if 15% of a population is getting what it wants and 85% arn't

 

[inkswamp]

To all the naysayers moaning that their security will be compromised if sideloading is implemented…

Guess what? The  App Store isn’t going anywhere. Everyone can still use the App Store.

The push for sideloading is to benefit developers, not end user customers.

Tell us you don't understand the potential security issues with allowing sideloading without telling us.

It's not that the App Store is still there. It's that Apple has to make significant changes to the way apps are loaded and validated on the platform and that will open the door for all kinds of problems.

Switch to Android if you want that. Some of us like iOS because it's not kicking all the doors open for a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter.

 

[nt5672]

Reason why I do not want sideloading is that it makes the iPhone less secure and owners of the iPhone cannot lock it down totally for the users they assign the smartphone to.

Yep, that is why I wear a winter jacket, so you won't get cold.

 

[avkills]

The minute the government forces Apple to an open system with multiple app stores is the day I delete a whole slew of apps off my iPhone; most notably Facebook --- they can't be trusted to do anything moral.

 

[macsound1]

Thank goodness Apple was there when Uber started tracking their drivers' and the activities on drivers' devices. Side-loading would have skirted app review.

I'm happy with what Apple is doing. Until they break (or are proven to have broken) their privacy stance, I'm a fan. I'm not following them blind; they just haven't caused me any issues thus far.

Exactly - Everyone has become complacent about Google tracking everything they do, until they're not and switch to DuckDuckGo.
Except now with Apple - we already have the equivalent of DDG - a company who cares to prevent spying, battery hogging and unchecked software.

So people yearn for what they can't have. Doesn't matter what it is, it's just the opposite of what they already have.

 

[JamesHolden]

Tell us you don't understand the potential security issues with allowing sideloading without telling us.

It's not that the App Store is still there. It's that Apple has to make significant changes to the way apps are loaded and validated on the platform and that will open the door for all kinds of problems.

Switch to Android if you want that. Some of us like iOS because it's not kicking all the doors open for a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter.

FUD. FUD. FUD.

If you jailbreak an iOS device, you can sideload. Apple didn't have to make any changes to anything. They created a software barrier to their platform. Remove the barrier and you can install whatever you want.

Allowing sideloading won't change things one bit for people who decide to only obtain apps from the App Store. Your phone's security isn't compromised today by someone else jailbreaking a device and sideloading an app.

 

[Liquid Galaxy]

Bet ol' Cooky is missing Trump now

 

[inkswamp]

This regulation is coming from the U.S. government and therefore relates to the U.S. market. In the U.S., iOS has around 58% share of the mobile OS market while Android has 42%. It is Apple/iOS that has the higher share here, not Android. I guess these arguments are no longer pointless, then?

Market share is market share. If you want to move the goal posts to make your point, that's fine but don't expect me to take you seriously.

Does Apple sell more iPhones than Android phones that are sold? No. Therefore they are not a monopoly and therefore the abuse of monopolistic power arguments are invalid. Sorry. You'll have to find some other reason to hate Apple.

 

[macsound1]

Yes, obviously, but don't expect the Apple apologists to acknowledge it. They'll perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to explain why one is ok and the other is not. It's laughable.

It's simple to me.
Apple upholds the infrastructure that regulates and serves Apps and In App Purchases (good)
Apple does not provide or regulate the infrastructure that ships packages from Target, cars from Lyft, or parking Meters. (also good)

 

[JamesHolden]

The minute the government forces Apple to an open system with multiple app stores is the day I delete a whole slew of apps off my iPhone; most notably Facebook --- they can't be trusted to do anything moral.

Lol. Then why do you have it on your phone in the first place? They can't be trusted to do anything moral but you're still using their app anyway? That makes no sense.

 

[macsound1]

FUD. FUD. FUD.

If you jailbreak an iOS device, you can sideload. Apple didn't have to make any changes to anything. They created a software barrier to their platform. Remove the barrier and you can install whatever you want.

Allowing sideloading won't change things one bit for people who decide to only obtain apps from the App Store. Your phone's security isn't compromised today by someone else jailbreaking a device and sideloading an app.

Except jailbreaking is a hack. The barrier was broken.
If apple removes the barrier, you won't need special software, time, energy, or talent.
You'll just need to be a complacent human and ignore all the dialog boxes that popup by clicking Accept & Agree - like Microsoft (and all EULAs) trained us all to do since the early 2000s.

 

[inkswamp]

FUD. FUD. FUD.

If you jailbreak an iOS device, you can sideload. Apple didn't have to make any changes to anything. They created a software barrier to their platform. Remove the barrier and you can install whatever you want.

Allowing sideloading won't change things one bit for people who decide to only obtain apps from the App Store. Your phone's security isn't compromised today by someone else jailbreaking a device and sideloading an app.

Answer this question: does allowing sideloading require Apple to decrease the security of the OS?

Spoiler alert: yes. So even if you don't jailbreak or sideload, you are still affected by the changes Apple will have to make.

Again, if you want that, switch to Android. What's the problem with that? You're not an Apple customer. Just accept it and move on.

 

[JamesHolden]

It's simple to me.
Apple upholds the infrastructure that regulates and serves Apps and In App Purchases (good)
Apple does not provide or regulate the infrastructure that ships packages from Target, cars from Lyft, or parking Meters. (also good)

Mental gymnastics. The only reason Apple upholds the infrastructure that serves apps and in-app purchases is because they refuse to allow anyone else to build that infrastructure and still access the platform.

 

[sigamy]

I really don't know where to fall on this. I'm an Apple fan and I acknowledge I have biases. Apple has definitely done some anticompetitive things.

This may be off-topic but I really credit Apple for the explosion of mobile/apps/internet. I don't believe it would have happened in the same way and in the same time frame without Apple.

In the 90s, as a non-MS fan, I was fully in support of the litigation against them, but that seemed a bit more clear:

• Embedding IE inside Windows and saying there was no other way they could have architected things.
• Rumors that MS would cripple Lotus's and WordPerfect's ability to write good Windows apps in order to make Excel and Word look better.
• Anticompetitive pricing power of Windows server products + desktop + Office in corporations.
• Trying to turn the open, standards-based web into a MS-dominated proprietary land of ASP pages running on IIS

Apple saying that alternative App Stores will be a security risk? Or that alternative payment platforms are a risk? These are probably mostly BS arguments. Especially if it is done in a way where there is choice, and if I never want those things, I can continue as I do today.

But...and I don't know how to make this point strongly enough...I really feel that the decisions and choices that Apple made in iOS and the ecosystem have lead directly to the explosion of the iPhone/smartphones/mobile tech/internet. And misinformation/Facebook U aside, these are mostly good things for society.

We had it the other way from 1977 to 2007.
PCs, PDAs: your device, do what you want. What did this give the majority of users? Headaches. Computers were "tolerated". They were confusing, hard to use, full of crap that didn't work. Then, with internet we got viruses and dangerous malware/spyware/ransomware.

This is what an entirely open ecosystem got us. Computers were for geeks. The thought of everyone being efficient was a dream.

Look at phones before the iPhone. Palm was decent but the OS got old and crusty like legacy Mac OS. MS was a mess of ten different Pen/WinCE/Pocket variations of Windows. Blackberry served a single niche of corporate email. Regular consumers were stuck with tiny plastic keyboards, T9, $2.99 ringtones, paying $$$ to send a bit of data, and tons of junk pre-loaded.

I've been using computers for over 40 years and I love Apple's attempts to hide/remove complexity and MAKE THINGS THAT BENEFIT THE END USER...

I really believe that removing the file system is a huge benefit for 90% of users. Personally, I never understood why people wanted the Files app on iOS. But, it's good that it is there for those that want/need it. The App Store (and Music Store before) took what had existed in Palm ecosystem and even Amazon and brought it even further with full integration and one-click installation. Remember installing software on Windows? Ten page "wizards" with technical questions and jargon. (C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Office\). Easy for us, near impossible for your mom...

Android was building a Blackberry clone before the iPhone announcement. Samsung, LG and whoever would not have gotten the freedom and autonomy from carriers that Apple got from Cingular. Now, here in 2023 it's hard to say where we'd be...but the easy of use and walls that Apple put up around the iPhone and Store, I feel were/are a net benefit.

Sorry for the long post...I hope this makes sense. Interested to hear your feedback.

 

[TheOldChevy]

• App store review processes should be more transparent.

yes.

For the rest, no. If you want it, get a Mac.

 

[bookofxero]

To all the naysayers moaning that their security will be compromised if sideloading is implemented…

Guess what? The  App Store isn’t going anywhere. Everyone can still use the App Store.

The push for sideloading is to benefit developers, not end user customers.

Hey, dingus, you do know that EU and other regulators are pushing for 3rd parties to have full access to everything, including the SE, right?

 

[JamesHolden]

Except jailbreaking is a hack. The barrier was broken.
If apple removes the barrier, you won't need special software, time, energy, or talent.
You'll just need to be a complacent human and ignore all the dialog boxes that popup by clicking Accept & Agree - like Microsoft (and all EULAs) trained us all to do since the early 2000s.

Of course it's a hack. But the point remains the same. You can jailbreak a device today and sideload. People have been doing this since the iPhone was first released. If someone jailbreaks his or her device, YOUR device is not compromised. People saying that sideloading and third party app stores will lead to malware, etc. are just spreading FUD. Stay in the App Store's walled garden and absolutely nothing changes for you, just like you aren't impacted in any way by someone who jailbreaks today.

 

[Naraxus]

Totally don’t agree with any of these recommendations as they will make my experience worse and less safe.

Explain to the class how it will make your experience worse and less safe if you never use it

 

[macsound1]

Of course it's a hack. But the point remains the same. You can jailbreak a device today and sideload. People have been doing this since the iPhone was first released. If someone jailbreaks his or her device, YOUR device is not compromised. People saying that sideloading and third party app stores will lead to malware, etc. are just spreading FUD. Stay in the App Store's walled garden and absolutely nothing changes for you, just like you aren't impacted in any way by someone who jailbreaks today.

What I'm saying is - the barrier to entry of current sideloading - the hack - prevents normal people from doing it.

Once sideloading is allowed, any numbskull who has no idea what sideloading is, will be able to quickly and easily install something without realizing it, specifically users of iOS who've been using it forever and "know" the app store is the only way to install something.

 

[Naraxus]

Can't wait for sideloading on PlayStation, because for sure they wouldn't only over-regulate mobile appstores, right? Right?

Why would they? I can get stuff without the PS Store for my PS5

 

[BaldiMac]

One thing many people don’t seem to realize is that Apple also doesn’t collect a 30% cut from apps that sell physical goods or services like Uber. So one class of apps don’t pay for in app purchases but other apps that engage in digital transactions like Fortnite and other games etc must pay the fee. Isn’t that an unduly discriminatory practice ?

No. It's just a normal business decision. I can give away yogurt and sell ice cream. Nothing wrong with that. (And again, 98% of apps pay 15% or less.)

 

[Kierkegaarden]

But a merger would be part of the company's business model. It's the exact same thing. The market is very much harmed by Apple's model. Developers are prevented from developing certain kinds of apps because Apple has decided they don't want those apps, nevermind what the paying customer wants. Customers can have apps they've paid for yanked out from under them with no notice because the all-powerful gatekeeper decided to do so - and there's no recourse.

Opening the platform doesn't change anything for people who want to only use the App Store either. Your phone's security is not compromised because I decided to download an app to my phone from outside the App Store. The gatekeeper model is immoral and it's about time someone cut the head off the snake.

A merger can help a company achieve greater economies of scale, but the primary purpose of most mergers is to eliminate competition. The business model of a company is their core strategy for profitability. A merger can contribute to profitability, but they are not the “exact same thing”. A merger doesn’t guarantee profitability because there is no guarantee that there won’t be future competition. Over leveraging yourself just to try to eliminate competition at the moment can actually work against your core business strategy.

 

[mookc1]

Explain to the class how it will make your experience worse and less safe if you never use it

That little piece of code that resides deep in iOS that would allow you to sideload is yet another setting or bit of code that is ripe for an attack. Best just to leave it out and force you to jailbreak your phone so you can sideload. I'm not interested in giving up something I like for those in the minority.

Interesting....that can be applied to lots of things today, don't you think?

 

[macsound1]

No. It's just a normal business decision. I can give away yogurt and sell ice cream. Nothing wrong with that. (And again, 98% of apps pay 15% or less.)

Just like Starbucks overcharges for drip coffee but has free sugar, spoons, straws and napkins.

 

[JamesHolden]

Answer this question: does allowing sideloading require Apple to decrease the security of the OS?

No it doesn't. The security of the OS is pretty much security theater anyway. People have been jailbreaking their iOS devices since day one and that hasn't impacted your device's security in any way. If you stay in the App Store's walled garden, absolutely nothing changes for you.

Spoiler alert: yes. So even if you don't jailbreak or sideload, you are still affected by the changes Apple will have to make.

And you know this how? Because you're part of the iOS development team? If you jailbreak a device today, you can install anything you want. Apple didn't have to make any changes to the OS, so your argument simply isn't valid. Show me how Apple will have to make changes that compromise security and I'll get on board, but no one has been able to do that. Someone else jailbreaking their device and sideloading an app hasn't impacted your device's security for over 15 years.

Again, if you want that, switch to Android. What's the problem with that? You're not an Apple customer. Just accept it and move on.

Sorry, I don't accept it. I've been an Apple customer for 40 years and I'll continue to be one. Generally I love everything they do, but I strongly disagree with their gatekeeping behavior and will continue to push my elected officials to make sure computing platforms are as free and open as possible. It's in the public's best interest to not have gatekeepers. The whole gatekeeper model is immoral.