Biden Administration Report Recommends Sweeping Changes to Apple's Ecosystem

[JamesHolden]

That's a completely reasonable position. If only you could stick to that and not make up things to support your position.

Show me where I haven't stuck to that position.

You obviously don't believe if freedom if you want to use the government to force a private company to do what you want. So what do you really believe in?

As I've said before, it's in the public's best interest to have open platforms. There are some industries that do require government intervention and regulation. Nothing is absolute, even freedom. I don't believe the power company should be able to deny you power, nor do I believe a telcom should be allowed to deny you access to communications. We've collectively decided that these industries deserve additional scrutiny and regulation, that it's in the public's best interest, and I feel the same holds true for general purpose computing platforms like iOS.

That's just silly. Black and white thinking. There are obviously degrees of privacy and lines that I can decide not to cross.

It's not silly. Why do you feel you're entitled to force your privacy views on Facebook and other third party apps? It's not okay to force Apple to make any changes, but it's okay to force Facebook to do what Apple says? You just said I don't believe in freedom, but really it's you who doesn't believe in freedom. You say I want to use the government to force a private company to do what I want...and here you are arguing in favor of a private company forcing another private company to do what you want. There's a word for that. Hypocrite.

 

[XXPP]

USA wants to destroy american company. LOL.

 

[JamesHolden]

You don't have any data to support that.

Do you have any data to support your fantasies about the demise of iOS security? I doubt it.

It does, no one would publish apps to iOS app store.
I am forced to download apps from third party app store, i don't know what i am downloading, what information they are gathering.
take a look at Mac OS app store, this is best example.

You're not forced to download anything. You can choose to not use that app if you don't want to use a third party app store. You're not entitled to having everything your way.

 

[Hyperchaotic]

Open the browsers to 3rd party engines. I have nothing but support for that.

I support that too, I really want a full Firefox with extensions. I use Orion right now with some Firefox "desktop" extensions like uBlock Origin but the browser is a bit glitchy.

However, this may also be how the Chrome Blink engine will finally take over the world and that's a very bad thing. Google could finally have the web fully in its hand.

 

[Miat]

If Apple want to offer a closed system, let 'em. They are not a monopoly. Nobody is being forced to buy their stuff. There are competitive alternatives, both hardware and software (including operating systems).

Why is the consumer having that choice taken away?

 

[webkit]

i like competition, but this will kill iOS app store

Not necessarily. Sideloading and accessing apps from third party stores has largely been allowed on Android and it hasn't "killed" the Google Play store.

Do you really feel Apple's App Store has such little user and developer value that it wouldn't be able to handle any competition from sideloading or alternative app stores? If so, maybe this is precisely the kick in the pants Apple needs to make its App Store better. More choices and better services would be a GOOD thing.

 

[codewrangler]

If I were Tim Cook, I'd tell them to blow it out their arse....

 

[mookc1]

Maybe this is the government's way of attempting to force Apple to allow sideloaded apps that will attempt to circumvent Advanced Data Protection or the security on purpose. Could it be that the government is mad that they can't still can't access the devices and are attempting to get Apple to loosen the security so they can get past the security?

This request/proposal/requirement isn't as it appears, IMHO.

 

[BaldiMac]

No it's not. DOS, Windows, Mac, Linux, NeXTSTEP, Android, etc...none of them have/had a gatekeeper deciding what the user could and could not do or what kind of apps developers could and could not develop.

Weird how when you choose to list open platforms, you only see open platforms. Obviously there are tons of closed platforms. Gaming platforms being the obvious example.

Lol. You're the one making stuff up. Show me where another general purpose computing platform has restricted access in the way iOS does.

You moved the goalposts there. I didn't say anything about a "general purpose computing platform". Again, closed platforms exist.

I've never said it was nefarious. I think the gatekeeper model is bad for society. When billions of people reply upon a platform, no single company should be allowed that much power over the platform.

Like I said, I think that's a reasonable argument, but it's a bit myopic. The real problem isn't one company with a closed business model. It's Google entering into agreements with their horizontal competitors across 80% of the global market to install Google Play Services thereby creating a "good enough" model that eliminates competition and prevents innovation. People wouldn't be complaining about a app store duopoly if Google didn't collude with it's competitors to control the vast majority of the market.

Strangely, governments seem to be ignoring these obviously anti-competitive agreements. Why is that?

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Fantastic. Lets hope they follow through.

 

[Hyperchaotic]

Android already has thrid party app stores correct ?
What's the complain there ?

I got ya: There is a link to the report in the article, it goes into great detail about Google as well. Enjoy!

 

[1557750]

I’ll never understand this. Apple isn’t the only smart phone operating system. You can do all of this on Android. Clearly that demonstrates there are options in the market.

But everyone wants it their way and nothing else matters. Why go somewhere that’s been offering this forever when they can complain about the platform they’re on forever?

Pffft… That’s just silly talk.

 

[kevinof]

Love it and makes a lot of sense. Side loading is minor and very few users will take that path. Non webkit based browsers yes because webkit is a piece of crap and apple has held back apps on ios with delayed or no support for webapis.

 

[JamesHolden]

Weird how when you choose to list open platforms, you only see open platforms. Obviously there are tons of closed platforms. Gaming platforms being the obvious example.


You moved the goalposts there. I didn't say anything about a "general purpose computing platform". Again, closed platforms exist.

My previous comments referenced "general purpose computing platforms" and my views apply to those. I recognize that closed platforms like gaming exist. I'm not moving goal posts. Those platforms aren't general purpose. People aren't running businesses on them, relying upon them for communication, etc. There's a difference. That said, if those platforms add features and become more "general purpose", I would support measures to open them up.

Like I said, I think that's a reasonable argument, but it's a bit myopic. The real problem isn't one company with a closed business model. It's Google entering into agreements with their horizontal competitors across 80% of the global market to install Google Play Services thereby creating a "good enough" model that eliminates competition and prevents innovation. People wouldn't be complaining about a app store duopoly if Google didn't collude with it's competitors to control the vast majority of the market.

Strangely, governments seem to be ignoring these obviously anti-competitive agreements. Why is that?

I don't agree. I don't think people are complaining about an app store duopoly. They are complaining about Apple restricting choice on the iOS platform, giving developers a "take it or leave it" deal, arbitrarily choosing to take a 30% cut of certain services, not others, restricting the kind of apps developers may develop, etc. In other words, micromanaging what users and developers can do with their devices after they've paid for them. That's why people are complaining. It has nothing to do with Google.

 

[BaldiMac]

Show me where I haven't stuck to that position.

Well, seems like I've clearly responded to posts where I think you've made stuff up to support the position. For example, your claim that closed platforms are anti-competitive.

As I've said before, it's in the public's best interest to have open platforms.

It's also in the public's best interest to have closed platforms.

There are some industries that do require government intervention and regulation. Nothing is absolute, even freedom. I don't believe the power company should be able to deny you power, nor do I believe a telcom should be allowed to deny you access to communications. We've collectively decided that these industries deserve additional scrutiny and regulation, that it's in the public's best interest, and I feel the same holds true for general purpose computing platforms like iOS.

I just think it's hypocritical to use "freedom!" as a shield when you are literally arguing for the government to force your preference on others.

It's not silly. Why do you feel you're entitled to force your privacy views on Facebook and other third party apps?

I don't. I choose not to use Facebook and other apps that don't respect my idea of privacy.

It's not okay to force Apple to make any changes, but it's okay to force Facebook to do what Apple says?

This is pretty basic stuff here. The government forcing changes to a legal business model is far different than two companies deciding to go into business together under specific terms.

FWIW, in my view, I think the US government is clearly violating the first amendment by compelling speech and interfering with the freedom of association with these proposed regulations.

You just said I don't believe in freedom, but really it's you who doesn't believe in freedom. You say I want to use the government to force a private company to do what I want...

Nope. I believe in freedom. And I believe you do too. But I don't believe in using it as an excuse to force to my view on others.

and here you are arguing in favor of a private company forcing another private company to do what you want.

Two companies voluntarily choosing to do business under certain terms isn't "force". This is what I mean about you making stuff up to support an otherwise reasonable argument.

 

[DeepIn2U]

fantastic news. bring the hammer down on apple and break them up.

LMAO like that worked with Microsoft right? 13 states couldn't get that happening.

 

[BaldiMac]

My previous comments referenced "general purpose computing platforms" and my views apply to those. I recognize that closed platforms like gaming exist. I'm not moving goal posts. Those platforms aren't general purpose. People aren't running businesses on them, relying upon them for communication, etc. There's a difference. That said, if those platforms add features and become more "general purpose", I would support measures to open them up.

What are you talking about?!? Of course people are running businesses on them and relying on them for communication, etc. An Xbox would certainly qualify as a general purpose computer by any definition that I've ever seen.

I don't agree. I don't think people are complaining about an app store duopoly.

You're simply wrong. The NTIA's report repeatedly mentions Apple and Google's control of the market. Or you could search any of the threads on the DMA.

 

[DeepIn2U]

None of this is irrational, as far as findings go. And if it comes down to it, Apple will find ways to oblige while still maintaining control of the OS.

Isn't iOS programmed in such a way that an app exists in a sort of "walled space", where its functionality is bound to only itself, and not affected by or able to affect other apps? Or at least, not without express permission?

Because I can totally see something like the above being implemented (if it isn't already) so that while allowing apps from outside sources, their functionality will always be just shy of perfect compared to Apple's own in-house variants.

So if it isn't irrational then ...

Pre-installed apps, default options, and anticompetitive self-preferencing should be limited, including in search results.

Explain to me why ...

Sony gets to prefer their in-house PS3/4/5 browser?
Microsoft doing the same in XBox 360/X and S series?
Microsoft forces Teams to be pre-installed and launch as the default chat app in Windows 11!?
: DITTO: with Microsoft EDGE browser?
The US Gov preferes their own in house systems for security? Guess what their SOLD for cost provisioning to a particular US government arm for spending.

 

[siddavis]

Yeah you understand nothing.

You think monopolies are good. You think a company doing great with no competition is good. LMAO.

It’s precisely the opposite.

Regulation is fundamentally important and great. Regulation is why you were killed decades ago from untested medications lmao

Your posts ooze with historical understanding and context. (lmao)

 

[fdw777]

Looks like the majority got what they ask for....are you still happy. BTW, I'm very happy with my 2021 M1 14" MacBookPro.

 

[boyarka]

"Sideloading" sounds like "side bi***", as if a user cheats on Apple. How about calling things as they are: monopoly what exists now and as an antithesis to that free market.

 

[BaldiMac]

How about calling things as they are: monopoly what exists now and as an antithesis to that free market.

Because it's silly to say a company has a monopoly on their own product. Every company does.

 

[Chazak]

Hard to argue with what they are saying... but I love my Apple ecosystem... so hands-off. People have alternatives to Apple.

I don't think it is hard at all. They are using a twisted logic to support their political strategy, but that is nothing new in America or the EU. Some people on both sides of the aisle this will get them votes.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

So a merger is about eliminating competition, but restricting access to a computing platform is...not? Hmmmm.

Apple is not restricting anyone from using the Android platform.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Maybe Biden should fix the country before "fixing" Apple. They can't be voted out of office fast enough.

Told you it was coming old chap. Commiserations