Netflix Gaming Service on iOS Likely to Offer Individual Games Through the App Store

[DFZD]

Good for you at making assumptions - I don't own any Apple stock. And I wouldn't characterize it as thuggery.

Doesn't make your analogy right though. And Apple's pretence love for consumer security won't hold well in a court room because it really is about the bottom line for them. Other companies just have to get together and fight this absurdity.
Apple gets away with a lot of shady business tactics like lack of repairability and planned obsolescence only because there are people here defending them by giving such terrible analogies.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I guess that would also reduce the security of the entire Apple Mother Cloud.

I was only referring to sideloading. Since you’re no longer talking about sideloading, I take it we’re in agreement on that point.

Regarding the others, I don’t know too many “for profit” publicly traded businesses that are in business NOT to make a profit. They’re must makea profit or they’ll run afoul of their shareholders/SEC. So, I’m quite sure those profit making activities are indeed profit making activities.

 

[DFZD]

Regarding the others, I don’t know too many “for profit” publicly traded businesses that are in business NOT to make a profit. They’re must makea profit or they’ll run afoul of their shareholders/SEC. So, I’m quite sure those profit making activities are indeed profit making activities.

So since you're no longer talking about User Security, I assume that we both agree that the whole matter is about profits and not user security.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

So since you're no longer talking about User Security, I assume that we both agree that the whole matter is about profits and not user security.

No, you switched from talking about sideloading (which, providing the capability in an easy way would make it far easier than it is now for a malicious actor to get malicious code on an unsuspecting user’s device) to “Apple does things specifically to make them money”.

These are not mutually exclusive ideas. As I wrote previously,

They both can be true. Opening it up would hurt Apple’s bottomline AND allowing an easy way for average folks to critically reduce the security of their system would absolutely allow for endless amounts of malware to exist where none does currently.

 

[DFZD]

No, you switched from talking about sideloading (which, providing the capability in an easy way would make it far easier than it is now for a malicious actor to get malicious code on an unsuspecting user’s device) to “Apple does things specifically to make them money”.

These are not mutually exclusive ideas. As I wrote previously,

They both can be true sure, but Apple as a multi trillion dollar with world's best engineers can figure out a way to make it safer like they do on Mac OS.

Try and understand what I'm saying.

Apple charges a 30% fee for two things mainly

1. Managing App hosting, install, authentication and other stuff.
2. Providing access to a huge premium market.

Apple can still provide the first by providing a separate licensing service for companies that don't really need App Store's discovery service, at least not for a large cut of 30%. Companies like Netflix, Spotify would hugely benefit from this, and along with their consumers. Although they are just one company, several other medium and small companies are forced to provide an app that has a paid service but not an option. All this because the fee is too much for their business model to be viable. Is that a compromise for the consumers as well to not be able to pay for a service.

At this moment you have to pay a huge Apple tax just for your presence on iOS. This is unique to just iOS, out of all the operating systems in the whole world, including Mac OS.
Charging a huge cut for just hosting the app is day light robbery. And not allowing companies to link to their website for payments is corporate tyranny.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

They both can be true sure, but Apple as a multi trillion dollar with world's best engineers can figure out a way to make it safer like they do on Mac OS.

The safest Mac is still far LESS secure than iOS. Any movement of iOS in a macOS direction, then, is by default moving the system into a state of being less secure (less secure = more malware). Being a multi-trillion dollar company with world’s best engineers doesn’t change the fact that patterning your system after a LESS secure operating system, makes your system less secure.

If anything, Apple’s patterning macOS more and more like iOS to end up with a more secure system. For example, kext’s not being supported on macOS? That makes macOS objectively MORE secure.

Apple deprecating macOS kernel extensions (KEXTs) is a great win for security

Apple kernel extension APIs to be deprecated in macOS 10.15.4.

www.zdnet.com

With this deprecation, are there things your average user can’t easily do on macOS now? Has the available feature set been reduced? Sure, and while some of the things kext’s used to be used for are handled by API’s now, there are still gaps, some of which may never be filled because they yield a less secure system.

Try and understand what I'm saying.

macOS allows average folks to easily install apps from anywhere. iOS only allows average folks to easily install apps from the App Store. In this way, macOS is less secure than iOS.

What I’m understanding is that you want it to be easy for average folks to install apps from outside the App Store which would reduce iOS security to the level of macOS. And I understand that, because I’m sure there are folks that wish macOS was less secure so that it would be easy for average folks to install kext’s in the latest version of macOS.

 

[JustSomebody12]

Not really, there are a LOT of limits placed on Apps as a part of being on the AppStore. These are all methods that are useful for developers, so you can’t cut them out completely, but you CAN curtail their use. Just by saying, “You can do this, but if you do it in THIS way, we’ll kick you off the AppStore.” It’s a good deterrent.

Without “delisting from the App Store” as a threat, developers are free to do whatever they think they can get away with. UNLESS you’re saying that they should have a second tier of far less functional applications. If that’s the case, anything they put into place, an enterprising developer can just offer the customer a secondary app that would patch the OS to give FULL control to the app. Considering how many folks today appear to do their DARNDEST to compromise themselves via email and the internet, you’d definitely see a rise in malware.

What I mean is, even Android succeeds in limiting an app’s handle on the OS and the operating system (if it has no root access), I suppose for Apple it shouldn’t be THAT hard to deny (or make opt-in) a lot of app functionalities and APIs.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

What I mean is, even Android succeeds in limiting an app’s handle on the OS and the operating system (if it has no root access), I suppose for Apple it shouldn’t be THAT hard to deny (or make opt-in) a lot of app functionalities and APIs.

Android succeeds in limiting a well behaved app’s handle on the OS. If everyone in the world writing apps were doing so non-maliciously, then that’d be fine.

But when you have situations like this:

This New Android Malware Can Gain Root Access to Your Smartphones

Researchers have discovered a new Android malware strain that is capable of rooting smartphones and gaining complete control over infected devices.

thehackernews.com

when you have apps that pose as utility and other types of apps out in the wild, it’s good that you have something like an App Store for folks to download from. In this case, even though it DID get on the Google Play store, these apps were only downloaded 10,000 times before it was removed. For anyone that ONLY used the Google Play store, there is an extremely high likelihood that they weren’t affected in any way.

For anyone that followed a link on a website to some random page that offered a well known utility for free? Of which there’s no way to really even tell how many folks may have been fooled into downloading it? Who knows how many folks are affected now and continuing to be infected daily?

It’s far more effective to include the distribution method as a part of the secure solution. You won’t stop EVERY exploit, but you can know that once you’ve caught and removed the exploit, the customer exposure becomes zero.

 

[DFZD]

The safest Mac is still far LESS secure than iOS. Any movement of iOS in a macOS direction, then, is by default moving the system into a state of being less secure (less secure = more malware). Being a multi-trillion dollar company with world’s best engineers doesn’t change the fact that patterning your system after a LESS secure operating system, makes your system less secure.

If anything, Apple’s patterning macOS more and more like iOS to end up with a more secure system. For example, kext’s not being supported on macOS? That makes macOS objectively MORE secure.

Apple deprecating macOS kernel extensions (KEXTs) is a great win for security

Apple kernel extension APIs to be deprecated in macOS 10.15.4.

www.zdnet.com

With this deprecation, are there things your average user can’t easily do on macOS now? Has the available feature set been reduced? Sure, and while some of the things kext’s used to be used for are handled by API’s now, there are still gaps, some of which may never be filled because they yield a less secure system.


macOS allows average folks to easily install apps from anywhere. iOS only allows average folks to easily install apps from the App Store. In this way, macOS is less secure than iOS.

What I’m understanding is that you want it to be easy for average folks to install apps from outside the App Store which would reduce iOS security to the level of macOS. And I understand that, because I’m sure there are folks that wish macOS was less secure so that it would be easy for average folks to install kext’s in the latest version of macOS.

I've never even mentioned Kexts, I actually described the issue in detail but you chose to ignore it all and brought in your Ted Talk about all the issues with legacy Mac OS systems.

I clearly said that there has to be a way for app developers to deliver apps to iOS without App Store, because being a part of App Store means a world where consumers either have to pay 30% more or have to quit the app, open a computer and pay on the website. I have all 4 major OS devices with me (Android, iOS, MacOS and Windows). This app jail exists only on iOS, and yet the biggest security disasters happened on iOS, first the Celebrity iCloud hack and second the Pegasus hack. They targeted people who clearly would have secured their devices and accounts, considering their public positions.

Anyway, if regular people really cared about security and privacy Facebook and Google would have been dead by now. They clearly don't and if you take a basic survey to examine the knowledge of an average iPhone user on Mobile Privacy and Security, close to 90% would end up proving that they are either not fully aware of it, or simply don't care.

As for people who care so much about privacy or security, they wouldn't use a phone to make important data transfer or transactions. They mostly have a secure device to do all that. iPhone is not that device, for most of them.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I've never even mentioned Kexts, I actually described the issue in detail but you chose to ignore it all and brought in your Ted Talk about all the issues with legacy Mac OS systems.

No, you didn’t mention kext’s, I did, and so did every security researcher who said that deprecation of kext’s (even though it limits users) makes macOS more secure. Limiting a user’s ability to intentionally make their system less secure makes the system more secure.

I clearly said that there has to be a way for app developers to deliver apps to iOS without App Store,

“a way for app developers to deliver apps to iOS without the App Store” cannot be done without lowering the security of the iOS system to the same level as macOS. And, I agree with you that there are a good number of folks that would like Apple to lower the security of iOS.

Anyway, if regular people really cared about security and privacy Facebook and Google would have been dead by now.

That’s actually a good point. The vast majority of folks in the world want a less secure system that allows them to sideload… they use Windows, macOS, Android, etc. It’s only a subgroup that use iOS based products. So, in the big picture, the folks that have an issue with iOS are those folks that WANT a less secure system, but, for whatever reason, bought the more secure iOS products.

 

[1284814]

“I hate the idea of nested movie apps. How would parental controls work? Would I be able to control individual movies that my kids can watch and set different viewing limits?”

Lol

What is this inability for people to make their own decisions? I clearly expect this to happen. But giving people a choice is what freedom is. Tech compagnies need to stop acting as if they got a resonpsability to Galadriel the human race. You are making a product and most of us want (and should be able to ) install our own codes. Beside a lot the things you are enjoying right now are copy pasted by Apple from the jailbreak community.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

What is this inability for people to make their own decisions? I clearly expect this to happen. But giving people a choice is what freedom is. Tech compagnies need to stop acting as if they got a resonpsability to Galadriel the human race. You are making a product and most of us want (and should be able to ) install our own codes.

Because very many people quite consistently make poor decisions. People who buy an Xbox and want to run the latest Spider-man game on it because they should be able to, for example. In a world where Sony didn’t own Spider-man, it might even be an option. BUT, this is the reality we’re in and if a consumer makes a choice and buys an Xbox, they are, at the same time choosing ALL the good things about owning an Xbox as well as all the downsides. They have the freedom to choose the system that runs Spider-man or the system that DOESN’T run Spider-man.

People choose to listen to malicious telemarketers and provide their personal identifying information AND admin access to their system to them, too.

When people choose to buy an iOS device, they are choosing all the good things about owning an iOS device as well as all the downsides. They can, for example, choose to buy a device that allows sideloading OR choose to buy a device that doesn’t allow sideloading. And, while it doesn’t happen very much, there ARE a good number of people that buy a device that doesn’t allow sideloading when sideloading was a VERY important feature for them. They were free to make the choice that aligns with their wants and needs and, instead, didn’t.