Proposed Law Against Apple's 'Walled Garden' Software Approach Sparks Fears of iPhone Ban in Italy

[C00rDiNaT0r]

Not true. You cannot set default apps. You can hide the stock Apple apps but that's it

Huh. I guess this is not doing what I think it does: https://www.imore.com/how-delete-apple-apps-ios-10

[EDIT] I see the fine print now, from that very link I referenced above:

when you delete them, they aren't actually removed — they're just being hidden from the home screen. (It's very similar to the toggle for Apple's iCloud Drive app in iOS 9.)​

 

[ajgash]

This is another example of the epitome of idiocy. A bill that demands that users have access to any app they want? They already do! You don't like Apple's approach, you don't have to buy an iPhone! DONE! Ugh. Why is it that people have a RIGHT to buy an iPhone and then a RIGHT to dictate how apps are served or available on that device? Maybe I should have a RIGHT to have my TV also function as a microwave oven. It's absurd, of course, but that's what we're getting to here.

Apple has a walled-garden approach for what I would think are obvious reasons - user experience. They are seeking to make the user-experience on a Apple device synonymous with excellence, and they can't do that when they allow anything to be installed on the device. On the other side, the fragmentation of experiences on the Android platform is all the proof you need to see that Apple has a reason to do what they do. And gosh, if people don't like that, then they DON'T have to buy an Apple phone. iPhones are more expensive anyway.

I hate it when people's self-centered catering to every aspect of human whim and want is turned into a RIGHT.

 

[mi7chy]

Why would they ban the iphone? they have the 'right to choose' another platform that lets them do what they want. If they user wants to buy the iphone they know what they're getting into. Just because you 'want' something doesn't mean a company has to change their business to comply with your requests. Don't like it don't buy it

It's a violation of US anti-trust law or that country's equivalent.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

 

[mumpitz77]

All iPhone would need to do is use the Android approach: You can download anything from the official app store, if you download from other stores, a warning appears saying something to the effect that this is from an untrusted source, if you install this things may not work properly. They could even add in a clause that says if you need warranty service you have to uninstall all apps from untrusted sources first.

This would actually be a reasonable balance between the two positions.
[doublepost=1498231951][/doublepost]
Not really, Android allows for it and has found a way to do so as safely as possible, so it CAN be done.

There is a lot of interest from some developers to avoid paying 30% of their sales to Apple. By opening up – even with a warning dialog – a lot of Apps would leave the AppStore to maximize their profits.
I think and hope, that Apple will not go this route. Because staying in the walled garden won't be the same, if all the apps had left ... and I like it, the way it is right now. I would not have a problem, if some laws forced apple to reduce their 30% cut, as long as they stay in charge as gate keeper by reviewing code.

 

[H2SO4]

He is not an IT manager. As an IT manager, it's not your job to fix people's iPhones. Besides, in an enterprise environment, settings can be managed company-wide. E.g. the setting that allows people to install apps from different app stores.

So what, and how do you know? You want to do more that suits you? Fine but make some concessions, one of which is NOT installing crap from just anywhere.

 

[Otelm]

member of the Scelta Civica political party in Italy

I know those, they barely represent anyone (they have 6 seats out of 630). It is highly unlikely that it will pass. Even if it passes, the original article makes it clear that the EU could overturn it if it breaks EU regulations. I'm sure that guy appreciates the publicity, though.

 

[Gasu E.]

I’ve noticed over the past


As an IT manager, this would be a complete nightmare. The last thing I want is for people to bring their iOS devices to me and bitch about poor performance or worse a compromised device. Apple would never make such a compromise.

Apple is slowly opening up their ecosystem in a way that makes sense to Apple. The next step would be to allow users to assign default apps in iOS. If a user really needs to download a program outside of the App Store, they should learn how to sideload apps.

Apple should be able to provide a lockout that you can enable for corporate phones, addressing your needs as an IT manager.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

All iPhone would need to do is use the Android approach: You can download anything from the official app store, if you download from other stores, a warning appears saying something to the effect that this is from an untrusted source, if you install this things may not work properly. They could even add in a clause that says if you need warranty service you have to uninstall all apps from untrusted sources first.

This would actually be a reasonable balance between the two positions.
[doublepost=1498231951][/doublepost]
Not really, Android allows for it and has found a way to do so as safely as possible, so it CAN be done.

Yes, and one only has to read the horror stories of malware on the Android platform to see how well that works in practice.

 

[shk718]

and then these politicians will complain when they get viruses and expect Apple to fix the mess.

 

[AlexH]

Won't ever happen.

Never underestimate the ability of the Italian government to make dumb laws.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

Yes it does count but iPhones can't side load apps.

Yes they can. Since iOS 8.

 

[DoctorDoctor]

They should just look at the mess that is Android for guidance. Once they do they will realize this is a bad idea and move on.

 

[mi7chy]

and then these politicians will complain when they get viruses and expect Apple to fix the mess.

Can't get any worse than iOS/iCloud leak of people's private orifice pictures all over the internet.

 

[vertsix]

To be honest, I love jailbreaking because of the enormous amount of freedom and being to have full control of the device, while still enjoying the perks of iOS (battery life and stuff) excluding updates. And this being said, I can personally never go back to stock iOS.

But I understand why Apple's "walled garden" exists. For example, it allows Apple to push updates quickly and to everyone, something Android suffers on. It allows everyone to have a uniform amount of stability and a fool proof operating system for those who are not tech-literate.

These positives arguably do or do not outweigh the negatives, and I think they do not, hence why I am still jailbroken.

But in the end, this law is stupid. Apple's "walled garden" exists for a couple of good reasons.

 

[nsayer]

This would affect more than just Apple. It would affect all of the major game consoles as well.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

All you have to have is Xcode. It's a free download from Apple. So I guess you also have to have a mac, but it is possible to sideload.

Actually, with Cydia Impactor, you don't have to have XCode, nor a Mac:

http://www.cydiaimpactor.com/

https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/...e-by-sideloading-with-cydia-impactor-0176467/

 

[Darth.Titan]

It's a violation of US anti-trust law or that country's equivalent.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

Not even REMOTELY the same as the situation with Apple's iOS software.
If you actually read the link you posted:

... Microsoft abused monopoly power on Intel-based personal computers...​

So you're saying that Apple has a monopoly on smartphones with ARM-based processors? Not even close. Customers have lots of choices if they don't like Apple's software.
iOS marketshare on smartphones does not compare to Windows' marketshare on PCs in the 90s. You're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Urban Joe]

Competition is always a good thing. Let the market sort it out and let the consumers beware. It's totally plausible that a competing App Store comes along that provides a comparable level of security without charging developers an arm and leg.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

The thing is, you are free to stay inside the walled garden. If Apple allowed side loading they would probably make users go far out of their way to do it. Which is fine; if us geeks want to play around with unvetted software and we are aware of the risks, why not?

Make it difficult enough to the average non-techie won't bother, but those of us who want to side load still can. This is already sort of the case with Xcode free provisioning, but they need to make the certificates last longer than a week.

They have allowed "sideloading" since iOS 8.

You can either have XCode, and Install Applications after answering "Trust This Publisher?", or use Cydia Impactor, which doesn't require Jailbreaking nor even a Mac.

https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/...e-by-sideloading-with-cydia-impactor-0176467/

 

[The Phazer]

This passing is very unlikely, but god I hope it does.

All competition law should feature this, always. Apple have relentlessly abused their code signing on iOS for anti-competitive reasons, and the ecosystem is significantly poorer for it. Apple's censorship of speech on iOS is a defacto evil on society.

The talk of malware on this thread is ludicrously overblown. Malware is not "prevalent" on Android devices, just as it's not "prevalent" on a Mac. It's a tiny, infinitesimally small issue that is trivially mitigated in many ways. A walled garden is, ultimately, a moral evil - a central code signing monopoly is fundamentally setting up a system of control that is inevitably abused by governments.

 

[diegov12]

All iPhone would need to do is use the Android approach: You can download anything from the official app store, if you download from other stores, a warning appears saying something to the effect that this is from an untrusted source, if you install this things may not work properly. They could even add in a clause that says if you need warranty service you have to uninstall all apps from untrusted sources first.

This would actually be a reasonable balance between the two positions.
[doublepost=1498231951][/doublepost]
Not really, Android allows for it and has found a way to do so as safely as possible, so it CAN be done.

Remind me again how many malware apps were found in the google play store?

Remind me again how many people downloaded them?

 

[The Phazer]

You either have limited experience or have no idea what your talking about.
Some companies IT departments allow BYOD and have corporate apps that employees use on those devices.
Some executives in these companies expect and want the tech department to look at other issues with their personsal devices.
I have worked at couple of companies like this in NYC and I'm talking companies with staff greater than 200 thousand employees worldwide.
Of course this is ancdeotal.
YMMV

And on those devices you'd use a software management tool like Good or Microsoft Intune to restrict software installation of sideloaded software on Android if you want them to be compliant with a device security policy.

There are thousands of companies worldwide that do this and strong, tested solutions.

 

[8692574]

This would affect more than just Apple. It would affect all of the major game consoles as well.

No it won't, you can buy console games anywhere, not only in their stores.....GameStop, BestBuy, you know... stores different from the manufacturer's one?

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Nanny gov't to the rescue! Thanks, but no thanks. There is plenty of consumer choice if one is looking for a more open system. If Italy does pass such a law I hope Apple high tails it out of there ASAP. Would be funny if all the Italian iPhone users just crossed the board to by an unlocked phone elsewhere. I'm sure Italian businesses would be as thrilled with that as Taxachussets business are with people running over to NH for big purchases... and alcohol.

 

[nt5672]

Seems like all Apple would have to do is allow you an easy way to install apps from other sources. As they move the iPad closer and closer to being a computer, I see fewer and fewer reasons to keeping the devices restricted only to Apple-approved apps.

They could go the Android route, block third-party installs by default, warn users a dozen times, and then allow it if the user wants it. It's not like installing apps from other sources is a new concept. Apple has just chosen not to allow it.

I agree with this keeping restrictions in place for the iPhone, but not the iPad or macOS. These should both be open and the user allowed to make bad choices (its called freedom).