No, the argument leads to the conclusion that Apple should rather focus their efforts on making the core OS more secure. Security by obscurity (the app vetting model) is no security at all
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook Meets EU Antitrust Chief Ahead of iPhone App Sideloading Deadline
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sure, just be sure to warn us when BMW is one of only two significant automobile vendors in the EU and maybe we can arrange somethingBTW, you EU folk...I wish you'd force BMW to allow me to sideload Apple Car Play on my 1250 GSA motorcycle. They force me to use their terrible software!
Apple does both. And it would be silly to argue that app restriction plays no role in security.
It's actually harmful when done poorly. As in, users think the App Store is 100% secure and then they get bitten by rogue apps that somehow got through the wildly inconsistent approval process. I'd say that isn't something to ignore, security-wise.
So, you're saying that my remedy, right now, is to simply choose a different brand of motorcycle? One that offers sideloading?
No. I'm saying your analogy doesn't hold up because the automobile market is highly competitive. I don't even know how you got that from my comment, unless you didn't even read it, to be fair.
Right. Again, the logical conclusion of your argument would be for Apple to be even more restrictive in its App approval process. But now we're just going around in circles.
The "logical conclusion" is that Apple shouldn't have sole responsibility for app installations.
Directly? Of course not
Indirectly, so Apple can avoid being strong armed with fees or not being able to sell in some EU land, in trade for making it easier of the state sponsored spyware much easier to implement, you betcha!
There's no way to implement such a backdoor partially. You either allow third parties to remotely control app installation or don't, there is no in-between.
Allowing the side loading is changing permissions in the software and opening stuff up, seeing it’s being forced by the biggest of big gov seems silly to not think it benifits them
It's not.
How could I not think of the Illuminati? That makes much more sense. Thanks for opening my eyes.
This entire argument boils down to this:
You: have a preference.
I: have a preference.
They: have a preference.
Governments can and do enact regulations on businesses. All countries do this.
In very few instances of business regulations are there clear cut moral imperatives.
If you like what the EU is doing. Fine. If you don't like what the EU is doing. Fine.
But no side is morally "right" on these arguments.
You: have a preference.
I: have a preference.
They: have a preference.
Governments can and do enact regulations on businesses. All countries do this.
In very few instances of business regulations are there clear cut moral imperatives.
If you like what the EU is doing. Fine. If you don't like what the EU is doing. Fine.
But no side is morally "right" on these arguments.
It makes tons if sense if you look at the history, just over the last few decades of the these state actors
Allowing random software to be installed to be installed weakens stuff
Remember the FBI phone?
Remember the last time a iOS device was used like this, neither do I
What you fail to mention is that "your" "preference" means I'm forced to use a locked down iOS, while "my" "preference" means I have the option, should I want to, to install third party apps, but if you don't, you aren't forced.
I didn't say anything about all backdoors, read my comment again. Focus on the "such a backdoor" part. Besides, even if I did, what you said isn't true. Bugs are a normal occurrence and are almost never intentional.
Of course, iOS is not open-source. That's a whole different topic.
As I say, you can have your preferecne. And your opinion. But I consider the statement that you're "forced to use a locked down IOS" silly.
🤡
You're free to do that but at this point you're no longer engaging in constructive debate.
If the product does not meet the legal requirements he doesn‘t have to do sh**. Here in the EU, there is a limit as to how much a company is allowed to abuse its customers. If you enjoy being treated like that, continue to do so, but not everyone has to let themselves be treated like a child and this is one less f***up we have to deal with over here.
Also not sure where you get your 0.003% but just know that jailbreaking was a huge pita and torpedoed by Apple, and it was a cat and mouse game. People were not willing to keep up with that all the time.
If you wanna see real sideloading stats, go look at macOS and ask Apple how manx people sideload. Oh, right, you don‘t like those numbers.
That's entirely out of context, and it's not even what I said.Neither is claiming that you're "forced" to use IOS
Huh?
I’m not talking fiction, I just posted a video of these types of things
You think the EU is really doing this because they want to be nice to their subjects?
Historically that’s not how big government works, they are doing this because it benefits them
I'm just saying, being scared to death of whatever a government does while embracing corporations and their lust for user data and control is a weird mental gymnastics exercise. But you do you, I guess.
You said...
You're not forced to use IOS at all. Locked or unlocked. No matter your attempt to dance around language.
This is where these discussions go off the rails.
You've chosen to use IOS. Knowing it is locked. 70% of EU users of mobile phones choose to NOT use IOS.
But now we're in silly territory. Best of luck to you.