Rumor has it that Google's subsequent requests for clarification to Apple have gone entirely unanswered, save for automated messages stating that Apple's decision on this matter should be regarded as "final" and "binding", and that no further statement from Apple should be expected.
Maybe Google and Apple's "decision is final" bots can work it out between them.
I'd love to see the Google AI [1] automatically calling Apple customer support "Hello there my app is not starting. May you help me please?".
Is this the achievement of machine learning and speech recognition?
A real show of power would be Apple disabling all of Facebook and Google's public apps, and then bricking all of Facebook and Google's employees' phones.
I don't think Apple is going for a show of power here, just enforcing its rules. Also this would be quite detrimental for all three companies.
"The rules" were not given by God, government or the people. The rules were written by the same company that enforces them and Google, Facebook or anyone else can make the same type of "Rules".
I feel less vengeful satisfaction from this one, but I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. I just hope it doesn't backfire. On a totally personal level, I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies.
Similar concerns. I think this might, in the long term, be detrimental to Apple if companies begin to revolt against their overarching, seemingly totalitarian power regardless of if the intent is noble. As mentioned in a separate Verge article- "One giant platform declared another giant platform’s market research program inappropriate, then disappeared it with a Thanos-style finger snap" also from same article, attri…
"Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones."
no - you are free to run any code on YOUR phones with the enterprise program - you are clearly not free to run any code on OTHERS phones using this program..
Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.
Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.
Google will have explicitly accepted very specific terms at a corporate, much-reviewed-by-legal level when they got their enterprise certificate. It's not a "visiting this site means you're bound by the TOS" sort of situation.
> it doesn't sit well with me that Apple yields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them At the end of the day, you can compile and run anything on your machine. This is just regulating distribution. Given the specific breaches at hand by Facebook and Google, a balance seems to have been found (acceptable to most users) between freedom and security.
> At the end of the day, you can compile and run anything on your machine. Iff you have a Mac. And even then, you need to recompile it every week.
I assume you're being hyperbolic to make a point, but really the need to recompile yearly when my dev cert is up for renewal isn't that bad.
I'd prefer something else for my personal toy applications so I don't even need to bother with this, but it's not a huge deal to me.
I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?
I used to feel that way, and I used Android for years for that reason. But since switching to an iPhone, I've found that what I really want from my phone is not a totally open platform, but a tool that's simple, secure, and effective. Something I don't have to mess with, something I can trust to do its job and respect my privacy and be pleasant to interact with. They tried going that direction a bit with macOS when t…
Honestly that's my feeling as well, but even for workstations, it has begun to dawn on me that spending time configuring the minutiae of various settings and flags and plists etc just isn't worth my time. I just want a workstation that's simple, secure, and effective in getting things done.
Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.
Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.
> Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference.
The difference is that Facebook and Google agreed to and were fully aware of the terms beforehand.
I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?
This will hopefully push Google, Facebook and others to favor web technologies over iOS, a win for open platforms.
I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?
RMS is laughing / crying / something, somewhere...