91–100 of 667 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is true only in the most technical of senses. Practically, Apple has near complete control over what is allowed to execute on an iOS device.
Excluding technical users, Google Play Services is the same. And their grip only tightens over time.
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?
https://www.recode.net/2018/9/12/17848384/nicole-wong-cto-la...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On what basis? They clearly violated the rules.
Google doesn't need a basis to retaliate other than "we want to". Maybe they'll yank the Apple Music app from the Android app store or something.
There are contractual obligations for both parties. Taking retaliatory action that is not permitted by the terms of the contract will result in a lawsuit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
The advantage of the Free Profile is that (afaik) it can't be revoked or censored. Disadvantage is 7 day lifespan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If you think they're "very clearly laid out", can you quote the relevant sections, and definitions, from the terms that make it so? I've been searching, and asking, and not seen them yet.
The terms are very clear. Apple wants to control distribution of apps, the enterprise program is only supposed to be for employees or for end users using under the direct personal supervision of an employee as part of an in office test. The conditions are clearly defined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I'm not sure I quite understand your complaint about the Mac's App Store. I want to have free reign on my workstation, but part of that is I want to be able to limit the amount of access that programs have. The big difference with the App Store, from my perspective, is that I know that the applications are sandboxed, signed, and someone out there can revoke the code signing certificate. This is basically what I want,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The parent is correct if you're not using the Developer Certificate, but relying on the Free Provisioning Profile - as the name implies, it is free, but it only lasts for 7 days instead of the 1 year you get with a paid developer account / Developer Certificate. The advantage of the Free Profile is that (afaik) it can't be revoked or censored. Disadvantage is 7 day lifespan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If you think they're "very clearly laid out", can you quote the relevant sections, and definitions, from the terms that make it so? I've been searching, and asking, and not seen them yet.
"Your company, organization or educational institution would like to use the Apple Software (as defined below) to develop one or more Internal Use Applications (as defined below) for Apple- branded products running iOS, watchOS, tvOS, and/or macOS, and to deploy these Applications only for internal use within Your company, organization or educational institution or for limited use as expressly set forth herein."
https://developer.apple.com/terms/ → Apple Developer Enterprise Program License Agreement