Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

puri.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 280 posts

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#191

Post by ogre_codes »

bogwog wrote: post #159
ogre_codes wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet Apple is forcing them to give up 30% of their revenue, because they can. This is a bit disingenuous. Apple isn’t forcing them to give up 30% of their revenue, they are requiring they give users the option to sign up through the App Store. If most of their customers come from outside the App Store, this won’t make much difference to them. If they make less the $1m through the App Store, it will only be 15%. The…

Arguing these fine points is a waste of time because I feel like people defending this are missing the complete insanity of this situation. Try a different perspective: Let's say Apple wants to sell their devices at "Billy's Electronics", which is a tiny kiosk at a mall with minimal foot traffic. Billy tells Apple that he'll only sell Apple devices at his kiosk if Apple agrees to give him 30% of all revenues Apple ma…

> Arguing these fine points is a waste of time because I feel like people defending this are missing the complete insanity of this situation

All I’m suggesting is we just discuss what Apple actually does rather than exaggerating it to poorly make a point.

> That's a deflection tactic, and doesn't justify anything. 15% is still too much as long as there are no alternatives.

I wouldn’t have even mentioned this if you hadn’t blown the first more important point out of proportion.

There is an absolutely massive difference between “All their revenue” and “All revenue from in app purchases”.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#192

Post by themacguffinman »

crusty wrote: post #61

Wouldn't the spirit of librem here suggest the solution would just be to make and distribute an open VPN app on iOS and tell your librem one subscribers to install it and have an easy and secure method of downloading a file with your endpoints? Then there is no argument to be made that it's tied to a subscription because anyone could use it for their own or yours or anyone else's that supports it. PIA (and others I'm…

Pretty sure you can already download an ovpn config for Librem Tunnel [1], the only reason for Librem to develop its own iOS app would be to make it easier than a generic client by connecting directly to the paid service.

[1] https://docs.puri.sm/Librem_One/Generic.html

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#193

Post by howinteresting »

3grdlurker wrote: post #58

Can somebody provide a direct answer to the question of why Apple’s App Store policies are bad? The argument that always comes up is that it is anti-competitive, but how does that not encroach on every business owner’s right to decide who they want to do business with, how they want to run their businesses, and how they design their platforms? Also, one of the examples that always comes up in these discussions is how…

> but how does that not encroach on every business owner’s right to decide who they want to do business with

There is no such right. There is a right to free association, but incorporation is a privilege granted by the state. It comes with many benefits, such as being able to walk away from the business if it goes bankrupt. It also comes with some responsibilities, such as not violating civil rights and antitrust laws.

In practice, some businesses start exerting too much power and start harming other entities, so they have it reduced.

There's been plenty written about antitrust. Check out some of the works of Lina Khan, who's slated to join the FTC soon: https://www.wired.com/story/lina-khan-ftc-antitrust-biden-ad...

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#194

Post by knubie »

ncw96 wrote: post #120
akmarinov wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sucks, they don't require it of Netflix, Spotify, Amazon, Disney, etc What Librem are doing is the right thing though - go to the press, raise a big stink and Apple will back off. It's been proven to work time and time again.

Apple has a well known exception to the rule requiring an option to subscribe inside the app for “reader” apps, a vaguely defined which includes Netflix, Spotify, Dropbox, and seemingly whatever else is convenient to Apple. Apple did not lift this requirement for the Hey email app during the controversy over that last year. Instead, they reached a compromise where Hey would offer a free trial of their service inside…

What's maddening is that that "solution" isn't even informed by anything in their guidelines, and technically Hey is still not compliant according to 3.1.3(b).

> 3.1.3(b) Multiplatform Services: Apps that operate across multiple platforms may allow users to access content, subscriptions, or features they have acquired in your app on _other platforms or your web site_, including consumable items in multi-platform games, _provided those items are also available as in-app purchases within the app_.

And by that rule there are _many_ apps from big companies that violate App Store guidelines, yet they get a pass because Apple doesn't have has much leverage over those companies as they do with small independent developers.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#195

Post by knubie »

This is timely considering I just got hit with a rejection from Apple for my app. It's insane to me that a $1 trillion company is willing to put someone out of business for a measly $300/mo.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#196

Post by wmf »

3grdlurker wrote: post #184
wmf wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox and Chrome were able to dethrone IE because Windows doesn't have any gatekeeper preventing apps from being installed. Apple has the right to decide who they do business with, but app developers shouldn't be forced to do business with Apple at all. That's the asymmetric part of the relationship. App developers should be allowed to distribute/sell apps directly to people. Specifically, the expected outcome is e…

> Firefox and Chrome were able to dethrone IE because Windows doesn't have any gatekeeper preventing apps from being installed. What’s preventing people from buying an Android, though? This really is just a story of two businesses who can’t agree with the terms of engagement: Apple requires subscription-based services to use their payment system if the services want to be available in their platform, and Librem doesn…

There's the issue of market power: given that >50% of the market already has iPhones, they won't switch to Android just to get one app. It's not about competing ecosystems/platforms; this problem applies to tons of apps.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#197

Post by throwaway19937 »

Barrin92 wrote: post #87
jsperson wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, I spend 0% of my time managing iOS devices for my parents and am constantly bombarded with issues from my in-laws with Android phones. I agree that some of Apple's behavior is monopolistic and has some unfortunate, possibly unforeseen consequences, but the end result is pretty nice for the consumers who are willing to accept the compromise.

I'm always amazed that in the land of the brave and free butchering general purpose computing machines is supposed to be justified by the fact grandma doesn't install the wrong apps. Funny is this argument always exclusively pops up when it comes to Apple smartphones. Are we supposed to lock every desktop down too because mom and pop installed a wrong toolbar? It's like the reverse 'but think of the children', and pe…

> I'm always amazed that in the land of the brave and free butchering general purpose computing machines is supposed to be justified by the fact grandma doesn't install the wrong apps.

If you want a low-quality platform with limited security updates, multiple app stores, and other debris then buy an Android. I chose an iPhone so I wouldn't have to deal with these issues.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#198

Post by zepto »

ece wrote: post #143
zepto wrote: post #26

I have been a vocal supporter of Librem, and Pine64 because I see the adoption of free devices running free software as a necessary solution and the way to ultimately change the dynamics in the industry. They are literally doing the thing I think is the solution. On the other hand, I oppose the generic bashing of Apple and Epic’s antitrust campaign, because these have nothing to do with creating an alternative. Indee…

I disagree, it's perfectly fine for a developer to say no, I can't be in a closed ecosystem for these reasons like Purism stated. We need developers and users to choose open ecosystems.

I have nothing against them leaving the store or criticizing Apple or the store.

I couldn’t agree more that people need to choose open ecosystems.

It’s the writing in support of Epic’s anti-trust suit that I dislike.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#199

Post by [deleted] »

comex wrote: post #175
jasonjayr wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect any device with general purpose computing capabilities to allow me to use those capabilities anyway I want. Especially I'm spending $1000 USD on the thing.

What if the way you want is using the App Store's payment infrastructure?

[deleted]

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#200

Post by chipotle_coyote »

thelopa wrote: post #101
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's got to be a carrier thing. iPads do not "require activation," and many iPads are wifi-only. I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but I am extremely skeptical it is a problem caused by Big Bad Evil Apple doing Big Bad Evil things.

I think you are mistaken. Activation is unrelated to cellular service. Activation is an anti-theft feature. E.g. even M1 macs are subject to activation and activation lock. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208987 Replacing the sim card in a device immediately triggers activation (e.g. to stop someone from using a stolen, passwordless device as their own). So, if the sim went bad, it seems plausible that the device m…

Hmm. Okay, that sounds reasonable! I've come across the "Activation Required" screen before, both with people asking similar questions specifically about old cellular iPads, and it specifically says "Activation Required" while it's waiting to talk to an activation server, and that server really does cellular configuration. (I have personal experience with this step being screwed up on a new iPhone once. It was not a super fun time.)

A bit of Googling shows the "Activation Lock" screen as a screen that says, well, "Activation Lock"; I think it's really a separate thing. If that's what happened to the OP, then it can be unlocked from the web:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201441

Post reply on HN