221–230 of 375 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple "All" that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is there's going to be competition in what is now a monopoly. To say that the only difference will be lower quality is, at best, naive.
I'm interested to see Steam on the iphone rather than anything Epic might do
Why is a judge asking a witness questions? Isn't that normally either the prosecutor or defense counsels' job?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new iPads literally have the same SOC as what are some of, if not the best consumer laptops on the planet currently. But what can you do with them? Not a heck of a lot, thanks to the walled garden that is iPad OS. If you ask me, that's a crying shame. I don't see how it hurts anyone to allow side-loading of apps on iOS devices. Even if you make it as hard as having a toggle behind a scary warning 2 layers deep in…
Where is the evidence that allowing sideloaded apps will result in an explosion of desktop class apps ? Hasn’t been the case with Android. And I would say the touch centric form factor is far more an issue.
Though android is locking down, making this kind of app difficult in future.
The best result for customers is that there are alternate ways of putting apps on their own phones that do not require apple's permission. Then the customers that trust apple to protect them will just stay with the app store. The customers that try the alternate ways may find problems, but they will also find enormous positive changes in their ability to do new things on their phone. Personally, I would like the abil…
Most phone users aren’t interested in developing software on their phone. They aren’t interested in developing a better systemd. They have no idea what malware actually is. All that is going to happen if Epic gets their own store is Epic will be collecting the 30% rather than Apple, and the user will get apps that are poorly designed, chew battery, and don’t conform to the UX standards that Apple has set (eg: accessi…
It's their phone, they take the risk. You give them a warning that they are about to install an unapproved app just like android. If they go ahead with the install who the heck are you to tell them otherwise?
"Keep your grubby mitts off the apple ecosystem" This line betrays the true motivation: It's about that 30% profit on all transactions.
It's got absolutely zero to do with preventing apps that are "poorly designed, chew battery, and don't conform to UX standards." Apps that meet that description make it through the "QA Process" for app submission, All. The. Time.
I don't buy the excuse from you, and the judge didn't buy it from Tim either, this has got nothing to do with protecting users and everything to do with profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t think Apple has a team of people trying to figure out what you can do with them? iPadOS isn’t designed to cripple the HW, its designed to extract the most from it. Its missing some traditional use cases
in a few seconds I can think of many many ways an ipad is crippled. - look at your data directly and back it up - backup and restore the entire device including apps - use ethernet through the lightning port instead of wifi - use general usb devices through the lightning port - wifi scanner (apple disallowed it in ios early-on) - tcpdump network traffic - change the wifi-off shortcut to actually turn it off (matching…
And allowing apps to sniff network traffic defeats the entire security model of the device which many of us like.
I want more privacy and security in my devices not less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is opening it up so users have a choice. Third party stores will emerge, and it is up to the consumer, not Apple, to decide whether the extra features are worth the new apps being a little rough around the edges like they are on Android. If it's as bad as you say, the new stores will not be successful anyway.
> The point is opening it up so users have a choice. Users have a choice: Don't use iOS. Their actions have pretty overwhelmingly spoken and they don't care. The only people that care are techies. And most obviously not that much because most meetings I show up to are still full of iPhones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new iPads literally have the same SOC as what are some of, if not the best consumer laptops on the planet currently. But what can you do with them? Not a heck of a lot, thanks to the walled garden that is iPad OS. If you ask me, that's a crying shame. I don't see how it hurts anyone to allow side-loading of apps on iOS devices. Even if you make it as hard as having a toggle behind a scary warning 2 layers deep in…
Where is the evidence that allowing sideloaded apps will result in an explosion of desktop class apps ? Hasn’t been the case with Android. And I would say the touch centric form factor is far more an issue.
I would wager that within weeks or months there would be a full windows VM available for the iPad if it was allowed.
Apple could sell Bootloader unlocked iPhones and iPads at a higher premium and then tell Epic there’s your freedom. There’s literally no need to interface with iOS other than Epic wanting to tap into the iOS userbase and platform and to not pay for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is opening it up so users have a choice. Third party stores will emerge, and it is up to the consumer, not Apple, to decide whether the extra features are worth the new apps being a little rough around the edges like they are on Android. If it's as bad as you say, the new stores will not be successful anyway.
> The point is opening it up so users have a choice. Users have a choice: Don't use iOS. Their actions have pretty overwhelmingly spoken and they don't care. The only people that care are techies. And most obviously not that much because most meetings I show up to are still full of iPhones.
And if Apple is so concerned about user security & privacy when it comes to alternative app stores, they should adjust their policies so that the apps most users want will see no reason not to be on the App Store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Then the customers that trust apple to protect them will just stay with the app store. The problem is that if it’s possible to trick grandpa into downloading a malicious app then it will happen. The only defense is to not make it possible. You can argue if that’s a worthy goal or not but thats what Apple has to do if they want to make it impossible to trick people into downloading malware.
This is the point that people keep missing. The most common argument is “just let people install whatever software they want and if they install something bad that’s their fault.” But the point is that, if Apple does allow sideloading apps, customer satisfaction with iPhones will almost certainly go down . Can you argue that those new unsatisfied customers are to blame? Sure. But Apple probably actually cares about h…