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

Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 851 posts

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#601

Post by tmwed »

i’d like to think if Apple allowed the AppStore to be an interface/gateway to other stores, most users would be happy. similar to how RSS works, but it keeps it unified for the user.

as many people have mentioned before, one of the main reasons people choose iOS is that it removes the choice and worry about unintentionally installing malware.

opening up the AppStore like this i think would allow Apple to ease up a bit on the gouging they’ve been doing now and instead become a pro-active leader in creating a specification/platform that others can adopt.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#602

Post by paulmd »

azinman2 wrote: post #432
kmonsen wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would more be like if food safety inspections were optional, but only restaurants that opt in would be allowed to show a sign they were inspected either physically or on their web page. It would be trivial to be able to check for this. Door dash would show a sign saying which restaurant is safe to avoid being sued after an incident. If you think restaurants and food safety is a good analogy it’s not a good argumen…

Except now there isn’t just 1 inspector, but many. And you have to figure out which you trust. Now imagine there’s a very popular restaurant, but it uses an inspector you don’t know if you trust. But you want to eat the food because all your friends are already there… so you’ll go. This is exactly what would happen— various companies once they reach a certain size will just want to have their own store because either…

facebook literally already got their hand slapped for abusing the very limited sideloading mechanisms that Apple already provided.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-...

This would generalize that and allow them to sideload for everyone. They straight-up would pull out of the app store, block Safari users from the website, and force everyone to sideload a tracker build on day 1.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#603

Post by wgjordan »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #256
wgjordan wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Analogy to drug safety makes no sense - FDA regulates drug safety and 'fake' generic drugs are very much allowed, so customers may choose generic drugs without needing to distinguish safe/unsafe themselves.

Counter to your point, pretend Apple is the FDA and the drugs are apps. Now pretend the government wants to get rid of Apple/FDA.

Pretend that Apple is a federal agency, not a corporation? Then its monopoly power would be legitimate and antitrust laws would not apply.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#604

Post by asdjlkadsjklads »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #583
Zak wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an important distinction here in that Apple is a for-profit company, not a government. It responds to market forces, not democratic ones. Its motivation is profit and shareholder value, not some semblance of fairness or a good society. > most people just want a safe app store We already have an example of how users behave when there's a platform that has a default app store and the ability to install others:…

I would argue that the US government is also a for-profit government, don't give up your rights so quickly to them. At least with Apple you know what they want: money. With government it could be money, a power play, government official looking to get on the map (ambition), a policy lobbied for by a bought off politician, etc

Agreed, but only one party there is supposed to be working in your interest.

It's why i'm pro-big-government, but also very heavy handed about what i want to see with government transparency and power dynamics.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#605

Post by paulmd »

bsaul wrote: post #580
crazygringo wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is exactly what everyone wants to avoid. Imagine if there were 10 inspection groups, but sometimes they get bought by corrupt investors who let standards slide while pocketing the extra profit, and consumers constantly have to stay on top of which food inspection groups are the current OK ones and which aren't, and restaurants can't afford to get inspected by all 10 so they only do 2 but then people who only tr…

Apple would definitely need to make guidelines for stores. They would obviously be different than for apps, and deal with more meta aspects of the regulation (such as, fair examination of app submission, possibility for rejected apps to appeal, obligation for app owner to be identified, etc). Much like a government can create quality standards and then outsource parts of its missions to private sector.

Why wouldn't Epic Games then come crying that those rules are unfair and burdensome too?

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#606

Post by Aeolun »

tshaddox wrote: post #290
yosito wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good illustration of the point. But at the same time, customers have multiple pharmacies to choose from. And I'm pretty sure that it's still more the government regulators' job (FDA, etc) to decide what's safe to sell or not, than it is the for-profit corporations'.

Customers have multiple smartphone choices too, and most people choose non-Apple smartphones. If people want a smartphone where they can easily install any software from any source, there are plenty of very good options.

Plenty? There’s one option. Which is Android.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#607

Post by Aeolun »

bsaul wrote: post #586
s3r3nity wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If he believes customers genuinely value his curated app store, let him show us. They already did - they choose iOS over Android / other possibilities.

I value iOS hardware and operating system. I couldn’t care less about other apple software, and especially the app store which i only use as a package repository, and never as a recommandation or browsing tool (which is ideally what a store should be)

There was a time when the app store had higher quality apps, but the time when they’d be held to higher standards is long gone.

Just like the internet, it’s now flooded by crap.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#608

Post by mthoms »

ericmay wrote: post #521
mthoms wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong disagree. We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. Consider that different classes of vehicles are regulated differently, even though they all rely on the same underlying technology. The law should serve the people, not some rigid doctrine.

> We should regulate based on what's best for consumers and the free market. I agree completely, which is why hopefully Apple prevails. Their ecosystem is the best for Apple customers and the free market.

That's a perfectly valid argument IMHO. The argument equating smart phones with consoles however, is downright silly.

Can I ask, how does letting me have the option of occasionally purchasing songs, books, movies and character skins direct from vendors hurt your ability to enjoy the benefits of purchasing everything direct from Apple?

I just don't understand how that would ruin the system for you. If anything, wouldn't it force Apple to improve their store in order to be more competitive? Would that not be a benefit to you?

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#609

Post by paulmd »

celsoazevedo wrote: post #55
jrsj wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because my grandma is clueless and I give her an iPhone so she doesn’t install malware like she managed to on her Android phone

It's weird that a clueless person was able to download and install a malware apk when by default Android forces you to go to your settings and allow apps to install other apps (the behaviour has changed over the years, but you always need to do something). Not to mention that Google Play Protect scans your apps and warns you if it finds something sketchy. In any case and as much as I like my own clueless grandma, I d…

It's not exactly difficult to walk users through the process - Epic Games already makes you bypass all the warnings if you want to install fortnite.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-get-fortnite-on-andro...

Once it becomes normalized for users to click through the warnings, they become meaningless and powerless, just like any warning.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#610

Post by Aeolun »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #575
mdoms wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not weird because it didn't happen.

It's actually happened more than once. Perhaps the person you were replying to was lying; doesn't make their point valid, because it has actually happened. People can follow the most complicated step by step instructions if they're explained clearly enough, by someone they feel they don't need to trust , and there's an incentive to follow them.

If grandma ignores my advice and installs the unsafe app despite the steadily more large and screaming warnings doesn’t that become individual responsibility at some point?
Post reply on HN