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

Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

techradar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 344 posts

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#321

Post by smoldesu »

JimDabell wrote: post #173
TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #18

It's funny how the 30% tax and App Store nonsense automatically makes me want Apple to lose every single court case in perpetuity. Having such a monopoly on a device you purchase really means the legal system needs to take you down a notch.

> the 30% tax 15%. Almost everybody pays 15%, not 30%. The only organisations who pay 30% earn over a million dollars a year from things other than long-term subscriptions. That’s a tiny minority.

27%, if their demands in the Netherlands are still being taken seriously: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/02/apple-shocks-ios...

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#322

Post by saagarjha »

varenc wrote: post #316
saagarjha wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not much of a security argument for forbidding a JIT.

Interesting! I had assumed that if you could mark pages of memory as executable (for a JIT), that an app could use that to call all sorts of security/privacy sensitive private APIs they're usually forbidden from using. But maybe not? Or is iOS sandboxing just good enough it doesn't matter? (but at the minimum, it does still seem to nullify the app store review process if apps can introduce arbitrary new behavior/code…

You can do that anyways (i.e. by obfuscating the call so that review doesn’t find it). The sandbox (+entitlements) is supposed the be the actual security boundary here. A JIT makes bypassing review easy which is why they don’t like it but bypassing review is pretty easy already just by writing your code in JavaScript and downloading it from the internet so there’s not much technical merit to the policy.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#323

Post by jonplackett »

amelius wrote: post #317
jonplackett wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which IMHO has made the AppStore a cesspool of awfulness. Buying a one time app for a few quid used to be a normal and a good deal all round (I say this as a customer and iOS developer) But now EVERYTHING is a monthly subscription. Even for apps that really shouldn’t need any updates - but like you say, they do need constant updates just to remain functions. It’s created a broken AppStore and I just never pay for any…

Ripe for disruption ...

I’m in the UK and it’s looking from the rumours 3rd part AppStore’s are gonna be EU only so we’ll be missing out.

Another fabulous consequence of brexit.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#324

Post by usernew »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #168
usernew wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sorry to have to say this, as it detracts from discussion. you really need to read the full text of things to which you are replying, before replying. you are wrong, and your exact point was already explained. yes - criminal law is the only source of illegality. that is literally the definition of the word.

> criminal law is the only source of illegality. that is literally the definition of the word. Your definition is not compatible with any common understanding of the word, or with any major dictionary. Maybe you should check the definition of the word before taking a position on what it is, next time.

I give up. Enjoy doubling down Pooty, and take your own advice. Look up what a crime is (this is illegal) and look up what a tort is. There is a reason we have civil and criminal courts.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#325

Post by scrollaway »

lostlogin wrote: post #305
scrollaway wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, you too. I’m sorry but yeah, if you want a concrete solution that is on par with what google offers in terms of privacy and security, you can’t go with a random company and everything I said before stands. And in this scenario, fastmail IS a random company no matter how long you’ve used them.

I don’t understand how you define privacy - your data is used to sell adverts. Is that not part of the equation?

None of my data is used to sell adverts. You seem to completely miss that I’m using google workspace. I have a contract with google, I’m not using free shit.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#326

Post by Tagbert »

rollcat wrote: post #202
amelius wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I wonder why do we have Wine to run Windows stuff on Linux, but we have no equivalent to run OSX programs on Linux ... Is nobody interested in implementing the OSX APIs on Linux?

It's a very fast moving target. Apple keeps rewriting and deprecating stuff faster than they can write the documentation. As a newcomer to native macOS development, I'm sometimes struggling to even find working examples.

That may be true in Swift, which is a relatively new language that was evolving rapidly in the early years. For objective-C the rate of change has been much slower.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#327

Post by thaumasiotes »

usernew wrote: post #324
thaumasiotes wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> criminal law is the only source of illegality. that is literally the definition of the word. Your definition is not compatible with any common understanding of the word, or with any major dictionary. Maybe you should check the definition of the word before taking a position on what it is, next time.

I give up. Enjoy doubling down Pooty, and take your own advice. Look up what a crime is (this is illegal) and look up what a tort is. There is a reason we have civil and criminal courts.

Torts are just as illegal as crimes. (And of course, in most usage, torts are just a particular subtype of crimes.) If torts weren't illegal, there'd be no justification for fining you after you committed a tort.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#328

Post by JimDabell »

smoldesu wrote: post #321
JimDabell wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the 30% tax 15%. Almost everybody pays 15%, not 30%. The only organisations who pay 30% earn over a million dollars a year from things other than long-term subscriptions. That’s a tiny minority.

27%, if their demands in the Netherlands are still being taken seriously: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/02/apple-shocks-ios...

Nope, 12% in that case. The 27% figure assumes a reduction from the 30% rate virtually nobody pays. If you read Apple’s documentation, you’ll see that they say they will reduce their commission by 3%:

> Apple will reduce its commission by 3% on the price paid by the user, net of value-added taxes. This is a reduced rate that excludes value related to payment processing and related activities.

— https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl...

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#329

Post by kaba0 »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #296
kaba0 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the latest OS. By what OS is your desktop supported actively? Also, iphones are supported for almost 10 years.

Fedora 38, Windows 10 I'm not asking about phones, we were talking about laptops.

Are they support your exact model? Or they can run them, and may even have a sticker for windows compatibility? That’s very different thing.

Re: Apple just lost its lawsuit trying to ban iOS virtual machines

#330

Post by andromeduck »

jstarfish wrote: post #309
Gareth321 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am convinced this is by design. Apple has leaned heavily into service based revenue. This means recurring revenue. So in their App Store, they heavily incentivise subscriptions over one-time purchases. One of their tools is frequent and rapid API deprecation. This breaks older apps which aren't maintained. Developers must therefore spend much more effort on maintaining software on iOS and macOS (I can still run sof…

> This breaks older apps which aren't maintained. This does suck when you find an "old" app that works well, but there is an upside-- the 99% of other garbage apps from 15+ years ago don't pollute ongoing search results forever. Eventually, old apps that aren't maintained get popped from the stack. The other upside is that new developers don't have to compete with ghost apps from the past continuing to leech new inte…

Isn't that what metrics like DAU is meant to capture?

Making DAU & avg active time per day in addition to user reviews/ratings would be a pretty strong signal.

Post reply on HN