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

Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

proton.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 665 posts

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#111

Post by 8fingerlouie »

msgodel wrote: post #85
andrewinardeer wrote: post #20

I'm not an Apple enthusiast—my rarely used iPad mini is my only Apple device—but let me play devil’s advocate. If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it? Why should I be forced to open up the carefully designed ecosystem I’ve built? If my pitch is premium, high-speed hardware and intuitive software so user-…

If you sell me a computer and I don't have a shell on it that's false advertising at best. Doing this en mass with the goal of actually changing people's behavior is even worse IMO. We don't have a word for it because it's not something that could be done before now. Microsoft tried with Windows and IE but the technology at the time meant they couldn't really lock people out of their own devices the way Apple does.

> If you sell me a computer and I don't have a shell on it that's false advertising at best

I believe that's why they're calling it "a phone", or "a tablet". The computer they actually sell has plenty of shells available, and lets you tinker with whatever you like.

A phone is not simply a computer, it's a regulated piece of hardware that must comply with local laws and regulations regarding radio transmissions and other stuff. You can't just peek and poke around anywhere you like in the system.

Besides that, it must be able to talk to carefully tuned 3G/4G/5G cell towers, which sounds easy in theory, but it's not. When I made mobile phones 20 years ago, we had people driving around all countries where we sold it, with a test setup where the phone connected to every cell tower it could "see", and recorded logs and GPS coordinates, and that work (and that of countless others) is partially what became the beginning of A-GPS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GNSS), which allows you to triangulate your phones location purely from the cell towers it can see.

Of course that's not how it works today, as most carriers these days register their cell towers in a central database with GPS coordinates, so A-GPS these days is simply a database dump (and a whole lot of math).

As a "fun" anecdote, when I wrote software for mobile phones, it was the only place I've ever worked that had a bug category for "potential harm to user". I'm certain companies working in Medicare and other critical industries also has that, but it was the first and only time I ever saw it.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#112

Post by 8fingerlouie »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #107
crazygringo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't they? Apple isn't dominant in the market worldwide (Android is), and they are competing against Android. Apple often implements things Android did first. That's how competition works. Apple's global marketshare is 30% or just under.

30% is a pretty big chunk of a market. There is no reason we have to wait until a company has 99% of the market to address anticompetitive behavior.

Samsung is sitting at 28% of the Western European market share with their Android phones. Should we be worried about anti competitive behavior there as well ?

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#113

Post by cosmic_cheese »

surgical_fire wrote: post #101
cosmic_cheese wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, does Settings > Apps > Gmail (or whichever other app) > Default Mail App really qualify as “a complex labyrinth”? Sure, it’d be a good thing to add a “Default Apps” section under Settings > General or something, but calling the current route complex almost sounds like an insult to users. EDIT: Actually, there already is a “Default Apps” section right at the top of the page of Settings > Apps. Yeah, if that’s…

> I mean, does Settings > Apps > Gmail (or whichever other app) > Default Mail App really qualify as “a complex labyrinth”? Compared to Android? Yes. I have no idea why iPhone users put up with this shit.

See my edit. I have two Android devices sitting right in front of me, and they’re identical to iOS in this regard: Settings > Apps > Default apps.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#114

Post by _benton »

whstl wrote: post #96
Velorivox wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Jailbreaking is WAI for the folks who want the “Android experience” on an iPhone. Much of this drama is merely corporations vying to “get theirs” from the ecosystem, without understanding that the extant nature of the ecosystem is why it is the most valuable platform by user spend (that is to say, they care little for the consumer). Shouting "monopoly" from the rooftops is not enough to affect real change. I…

I'm all for corporations "trying to get theirs" if it benefits the rest of society. iPhones are a premium product and they don't have a natural right to 30% of transactions going through it if the participants don't want Apple to know about it. > It’s the “if I can’t have it no one can” line of thought That describes what you and _benton are advocating. "If I can't have the phone be the way I want, no one can".

That's exactly backwards. I have no desire to limit the types of phones you can purchase, and you have an enormous amount of choices in phones outside Apple that provide essentially the same functionality, and can be as open as you wish. You wish to limit my ability to access a device that I want. I want a locked down phone, and third parties wish to intervene on a transaction between me and Apple so they can illegitimately get a piece of the pie.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#115

Post by whstl »

_benton wrote: post #98
whstl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how the legality question is relevant here. My country is not forbidding me from exercising my ownership rights. This "are you prevented by law" question is fallacious, it implies that Apple can do no wrong, since it can't create laws. What Apple is taking away is practical control for owners of a class of device that has become essential to my practical participation in society. I actually desire my coun…

Maybe if the iPhone was the only phone available to purchase this argument has merit. But it's not, there are no shortage of other phones that provide the same features which are "essential to (your) practical participation in society)". If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own. And I don't really like that.

> If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own.

What about we meet in the middle and governments force Apple to only open 50% of the phones, for the same price. Would that satisfy you?

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#116

Post by _benton »

bitpush wrote: post #83
_benton wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Huh, the __user__ paid for the product, so they own it. After the user handed over their money, Apple has nothing to say about who I do business with on that product, or what the conditions are. But this is already the case. You own the device, you can do whatever you want with it (legally ofc). If I buy a fridge without a freezer, the fact that I can't freeze food with it doesn't mean I don't own the fridge. Furth…

[flagged]

It does hurt when I can no longer purchase a product that I want because other corporations wish to use the legal system to make more money, yes.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#117

Post by msgodel »

8fingerlouie wrote: post #111
msgodel wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sell me a computer and I don't have a shell on it that's false advertising at best. Doing this en mass with the goal of actually changing people's behavior is even worse IMO. We don't have a word for it because it's not something that could be done before now. Microsoft tried with Windows and IE but the technology at the time meant they couldn't really lock people out of their own devices the way Apple does.

> If you sell me a computer and I don't have a shell on it that's false advertising at best I believe that's why they're calling it "a phone", or "a tablet". The computer they actually sell has plenty of shells available, and lets you tinker with whatever you like. A phone is not simply a computer, it's a regulated piece of hardware that must comply with local laws and regulations regarding radio transmissions and ot…

Lol. If phones were actually considered critical devices like this implies Android would have been nuked from orbit.

No. They're computers with a modem peripheral. This is like saying once you plugged your e machine into the phone line it could interfere with 911 calls so they need to be regulated by the FCC. We settled that one over 50 years ago.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#118

Post by _benton »

whstl wrote: post #109
_benton wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if the iPhone was the only phone available to purchase this argument has merit. But it's not, there are no shortage of other phones that provide the same features which are "essential to (your) practical participation in society)". If anything, you are attempting to remove my ability to purchase a device I want to own. And I don't really like that.

There are only two viable phone OSs and both have problems. "Vote with your wallet" is a BS argument in such a duopoly, because people care about other stuff.

There are many phones which let you flash your own OS and use with complete control. Please just purchase one of those and stop trying to interfere with my ability to purchase a phone that I want.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#119

Post by whstl »

_benton wrote: post #114
whstl wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for corporations "trying to get theirs" if it benefits the rest of society. iPhones are a premium product and they don't have a natural right to 30% of transactions going through it if the participants don't want Apple to know about it. > It’s the “if I can’t have it no one can” line of thought That describes what you and _benton are advocating. "If I can't have the phone be the way I want, no one can".

That's exactly backwards. I have no desire to limit the types of phones you can purchase, and you have an enormous amount of choices in phones outside Apple that provide essentially the same functionality, and can be as open as you wish. You wish to limit my ability to access a device that I want. I want a locked down phone, and third parties wish to intervene on a transaction between me and Apple so they can illegit…

> You wish to limit my ability to access a device that I want. I want a locked down phone

As others have repeatedly said, you can still opt to not use any other kind of app from outside the AppStore.

But as I asked on another thread, as a thought experiment: What about we meet in the middle and governments force Apple to only "open" 50% of the phones, for the same price. Would that satisfy you?

> third parties wish to intervene on a transaction between me and Apple so they can illegitimately get a piece of the pie.

It's actually Apple that wants to intervene in transactions where I don't want them to be a part of. I don't want to pay 10 euros and give 3 to them.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#120

Post by surgical_fire »

andrewinardeer wrote: post #20

I'm not an Apple enthusiast—my rarely used iPad mini is my only Apple device—but let me play devil’s advocate. If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it? Why should I be forced to open up the carefully designed ecosystem I’ve built? If my pitch is premium, high-speed hardware and intuitive software so user-…

> If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it?

Was that not the sort of rationale Microsoft used to defend its IE shenanigans back in the day?

It was considered to be a violation of antitrust laws then. I don't think Apple would be off the hook now. Especially considering how much more ubiquitous smartphones are in comparison to web browsers back then.

Post reply on HN