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

Rotten Apple

adactio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 226 posts

Re: Rotten Apple

#151

Post by Fischgericht »

interpol_p wrote: post #113
Fischgericht wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would suddenly disallowing users to run a PWA that worked for years improve platform security? How would having Spotify be able to use their own subscription system compromise platform security? Being able to install software without needing an OK from the hardware manufacturer has been standard for over 40 years now. People do it on Windows PCs, on Linux PCs, on MacBooks and on Android phones, and that very clea…

They are not allowed to give their browser an advantage under the DMA. If you take a look at BrowserEngineKit and BrowserKit there is a significant API surface area they offer for third-party browser engines. They must have been building this for some time. It's really detailed, down to allowing developers to implement their own JIT! [1] they have custom UI components replacing their standard scroll views with ones t…

I am not even sure that the EU has mandated that PWAs must be able to run in other browsers. Did you see any such regulation?

From what I understand, the regulation is about allowing users to install third-party apps including browser and of course PWAs. I doubt they mandate what browser engine the app uses, that's the apps business only.

Re: Rotten Apple

#152

Post by robenkleene »

addicted wrote: post #67
robenkleene wrote: post #58

This is a terrible argument: > You can read Apple’s announcement on being forced to comply but as you do you so, I’d like you to remember one thing: every nightmare scenario they describe for the security of users in the EU is exactly what currently happens on Macs everywhere in the world. There's 1.5 billion iPhone users vs 100 million Mac users, Apple believes that at least part of the reason for that difference is…

> There's 1.5 billion iPhone users vs 100 million Mac users It’s beyond hilarious, after years of seeing Apple users fight back against the idea that the Mac’s better security relative to windows Windows has anything to do with its smaller user base, to see Apple users insist that the Mac’s smaller user base relative to the iPhone is what makes it more secure.

I don't really understand your argument, e.g., "seeing Apple users fight back against the idea that the Mac’s better security relative to windows Windows has anything to do with its smaller user base".

Are you saying there was some dispute between where folks were saying Mac's tigher security someone made the platform less popular? I've never heard this. (Also for the record, I personally wouldn't make any case about Mac's security being better than Windows.)

Also side point, I said this is what Apple believes, not "Apple users". I.e., I don't think anyone cares what I think, but Apple behavior on a number of fronts points to Apple believing this (e.g., sandboxing in Mac App Store, reading between the lines of the App Store restrictions, notarization).

Re: Rotten Apple

#153

Post by blantonl »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #119
blantonl wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the UX is so good because they don't care to have a development team supporting your 0.001% edge case of you wanting to run iMovie on your Sun Workstation running Solaris.

[flagged]

The simple reality is this: if you are refusing to follow the established processes and procedures of an ecosystem that you've voluntarily decided to be a part of, for some technical reason you've conjured up or gotten yourself in, for which seems to otherwise work fine for billions of people, then you are a particular edge case

Now, with your final word, don't say something online you wouldn't in a professional setting, especially around here. It is disrespectful and unprofessional, and you should probably know better.

Re: Rotten Apple

#154

Post by robenkleene »

xbar wrote: post #86
robenkleene wrote: post #58

This is a terrible argument: > You can read Apple’s announcement on being forced to comply but as you do you so, I’d like you to remember one thing: every nightmare scenario they describe for the security of users in the EU is exactly what currently happens on Macs everywhere in the world. There's 1.5 billion iPhone users vs 100 million Mac users, Apple believes that at least part of the reason for that difference is…

That's a terrible argument. The MacOS security model has not suffered as Apple asserts.

"The MacOS security model has not suffered as Apple asserts." What does this mean? macOS security has radically changed on a number of fronts since the introduction of the iPhone. E.g., sandboxing, notarization, script execution/Apple Events, file-system access, microphone access, video access. I have no idea what your statement means.

Re: Rotten Apple

#155

Post by [deleted] »

Fischgericht wrote: post #63
thimp wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is just "all we could deliver by the compliance deadline without compromising platform security" ? The truth is usually a lot less interesting than the hypothesis.

How would suddenly disallowing users to run a PWA that worked for years improve platform security? How would having Spotify be able to use their own subscription system compromise platform security? Being able to install software without needing an OK from the hardware manufacturer has been standard for over 40 years now. People do it on Windows PCs, on Linux PCs, on MacBooks and on Android phones, and that very clea…

[deleted]

Re: Rotten Apple

#156

Post by Brian_K_White »

blantonl wrote: post #153
Brian_K_White wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The simple reality is this: if you are refusing to follow the established processes and procedures of an ecosystem that you've voluntarily decided to be a part of, for some technical reason you've conjured up or gotten yourself in, for which seems to otherwise work fine for billions of people, then you are a particular edge case Now, with your final word, don't say something online you wouldn't in a professional sett…

What, like, "Wow, really doubling down on the dickface eh?" Would that be a representative example?

Re: Rotten Apple

#157

Post by jmull »

monkin wrote: post #83

I wonder how the EU will respond when high-ranking politicians fall victim to third-party app store scams or experience significant data leaks exploited through other browsers. Given that they're not particularly tech-savvy, it raises questions about their preparedness for such situations, and who they will blame for it.

(1) Why assume Apple's browser is more secure than the likely alternatives, Chrome and Firefox?

(2) Those high-ranking politicians almost certainly already make heavy use platforms that allow "side-loading" and alternative browsers. That means the attack surface doesn't change much from where it is right now.

Re: Rotten Apple

#159

Post by robenkleene »

devnullbrain wrote: post #118
robenkleene wrote: post #58

This is a terrible argument: > You can read Apple’s announcement on being forced to comply but as you do you so, I’d like you to remember one thing: every nightmare scenario they describe for the security of users in the EU is exactly what currently happens on Macs everywhere in the world. There's 1.5 billion iPhone users vs 100 million Mac users, Apple believes that at least part of the reason for that difference is…

You are conspicuously not noting how much Apple value the $89 billion they made on app store commissions last year.

I don't think that's some big secret, but also irrelevant to the point I'm making. I said Apple believes that they're security model on the iPhone is important to it's popularity. Apple making a bunch of money on the App Store does not contribute to the iPhone's popularity, therefore it's not relevant to my original statement.

What you are really trying to say is that Apple doesn't actually believe the security model is important, instead it's just about collecting money from the App Store, that's a valid interpretation, I just believe that Apple values the iPhone's long-term popularity higher than it values the short-term profits from the App Store. The fact that they can have both is mighty convenient for Apple.

Re: Rotten Apple

#160

Post by Hizonner »

blantonl wrote: post #153
Brian_K_White wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The simple reality is this: if you are refusing to follow the established processes and procedures of an ecosystem that you've voluntarily decided to be a part of, for some technical reason you've conjured up or gotten yourself in, for which seems to otherwise work fine for billions of people, then you are a particular edge case Now, with your final word, don't say something online you wouldn't in a professional sett…

The "established procedures" of the worldwide, multi-company, multi-country "ecosystem" in which Apple is embedded are that everything, or at least everything administrative, can be done first and foremost from a Web page. Once you get that basic functionality in place, you can start screwing around with apps or whatever. Your platform is an "edge case", and, yes, Apple, this means you.

As for professionalism, you appear to be under the unfortunate misapprehension that anybody gets paid to engage in bull sessions on here.

Post reply on HN