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

Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 346 posts

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#321

Post by snapcaster »

LtWorf wrote: post #240
snapcaster wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, all these moves to open iOS are from some of the biggest pushers of enshittification. The walled garden is great for me, and all sideloading will do is open up new attack vectors for me (and more importantly, the tech ignorant people i care about). I understand the corporate actors pushing for this out of self interest, but all of the bystanders cheering this on annoy me. You already have android, linux phon…

I like how you appropriate a word coined by someone with a completely opposed point of view to your own. Just kidding. I don't like it. Live and let live man. Nobody is forcing you to install anything you don't want. Don't impose your preferences on others. It does no damage to you.

It likely won't since I'm technologically sophisticated, but it likely will do damage to people I care about

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#322

Post by theshrike79 »

smoldesu wrote: post #317
theshrike79 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Alternate store" might just be Epic's own store, the one with Fortnite. A big trustworthy name in the parents' eyes. Then the parents insert their CC info so Timmy can get the latest Disney skin for his game. And of course the store doesn't have any safeguards or parental controls, they're on the iOS side. In the official store. Can you seriously, hand on heart, tell me that people will in this case blame Epic f…

Apple should be to blame. Even registered and paying iOS developers aren't allowed basic sideloading privileges you'd get for free on Android. This isn't about stopping Little Timmy, this is about annihilating all avenues of app distribution that doesn't come from Apple. If Apple took a softer stance on this earlier, then developers wouldn't be up-in-arms right now. And mind you - nothing actually stops Apple from de…

How is it Apple’s problem when someone designs an alternate App Store with no safeguards or parental controls?

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#323

Post by smoldesu »

theshrike79 wrote: post #322
smoldesu wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple should be to blame. Even registered and paying iOS developers aren't allowed basic sideloading privileges you'd get for free on Android. This isn't about stopping Little Timmy, this is about annihilating all avenues of app distribution that doesn't come from Apple. If Apple took a softer stance on this earlier, then developers wouldn't be up-in-arms right now. And mind you - nothing actually stops Apple from de…

How is it Apple’s problem when someone designs an alternate App Store with no safeguards or parental controls?

Because it's Apple's problem regardless. The iPhone is at-odds with it's identity of security and privacy even without the threat of sideloading. The App Store, a supposedly curated and well-reviewed platform, is dominated by pay-to-play games and ad-supported datamining apps. First-party Apple software like iMessage is perpetually vulnerable to escalation attacks due to the way it's designed. iCloud is basically a fancy sticker on state-owned and surveilled datacenters that Apple markets for an easy buck.

Now, they want to argue that sideloading is the straw that breaks the camel's back? Not Safari, which has enabled lord knows how many scams and privilege escalation attacks. Not the App Store, which disseminates exploitative and fraudulent content under the guise of simplicity and security. Not iMessage, the perennial attack-vector for escalated malware. Somehow it's the sideloaders who are the problem, for daring to suggest that the iPhone should rely on OS-level security rather than arbitrary (and often wrong) first-party curation.

Who do you suggest we blame?

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#324

Post by acdha »

smoldesu wrote: post #318
acdha wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now think about this scenario: the parent approves installation when asked because they didn’t realize it was an open ended financial commitment, and because like most people they associate app stores with curation which prevents abuse. When they get a huge bill 6 months later, or after the game company is acquired, etc. the first thing they’re going to ask is why nobody warned them. That’s the point of these dialogs…

Today, Timmy's parents learn what a "chargeback" is, and how stable financial institutions help circumvent fraud better than App Store curation does.

Just wait until you try to cancel a subscription and learn why that one feature is so popular with Apple users.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#325

Post by smoldesu »

acdha wrote: post #324
smoldesu wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today, Timmy's parents learn what a "chargeback" is, and how stable financial institutions help circumvent fraud better than App Store curation does.

Just wait until you try to cancel a subscription and learn why that one feature is so popular with Apple users.

Just wait until subscriptions can be bought for ~<30% cheaper elsewhere and see how much it matters to people. Apple will certainly get their chance to make a case for the feature.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#326

Post by LtWorf »

snapcaster wrote: post #321
LtWorf wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you appropriate a word coined by someone with a completely opposed point of view to your own. Just kidding. I don't like it. Live and let live man. Nobody is forcing you to install anything you don't want. Don't impose your preferences on others. It does no damage to you.

It likely won't since I'm technologically sophisticated, but it likely will do damage to people I care about

Install parent mode on their devices if they need a parent.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#327

Post by [deleted] »

menacingly wrote: post #36

This is a complicated issue. On the one hand, I tend to have a generally unfavorable view of apple. I don't like closed systems, oversimplified to the point of missing critical settings UX, etc. That said, I really don't understand the issue with their cut, or insisting on handling payments. In the vast majority of cases, these are not your customers. These are apple's customers they have given you access to. If the…

[deleted]

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#328

Post by acdha »

smoldesu wrote: post #325
acdha wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait until you try to cancel a subscription and learn why that one feature is so popular with Apple users.

Just wait until subscriptions can be bought for ~<30% cheaper elsewhere and see how much it matters to people. Apple will certainly get their chance to make a case for the feature.

Yes, nobody is arguing that some people will follow the cheapest option but this thread is about the guy claiming that it’s anticompetitive for users choosing his payment system to receive a confirmation that it’s not the Apple system they’re used to and has different policies.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#329

Post by eviks »

lurking_swe wrote: post #277
Ajedi32 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The computers themselves generally do work the way I want, my issue is that the manufacturers have put in place artificial restrictions to prevent me from using them in any way other than the way they want. I don't mind reasonably justifiable technical limitations. Just don't "sell" me a product and then put a lock on it that I the supposed owner am not allowed to open. As for why it matters... companies get away wit…

i’m frustrated by the situation too, but your argument falls short for me. to play devils advocate - you knew all of this when you bought your iphone. Further, apple lets customers return a product within 2 weeks if they are unhappy with it. Your argument would be more convincing if apple suddenly started restricting the device in a different way AFTER purchase. That being said, i’d LOVE being able to install my own…

Of course you didn't know most of this when you bought your phone, and Apple is limiting the spread of information to make you knowledgeable, so how would 2 weeks of using that censored platform help learn?

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#330

Post by smoldesu »

acdha wrote: post #328
smoldesu wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait until subscriptions can be bought for ~<30% cheaper elsewhere and see how much it matters to people. Apple will certainly get their chance to make a case for the feature.

Yes, nobody is arguing that some people will follow the cheapest option but this thread is about the guy claiming that it’s anticompetitive for users choosing his payment system to receive a confirmation that it’s not the Apple system they’re used to and has different policies.

It could very well be anticompetitive. Microsoft was was almost broken up over similar scareware tactics, you'd have to be blind to see Apple in a different position today.
Post reply on HN