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

App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 437 posts

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#331

Post by ClumsyPilot »

charcircuit wrote: post #289
keleftheriou wrote: post #27

Great news. Apple has turned the magic of software development from “how cool would this be?” to “how cool would Apple be with this?” That’s an environment of software suppression instead of free innovation, and Apple has felt little pressure to change. For anyone concerned about the security and privacy implications, don’t fall for the misconceptions perpetuated by Apple: non-App Store apps will still be sandboxed (…

If you want free innovation why not develop for PC? If Apple doesn't think free innovation is a good thing for their app store then it's Apple's loss for losing out on innovative software.

Back in the real world Apple blocked UK governments app for letting EU citizen scan their passport and apply fir settled status, harming millions if people

https://www.ft.com/content/3f7ab3fc-c4f4-11e9-a8e9-296ca6651...

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#332

Post by ok_dad »

sgjohnson wrote: post #232
tragictrash wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Apple places a 7 day limit on developer mode side loaded apps when using a free account. Sorry to link to Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/sideloaded/comments/8ht5uy/question...

And there’s also a 3 app maximum Although you can always pay Apple $99/year to get around it!

Plus the cost of an Apple computer to develop it on.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#333

Post by LexGray »

clusterfish wrote: post #268
LexGray wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you are competing against stores that require you to use their ad-tech framework to make up the difference it is a different equation. The idea of billions of devices out there with constantly running background ad-tech frameworks horrifying to me. It would make the AirTags stalking seem like a joke if every phone secretly tracked every Bluetooth. Right now Apple is in the stream to say no to that. The argument…

Bunch of FUD. OS features and permissions aren't going anywhere. Even if coercing users into providing permissions became a real problem, Apple could have the OS provide fake data to apps not whitelisted by the user. If you don't want to be tracked, don't use Google, Facebook, and other ad techs. Doesn't matter whether you installed their apps or not. Even today Apple can't meaningfully shield you from their tracking…

That complex legislation is not going to happen because ad-tech has the money to stop it.

Facebook is right now taking a huge loss due to the fact the walled garden is working.

People compromise their privacy because they didn’t have a choice. Apple is providing that choice until you let Chrome only be installed from the Google store and web sites suddenly say “best with chrome”.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#334

Post by diebeforei485 »

There is no way this will get much floor time on the Senate.

The only real path forward is that a stripped-down version of it is added to some sort of big spending bill, similar to what they did with the tobacco minimum age[1].

https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/congress-raises-minimum-age-tobacco...

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#335

Post by GeekyBear »

hparadiz wrote: post #316
Apocryphon wrote: post #165

I find the FUD against third party app stores on iOS to be simultaneously crediting Apple with providing immense amounts of security in its App Store, and believing that it would be incredibly helpless without sole control through its App Store. That's very contradictory, both in ignoring the many, many vulnerabilities and scams that have proliferated on the App Store through the years (not to mention other negative…

> iOS is more secure than Android [Citation Needed]

I don't think I've ever seen the tech press warn users that they need to be wary of installing apps from inside Apple's App Store the way they have with Google's Play Store.

>With malicious apps infiltrating Play on a regular, often weekly, basis, there’s currently little indication the malicious Android app scourge will be abated. That means it’s up to individual end users to steer clear of apps like Joker. The best advice is to be extremely conservative in the apps that get installed in the first place.

A good guiding principle is to choose apps that serve a true purpose and, when possible, choose developers who are known entities. Installed apps that haven’t been used in the past month should be removed unless there’s a good reason to keep them around.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/09/joker...

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#336

Post by cglong »

starik36 wrote: post #297
keleftheriou wrote: post #27

Great news. Apple has turned the magic of software development from “how cool would this be?” to “how cool would Apple be with this?” That’s an environment of software suppression instead of free innovation, and Apple has felt little pressure to change. For anyone concerned about the security and privacy implications, don’t fall for the misconceptions perpetuated by Apple: non-App Store apps will still be sandboxed (…

I agree with your sentiment, but how would apps be scanned by Apple if you are allowed to sideload via 3rd party stores? They don't exactly scan apps downloaded from Cydia today.

Android can do automatic malware scanning of unknown APKs. When you try to install one, it checks a hash against Google's database, and if a match isn't found, you'll have the option to upload it to their servers.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#337

Post by riantogo »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #185
riantogo wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple’s App Store does a lot to protect me." You can still have that by only installing apps from the App store, no? While I can sideload app from any website I trust. And someone else can install a whole different store they trust. I don't see how it affects your protection in any way.

> I don't see how it affects your protection in any way. The way it affects me is that now, developers are faced with the choice - adhere to Apple’s privacy standards or lose out on the lucrative iOS market. With side loading, they will have the further option of just telling people to side load their apps and not put them on the App Store. This if I desire that the popular apps I use respect my privacy and avoid dar…

That is a fair point.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#338

Post by emptyparadise »

tomjen3 wrote: post #329
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever heard of messaging apps? The kind you want to beep when somebody sends you a message? Currently you have 2 ways of providing this to your users: run the app in the background, maintaining a persistent connection to the server, or via push notifications, where an app is woken from disabled state and displays a message. And background processes are killed off on iOS in less than 15 seconds (the documentation state…

Messaging apps are a good example of when not to do notifications. Why should my day be interrupted because some random contact sends me some information? I don’t have email set to interrupt me, why should chat?

Because there are people you care about and to hear from.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#339

Post by FpUser »

scarface74 wrote: post #124
keleftheriou wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android is in fact the dominant platform by number of users, and has cool stuff like cloud gaming apps that iOS does not. There are also other aspects of the iPhone that many people prefer over Android phones, e.g. hardware features and quality. The point about sandboxing is relevant because many people conflate sandboxing protections with the protections offered by App Review, and thus are afraid that non-App Store…

Don’t you think that dominance worldwide might be attributed to the fact that you can get an Android phone for $50?

The fact that one does not have to sell own kidney to own smartphone definitely helps I think. Does it somehow make non Apple smartphones less of a product?

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#340

Post by MAGZine »

jws wrote: post #320
echelon wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You will have six different app stores on your phone. The Apple one, the Facebook one, the Google one, the Epic one, [...] Let me turn this on its head. If you don't want Facebook, you're free not to download it. > You live in a world in which large predators want to devour you and small predators want to gnaw on you Right now Apple is that large predator. They take 30% (wtf!), have to examine all deploys (nevermin…

I agree with a lot of this, but some of the boogey men in the these arguments when stated simply over inflate themselves. …They take 30% (wtf!)… On 93% of the applications, Apple takes 0%. They vet your app for the users and handle distribution for $0. They provide the development environment for free (Your developer identity costs you $100/year and is required to release software in the store, but the tools are free…

> They vet your app for the users and handle distribution for $0.

... (but not "...")

>They provide the development environment for free (Your developer identity costs you $100/year and is required to release software in the store, but the tools are free and you don't need an identity to use them for yourself.)

So it's not free at all. It's $100/year. I know--I've tried to do it. frankly, it's in insult that I not only get to develop a free app, I get to pay for it, too!

Post reply on HN