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

Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

ericmigi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#611

Post by cyberax »

miki123211 wrote: post #442
tremon wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize this is a very infantilizing attitude? Why can't the end user choose its own level of security vs usability? Letting a corporation decide this for all users is just creating a nanny state in different clothing.

Because with iMessage, it's not about your own security, it's about the security of everybody that you're allowed to message from a given device. I suspect Apple can significantly cut down on abuse prevention measures just by making it harder to automatically send iMessage spam. If any random Bluetooth smartwatch was allowed to send those, there's no telling how that capability could be abused, we all know how IoT ve…

> Because with iMessage, it's not about your own security, it's about the security of everybody that you're allowed to message from a given device.

You do realize that you're implying that Apple is insecure by design? Because I can easily (locally) root my iPhone and get raw access to iMessage.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#612

Post by [deleted] »

guelo wrote: post #529
EA-3167 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I learned a while ago is that there's a particular brand of very vocal person online who has a bone to pick with Apple. Sometimes it's for a good reason, sometimes less so, but the point is that they come to discussions of any Apple topic with a conclusion ready in hand and then work backwards from that. In this case the conclusion is, "Apple is wicked, perfidious, and monopolistic." Truthfully there isn't…

Aren't all you apple defenders with very similar opinions also "a particular brand of very vocal person online"?

[deleted]

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#613

Post by frollogaston »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #586
frollogaston wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm annoyed about the dongles, but that's about it. Macs work better.

It all depends on what you're doing. For many on here, Macs are technically worse because they use docker and that means instead of just running docker and using the container functionality in the Linux kernel they have to virtualise a Linux VM to run docker in. If you're gaming it's not as good as Windows. Macs are ok, they do the job and in some areas they are better. But really, for most it doesn't matter, it's al…

Docker is fine on Mac but still a small sliver of user base, and nobody is buying a Mac to play games. For all those other general uses, they're better, that's why they buy them. Battery lasts long, fan doesn't spin up, you don't get harassed by Windows, you don't deal with Linux Bluetooth drivers. Not for style.

Apple Watch for style, sure. It's a watch after all. Not that it actually looks good.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#614

Post by inopinatus »

tremon wrote: post #364
Retric wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every device you let in is another attack surface, and no certification process can eliminate it. Allowing devices to view and respond to messages is inherently lower risk than allowing them to freely communicate with anyone.

You do realize this is a very infantilizing attitude? Why can't the end user choose its own level of security vs usability? Letting a corporation decide this for all users is just creating a nanny state in different clothing.

The adverse consequences are not limited to the end user that made that choice, and few people will subsequently admit culpability for the external consequences of poor choices. Which is to say, people are hypocrites. How surprising. Thus is the boundary of rational individualism identified.

Not all corporations make better choices, however, which motivates a regulatory role. Thus is civilisation identified.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#615

Post by KennyBlanken »

nixpulvis wrote: post #604
Nifty3929 wrote: post #268

I think people forget that Apple is not making devices for the Hackernews community. They are making devices for people that just want something that works pretty well and has reasonable security - even to the extent of protecting them from themselves. They have other things to do with their time than learn about security vulnerabilities and how to avoid them. They want to just click 'yes' on every popup and expect t…

Sub $200 smart-watches would be great for a lot of people.

There are a bunch of them in the market already. You can also buy used/refurbished.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#616

Post by m463 »

wpm wrote: post #184
liuliu wrote: post #81

I think, we fundamentally lack a mechanism to enforce secure / privacy aware APIs without resorting to trusted inner-circle type of things. I am already not comfortable with Apple picking winners (such as giving Zoom special entitlement but not the VOIP apps you want to distribute by your own). Apple trusting their own apps more than other apps is another symptom of this and it is not helping their anti-trust situati…

Quicktime Player.app gets an entitlement called `com.apple.private.tcc.allow`, giving it unprompted access to the Camera, Microphone, and Screen Capture. An MDM administrator, managing a computer or device owned by an organization, cannot grant those permissions to anything without user consent. For good reason! So why the *fuck* does Apple think they're entitled to?

Because to activate apple's device (not yours), you had to read 1000+ pages of terms and conditions (did you?) and they told you this somewhere in there.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#617

Post by op00to »

bigyabai wrote: post #441
lynx97 wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user, I am totally fine with Apple restricting access to iMessage. In fact, now that I read this, I want them to do this, thanks Apple.

You can thank Apple for the Lightning connector and App Store too, for all the good it does everyone in the EU. If a company uses their power to prevent competition with their own products or services, the market's jurisdiction reserves the right to restore competition to their market and prevent the harms inherent to monopoly abuse.

I specifically liked the lightning cable and the App Store. I had no problem getting lightning cables for a fair price, and I have no problem finding all the applications I need on my iOS devices. Compared with the sewer that is the Play Store, the App Store is a breath of fresh air.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#618

Post by NotPractical »

vv_ wrote: post #579
shantara wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re rapidly approaching the point where having a smartphone is becoming a necessity for being a functional part of the society. You could argue that is some countries we’re already past that point. A device of this social importance that’s also locked into one of the two American megacorps absolutely needs as much scrutiny as possible, since the interests of those megacorps are not aligned with the interests of the…

> having a smartphone is becoming a necessity for being a functional part of the society This is correct, as in some countries, you use your phone to authenticate access to banking applications and payments (e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart-ID ). However, I find it a bit of a stretch to claim that having iMessage access on a smartwatch is essential for being a functional member of society. Corporations will…

> people can simply switch to an Android phone

Giving all your data to Google (an adtech company) is not an acceptable solution. Not to mention that it's incredibly difficult to leave the Apple ecosystem, by design.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#619

Post by girvo »

bboygravity wrote: post #502
lynx97 wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably dont get your sarcasm. But I never had a problem with Lightning. In the long run, I like the switch to USB-C... But when I got my first iPhone, USB-C wasn't invented yet, so... Also, I like the AppStore for its reviews, and would actually NEVER activate an alternative appstore. No need to weaken my security on purpose. I know, its apparently an unpopular opinion here, but that is mostly because many people…

You can't run an ad-blocker and you browse the web with JS turned on in Safari, but your Iphone is secure? yeah ok

You absolutely can run an ad-blocker.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#620

Post by rickdeckard »

rickdeckard wrote: post #192
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is, suppose you want a phone with A, B, C, D and E. In a competitive market, there are a hundred phone OEMs providing every combination of those things for various prices with various trade offs etc. In a duopoly, there is one company providing A, another providing B and C, and nobody providing D or E. If you chose the company providing B and C, but you still want A, D and E, what are you supposed to do? Re…

What you need is REGULATION, because the market is already too skewed for new entrants to meet a level playing field. But yeah...not a popular opinion here, I know...

Almost funny to observe how this comment floats between 1 and 0 points every few hours.

Really, I'm in the telco industry for 18 years now. The smartphone market is in a way too unhealthy state, especially to properly compete with Apple.

As of today, there is no player in that space who has even remotely the amount of secured income to come up with a similarly specced and volume-scaled device as Apple, and there is little incentive for anyone new to enter this space.

A new entrant would be unable to secure the investment, because even if he would produce the exact same piece of hardware with the same quality, the carrier distribution channels, the brand-image and (walled garden) ecosystem of Apple will prevent users to even notice and adopt the product, and the press would jump onto it and rip it to pieces for not being universally better.

How would this normally work?

--> You disrupt the market by doing something particularly good, while being average in other areas, succeed, then iterate.

But this doesn't work in the Smartphone space as:

1.) iOS users are unlikely to leave their ecosystem because they can't take _anything_ with them

2.) the Google ecosystem leaves little room to disrupt and secure return-of-investment, and

3.) for Android (without Google) you need to (re)build your own ecosystem to _match_ Google/Apple from the start.

That's why it's not a competitive market anymore, it needs external forces to restore an even competition field for Hardware, Applications and Services.

For the benefit of the consumer.

Post reply on HN