This is akin to saying that the iPhone is vulnerable to apps with malware if you use Cydia. Typical users aren't likely to go outside Google Play so I don't see this as an issue, not to mention where gatorguy notes that most versions of Android already protect against this very thing. It's really a non story.
The difference is that Apple doesn't condone Cydia, which is tantamount to jail breaking. While Google doesn't vouch for other app stores, they and their fans have claimed for years that Apple's Walled Garden was WRONG, and that Android was superior because it was "more open." And now you want to praise the virtues of Google's Walled Garden. What do I make of that apparent cognitive dissonance? Is this another case of "it's only wrong when Apple does it"?
Those that argue both sides are hypocrites, and those pro-Android/anti-Apple people really don't come onto this forum anymore using that argument. But even if they did, the fact still remains that typical Android users aren't going outside of Google Play, hence it's not an issue for the typical Android user.
Right... Not outside Google Play, you realize these phishing hacks directs them outside Google play hmmmm? Seems that kinda slipped your mind. That people then will click through prompts like there is no tomorrow, even warning prompts; yup, they sure do.
In the case of Apple, you cannot, even accidentally, go outside the App store to load something.
Have you met a typical Android user? They'd be better off with an iPhone but they have this anti-Apple/control notion in their head, but they aren't technologically savvy. They won't be able to use 3rd-party app stores. The takes a concerted effort. Maybe you'll get some ignorant kid with aptitude doing it, but not likely, which is why this breach is only at 1M and not 1.4B. That's 0.07%. Why try to make this out to be a bigger issue than it is simply because you have an irrational hate for Android. Apple has had much worse issue that affected multiple OSes this past Summer that didn't involve the user installing any app, but I don't recall you acting that concerned over it.
To claim it's only at 1 million is ridiculous since a) half the Android devices out there don't have Google Play and b) devices are still being infected.
Did you have a source that it's "ridiculous" or just winging it? Honest question as I've not seen stats on how many devices run Google Android compared to some third party build based on open-source Android code. Do you think Google should be responsible for the OS on some forked version of Android in China? TBH it's to Google's credit that unlike some mobile OS providers they do make an attempt, and can do so quickly, to protect even those who don't want to use Google Play and it's vetted apps and intentionally disable/bypass default security and the multiple warnings when doing so just to get the content free instead. That's even if their phone provider fails to offer an OS update or at least a security update, as is too frequently the case.
China of course is a different issue where the government is the primary obstacle and hardly attributable to Google who offers security updates available to even forked versions.
Anyway, bypassing security settings, particularly in the current climate where even official builds from Apple and Google are under increasing attacks, is not all that unlike those jailbreakers who go to Cydia or some other 3rd party iOS-compatible store to get free stuff is it? Should Apple too offer a version of Verify Apps to give them at least some piece of mind to iPhone owners straying outside the garden? If not why not?
As for malware installs from this still going on again I've not seen mention of that anywhere else, but apparently you have? BTW I think you might be misreading the Ludwig quote you posted. It is not saying that Ghost Push was in the Play Store. Google is removing Google Play apps associated with the offending 3rd party apps effortGhost Pust promoted revenue-generating apps in Google Play that the cheats were getting shared revenue from. At least that's how I've seen it explained. The malware itself didn't exist there AFAIK.
Why should Apple ever support Jailbreakers?
iOS is not open, Apple has worked since day one to block jailbreaks, the number of jailbreakers is small, and there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem. This is a classic strawman argument that you bring up to make it appear that Apple and Google are equivalent. They are not. If anything, Google has made many moves, the Pixel XL being a prime example, to emulate Apple's successful closed system, under the guise of reducing chaos in the Android OS marketplace.
Google, on the other hand, benefits from the nominally "open" Android OS, markets it this way, and even benefits from "forks" in the case of establishing an Android like experience for users who may move up to Android OS products in the future.
You mentioned a good reason for Apple not to assist those who choose not to buy directly from the App Store. By the way it's hardly a strawman when you yourself manage to argue the point.
I argued the point that Apple has never supported third party stores, and Android OS has; hence your strawman.
Android OS third party app stores, albeit this is an old list;
"For users who download apps from alternative app stores, there’s the added task of having to enable downloads from these new sites in order to be able to get the apps on your Android device.
In order to do that, a user will need to go into their Settings menu, click on “Security” and then again on “Unknown Sources.” Users should also be aware that malware can sometimes be a problem but, if they download an Android security app first and exercise prudent judgment with the content they procure, malware and related security risks can be greatly mitigated."
This task would require a Jailbreak with iOS.
Well lets deal with what you like to think is a strawman argument.
If Google was encouraging or promoting use of 3rd party app stores they wouldn't be throwing up so many warnings when a user tries to disable security settings that prevent it. Even the quote you used to make your point didn't come from Google. So the difference really comes down to how aggressively Google and Apple lock down the ability to make use of 3rd party apps.
Google Android offers a way to do so, albeit only by changing default security settings and clicking thru with agreement on a couple of warning screens explaining why that user should probably not do so unless they are completely satisfied with the safety of the source. FWIW there's many smartphone users with very valid reasons for needing to side-load an application that might not be available on Google Play (or the App Store) and not just "I want it for free" reasons. Seems Google is trying to balance somewhere in the middle and protect those non-technical users from themselves by not making the process obvious or sound safe to do while allowing those more knowledgeable a way to accomplish the task they need if they're satisfied they know what they're doing and accept the inherent risks Google warns them about. But they also understand that some percentage of users are going to want 3rd party apps and to their credit devised a way to protect those making a bad choice to disable security settings on even an old OS version: Google's Verify Apps.
Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall in place to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertently, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block side-loading. Because they made the decision be be as aggressive as possible to block 3rd party apps they wouldn't consider anything like Verify Apps to assist those that did it anyway, right?
So based on what I've written there's good arguments for both designs isn't there?
This is akin to saying that the iPhone is vulnerable to apps with malware if you use Cydia. Typical users aren't likely to go outside Google Play so I don't see this as an issue, not to mention where gatorguy notes that most versions of Android already protect against this very thing. It's really a non story.
The difference is that Apple doesn't condone Cydia, which is tantamount to jail breaking. While Google doesn't vouch for other app stores, they and their fans have claimed for years that Apple's Walled Garden was WRONG, and that Android was superior because it was "more open." And now you want to praise the virtues of Google's Walled Garden. What do I make of that apparent cognitive dissonance? Is this another case of "it's only wrong when Apple does it"?
Those that argue both sides are hypocrites, and those pro-Android/anti-Apple people really don't come onto this forum anymore using that argument. But even if they did, the fact still remains that typical Android users aren't going outside of Google Play, hence it's not an issue for the typical Android user.
Right... Not outside Google Play, you realize these phishing hacks directs them outside Google play hmmmm? Seems that kinda slipped your mind. That people then will click through prompts like there is no tomorrow, even warning prompts; yup, they sure do.
In the case of Apple, you cannot, even accidentally, go outside the App store to load something.
Have you met a typical Android user? They'd be better off with an iPhone but they have this anti-Apple/control notion in their head, but they aren't technologically savvy. They won't be able to use 3rd-party app stores. The takes a concerted effort. Maybe you'll get some ignorant kid with aptitude doing it, but not likely, which is why this breach is only at 1M and not 1.4B. That's 0.07%. Why try to make this out to be a bigger issue than it is simply because you have an irrational hate for Android. Apple has had much worse issue that affected multiple OSes this past Summer that didn't involve the user installing any app, but I don't recall you acting that concerned over it.
To claim it's only at 1 million is ridiculous since a) half the Android devices out there don't have Google Play and b) devices are still being infected.
Did you have a source that it's "ridiculous" or just winging it? Honest question as I've not seen stats on how many devices run Google Android compared to some third party build based on open-source Android code. Do you think Google should be responsible for the OS on some forked version of Android in China? TBH it's to Google's credit that unlike some mobile OS providers they do make an attempt, and can do so quickly, to protect even those who don't want to use Google Play and it's vetted apps and intentionally disable/bypass default security and the multiple warnings when doing so just to get the content free instead. That's even if their phone provider fails to offer an OS update or at least a security update, as is too frequently the case.
China of course is a different issue where the government is the primary obstacle and hardly attributable to Google who offers security updates available to even forked versions.
Anyway, bypassing security settings, particularly in the current climate where even official builds from Apple and Google are under increasing attacks, is not all that unlike those jailbreakers who go to Cydia or some other 3rd party iOS-compatible store to get free stuff is it? Should Apple too offer a version of Verify Apps to give them at least some piece of mind to iPhone owners straying outside the garden? If not why not?
As for malware installs from this still going on again I've not seen mention of that anywhere else, but apparently you have? BTW I think you might be misreading the Ludwig quote you posted. It is not saying that Ghost Push was in the Play Store. Google is removing Google Play apps associated with the offending 3rd party apps effortGhost Pust promoted revenue-generating apps in Google Play that the cheats were getting shared revenue from. At least that's how I've seen it explained. The malware itself didn't exist there AFAIK.
Why should Apple ever support Jailbreakers?
iOS is not open, Apple has worked since day one to block jailbreaks, the number of jailbreakers is small, and there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem. This is a classic strawman argument that you bring up to make it appear that Apple and Google are equivalent. They are not. If anything, Google has made many moves, the Pixel XL being a prime example, to emulate Apple's successful closed system, under the guise of reducing chaos in the Android OS marketplace.
Google, on the other hand, benefits from the nominally "open" Android OS, markets it this way, and even benefits from "forks" in the case of establishing an Android like experience for users who may move up to Android OS products in the future.
You mentioned a good reason for Apple not to assist those who choose not to buy directly from the App Store. By the way it's hardly a strawman when you yourself manage to argue the point.
I argued the point that Apple has never supported third party stores, and Android OS has; hence your strawman.
Android OS third party app stores, albeit this is an old list;
"For users who download apps from alternative app stores, there’s the added task of having to enable downloads from these new sites in order to be able to get the apps on your Android device.
In order to do that, a user will need to go into their Settings menu, click on “Security” and then again on “Unknown Sources.” Users should also be aware that malware can sometimes be a problem but, if they download an Android security app first and exercise prudent judgment with the content they procure, malware and related security risks can be greatly mitigated."
This task would require a Jailbreak with iOS.
if Google was encouraging or promoting use of 3rd party app stores they wouldn't be throwing up so many warnings when a user tries to disable security settings that prevent it. Even the quote you used to make your point didn't come from Google. So the difference really comes down to how aggressively Google and Apple lock down the ability to make use of 3rd party apps.
Google Android offers a way to do so, albeit only by changing default security settings and clicking thru with agreement on a couple of warning screens explaining why that user should probably not do so unless they are completely satisfied with the safety of the source. FWIW there's many smartphone users with very valid reasons for needing to sideload an application that might not be available on Google Play. Seems Google is trying to balance somewhere in the middle and protect those non-technical users from themselves while allowing those more knowledgeable a way to accomplish the task they need.
Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading.
So based on what I've written there's good arguments for both designs isn't there?
"Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading."
You and your binary thought processes, and so much condescension of Apple users. For the record, consumers seem to like a single, secure, app ecosystem that Google has as well modeled the Play Store after, obviously to "ensure that (Google) gets a proper revenue cut of".
Perhaps Apple is aware that people view consumer devices as appliances that they shouldn't have to worry about; and from Apple's success, I can see why the Pixel XL/Google Play/Google Services seems to aspire to emulate the Apple iPhone ecosystem.
This is akin to saying that the iPhone is vulnerable to apps with malware if you use Cydia. Typical users aren't likely to go outside Google Play so I don't see this as an issue, not to mention where gatorguy notes that most versions of Android already protect against this very thing. It's really a non story.
The difference is that Apple doesn't condone Cydia, which is tantamount to jail breaking. While Google doesn't vouch for other app stores, they and their fans have claimed for years that Apple's Walled Garden was WRONG, and that Android was superior because it was "more open." And now you want to praise the virtues of Google's Walled Garden. What do I make of that apparent cognitive dissonance? Is this another case of "it's only wrong when Apple does it"?
Those that argue both sides are hypocrites, and those pro-Android/anti-Apple people really don't come onto this forum anymore using that argument. But even if they did, the fact still remains that typical Android users aren't going outside of Google Play, hence it's not an issue for the typical Android user.
Right... Not outside Google Play, you realize these phishing hacks directs them outside Google play hmmmm? Seems that kinda slipped your mind. That people then will click through prompts like there is no tomorrow, even warning prompts; yup, they sure do.
In the case of Apple, you cannot, even accidentally, go outside the App store to load something.
Have you met a typical Android user? They'd be better off with an iPhone but they have this anti-Apple/control notion in their head, but they aren't technologically savvy. They won't be able to use 3rd-party app stores. The takes a concerted effort. Maybe you'll get some ignorant kid with aptitude doing it, but not likely, which is why this breach is only at 1M and not 1.4B. That's 0.07%. Why try to make this out to be a bigger issue than it is simply because you have an irrational hate for Android. Apple has had much worse issue that affected multiple OSes this past Summer that didn't involve the user installing any app, but I don't recall you acting that concerned over it.
To claim it's only at 1 million is ridiculous since a) half the Android devices out there don't have Google Play and b) devices are still being infected.
Did you have a source that it's "ridiculous" or just winging it? Honest question as I've not seen stats on how many devices run Google Android compared to some third party build based on open-source Android code. Do you think Google should be responsible for the OS on some forked version of Android in China? TBH it's to Google's credit that unlike some mobile OS providers they do make an attempt, and can do so quickly, to protect even those who don't want to use Google Play and it's vetted apps and intentionally disable/bypass default security and the multiple warnings when doing so just to get the content free instead. That's even if their phone provider fails to offer an OS update or at least a security update, as is too frequently the case.
China of course is a different issue where the government is the primary obstacle and hardly attributable to Google who offers security updates available to even forked versions.
Anyway, bypassing security settings, particularly in the current climate where even official builds from Apple and Google are under increasing attacks, is not all that unlike those jailbreakers who go to Cydia or some other 3rd party iOS-compatible store to get free stuff is it? Should Apple too offer a version of Verify Apps to give them at least some piece of mind to iPhone owners straying outside the garden? If not why not?
As for malware installs from this still going on again I've not seen mention of that anywhere else, but apparently you have? BTW I think you might be misreading the Ludwig quote you posted. It is not saying that Ghost Push was in the Play Store. Google is removing Google Play apps associated with the offending 3rd party apps effortGhost Pust promoted revenue-generating apps in Google Play that the cheats were getting shared revenue from. At least that's how I've seen it explained. The malware itself didn't exist there AFAIK.
Why should Apple ever support Jailbreakers?
iOS is not open, Apple has worked since day one to block jailbreaks, the number of jailbreakers is small, and there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem. This is a classic strawman argument that you bring up to make it appear that Apple and Google are equivalent. They are not. If anything, Google has made many moves, the Pixel XL being a prime example, to emulate Apple's successful closed system, under the guise of reducing chaos in the Android OS marketplace.
Google, on the other hand, benefits from the nominally "open" Android OS, markets it this way, and even benefits from "forks" in the case of establishing an Android like experience for users who may move up to Android OS products in the future.
You mentioned a good reason for Apple not to assist those who choose not to buy directly from the App Store. By the way it's hardly a strawman when you yourself manage to argue the point.
I argued the point that Apple has never supported third party stores, and Android OS has; hence your strawman.
Android OS third party app stores, albeit this is an old list;
"For users who download apps from alternative app stores, there’s the added task of having to enable downloads from these new sites in order to be able to get the apps on your Android device.
In order to do that, a user will need to go into their Settings menu, click on “Security” and then again on “Unknown Sources.” Users should also be aware that malware can sometimes be a problem but, if they download an Android security app first and exercise prudent judgment with the content they procure, malware and related security risks can be greatly mitigated."
This task would require a Jailbreak with iOS.
if Google was encouraging or promoting use of 3rd party app stores they wouldn't be throwing up so many warnings when a user tries to disable security settings that prevent it. Even the quote you used to make your point didn't come from Google. So the difference really comes down to how aggressively Google and Apple lock down the ability to make use of 3rd party apps.
Google Android offers a way to do so, albeit only by changing default security settings and clicking thru with agreement on a couple of warning screens explaining why that user should probably not do so unless they are completely satisfied with the safety of the source. FWIW there's many smartphone users with very valid reasons for needing to sideload an application that might not be available on Google Play. Seems Google is trying to balance somewhere in the middle and protect those non-technical users from themselves while allowing those more knowledgeable a way to accomplish the task they need.
Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading.
So based on what I've written there's good arguments for both designs isn't there?
"Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading."
You and your binary thought processes, and so much condescension of Apple users. For the record, consumers seem to like a single, secure, app ecosystem that Google has as well modeled the Play Store after, obviously to "ensure that (Google) gets a proper revenue cut of".
Perhaps Apple is aware that people view consumer devices as appliances that they shouldn't have to worry about; and from Apple's success, I can see why the Pixel XL/Google Play/Google Services seems to aspire to emulate the Apple iPhone ecosystem.
Good comments, but it's obvious that you'd rather avoid discussing the points I raised or directly answering the question I asked you. It wasn't a hard question either, tho it may have been an inconvenient one as it would require you to expand your views a bit instead of arguing it in black and white.
BTW you yourself state "there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem" (aka Apple doesn't get a cut), a direct quote from you, as a reason for Apple not to protect jailbreakers, yet I mention the same point and it's "condescending" and a "binary thought-process"? No mirrors in your home?
This is akin to saying that the iPhone is vulnerable to apps with malware if you use Cydia. Typical users aren't likely to go outside Google Play so I don't see this as an issue, not to mention where gatorguy notes that most versions of Android already protect against this very thing. It's really a non story.
The difference is that Apple doesn't condone Cydia, which is tantamount to jail breaking. While Google doesn't vouch for other app stores, they and their fans have claimed for years that Apple's Walled Garden was WRONG, and that Android was superior because it was "more open." And now you want to praise the virtues of Google's Walled Garden. What do I make of that apparent cognitive dissonance? Is this another case of "it's only wrong when Apple does it"?
Those that argue both sides are hypocrites, and those pro-Android/anti-Apple people really don't come onto this forum anymore using that argument. But even if they did, the fact still remains that typical Android users aren't going outside of Google Play, hence it's not an issue for the typical Android user.
Right... Not outside Google Play, you realize these phishing hacks directs them outside Google play hmmmm? Seems that kinda slipped your mind. That people then will click through prompts like there is no tomorrow, even warning prompts; yup, they sure do.
In the case of Apple, you cannot, even accidentally, go outside the App store to load something.
Have you met a typical Android user? They'd be better off with an iPhone but they have this anti-Apple/control notion in their head, but they aren't technologically savvy. They won't be able to use 3rd-party app stores. The takes a concerted effort. Maybe you'll get some ignorant kid with aptitude doing it, but not likely, which is why this breach is only at 1M and not 1.4B. That's 0.07%. Why try to make this out to be a bigger issue than it is simply because you have an irrational hate for Android. Apple has had much worse issue that affected multiple OSes this past Summer that didn't involve the user installing any app, but I don't recall you acting that concerned over it.
To claim it's only at 1 million is ridiculous since a) half the Android devices out there don't have Google Play and b) devices are still being infected.
Did you have a source that it's "ridiculous" or just winging it? Honest question as I've not seen stats on how many devices run Google Android compared to some third party build based on open-source Android code. Do you think Google should be responsible for the OS on some forked version of Android in China? TBH it's to Google's credit that unlike some mobile OS providers they do make an attempt, and can do so quickly, to protect even those who don't want to use Google Play and it's vetted apps and intentionally disable/bypass default security and the multiple warnings when doing so just to get the content free instead. That's even if their phone provider fails to offer an OS update or at least a security update, as is too frequently the case.
China of course is a different issue where the government is the primary obstacle and hardly attributable to Google who offers security updates available to even forked versions.
Anyway, bypassing security settings, particularly in the current climate where even official builds from Apple and Google are under increasing attacks, is not all that unlike those jailbreakers who go to Cydia or some other 3rd party iOS-compatible store to get free stuff is it? Should Apple too offer a version of Verify Apps to give them at least some piece of mind to iPhone owners straying outside the garden? If not why not?
As for malware installs from this still going on again I've not seen mention of that anywhere else, but apparently you have? BTW I think you might be misreading the Ludwig quote you posted. It is not saying that Ghost Push was in the Play Store. Google is removing Google Play apps associated with the offending 3rd party apps effortGhost Pust promoted revenue-generating apps in Google Play that the cheats were getting shared revenue from. At least that's how I've seen it explained. The malware itself didn't exist there AFAIK.
Why should Apple ever support Jailbreakers?
iOS is not open, Apple has worked since day one to block jailbreaks, the number of jailbreakers is small, and there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem. This is a classic strawman argument that you bring up to make it appear that Apple and Google are equivalent. They are not. If anything, Google has made many moves, the Pixel XL being a prime example, to emulate Apple's successful closed system, under the guise of reducing chaos in the Android OS marketplace.
Google, on the other hand, benefits from the nominally "open" Android OS, markets it this way, and even benefits from "forks" in the case of establishing an Android like experience for users who may move up to Android OS products in the future.
You mentioned a good reason for Apple not to assist those who choose not to buy directly from the App Store. By the way it's hardly a strawman when you yourself manage to argue the point.
I argued the point that Apple has never supported third party stores, and Android OS has; hence your strawman.
Android OS third party app stores, albeit this is an old list;
"For users who download apps from alternative app stores, there’s the added task of having to enable downloads from these new sites in order to be able to get the apps on your Android device.
In order to do that, a user will need to go into their Settings menu, click on “Security” and then again on “Unknown Sources.” Users should also be aware that malware can sometimes be a problem but, if they download an Android security app first and exercise prudent judgment with the content they procure, malware and related security risks can be greatly mitigated."
This task would require a Jailbreak with iOS.
if Google was encouraging or promoting use of 3rd party app stores they wouldn't be throwing up so many warnings when a user tries to disable security settings that prevent it. Even the quote you used to make your point didn't come from Google. So the difference really comes down to how aggressively Google and Apple lock down the ability to make use of 3rd party apps.
Google Android offers a way to do so, albeit only by changing default security settings and clicking thru with agreement on a couple of warning screens explaining why that user should probably not do so unless they are completely satisfied with the safety of the source. FWIW there's many smartphone users with very valid reasons for needing to sideload an application that might not be available on Google Play. Seems Google is trying to balance somewhere in the middle and protect those non-technical users from themselves while allowing those more knowledgeable a way to accomplish the task they need.
Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading.
So based on what I've written there's good arguments for both designs isn't there?
"Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertantly, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block sideloading."
You and your binary thought processes, and so much condescension of Apple users. For the record, consumers seem to like a single, secure, app ecosystem that Google has as well modeled the Play Store after, obviously to "ensure that (Google) gets a proper revenue cut of".
Perhaps Apple is aware that people view consumer devices as appliances that they shouldn't have to worry about; and from Apple's success, I can see why the Pixel XL/Google Play/Google Services seems to aspire to emulate the Apple iPhone ecosystem.
Good comments, but it's obvious that you'd rather avoid discussing the points I raised or directly answering the question I asked you. It wasn't a hard question either, tho it may have been an inconvenient one as it would require you to expand your views a bit instead of arguing it in black and white.
BTW you yourself state "there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem" (aka Apple doesn't get a cut), a direct quote from you, as a reason for Apple not to protect jailbreakers, yet I mention the same point and it's "condescending" and a "binary thought-process"? No mirrors in your home?
iPhone knockoffs are falling apart give it a rest already.
Comments
If Google was encouraging or promoting use of 3rd party app stores they wouldn't be throwing up so many warnings when a user tries to disable security settings that prevent it. Even the quote you used to make your point didn't come from Google. So the difference really comes down to how aggressively Google and Apple lock down the ability to make use of 3rd party apps.
Google Android offers a way to do so, albeit only by changing default security settings and clicking thru with agreement on a couple of warning screens explaining why that user should probably not do so unless they are completely satisfied with the safety of the source. FWIW there's many smartphone users with very valid reasons for needing to side-load an application that might not be available on Google Play (or the App Store) and not just "I want it for free" reasons. Seems Google is trying to balance somewhere in the middle and protect those non-technical users from themselves by not making the process obvious or sound safe to do while allowing those more knowledgeable a way to accomplish the task they need if they're satisfied they know what they're doing and accept the inherent risks Google warns them about. But they also understand that some percentage of users are going to want 3rd party apps and to their credit devised a way to protect those making a bad choice to disable security settings on even an old OS version: Google's Verify Apps.
Apple either assumes users are not capable of properly determining the safety of 3rd party sites and need a solid wall in place to prevent owners from harming themselves inadvertently, or perhaps just wants to ensure Apple gets a proper revenue cut of any software that gets loaded to an iPhone and therefor does all they can to block side-loading. Because they made the decision be be as aggressive as possible to block 3rd party apps they wouldn't consider anything like Verify Apps to assist those that did it anyway, right?
So based on what I've written there's good arguments for both designs isn't there?
You and your binary thought processes, and so much condescension of Apple users. For the record, consumers seem to like a single, secure, app ecosystem that Google has as well modeled the Play Store after, obviously to "ensure that (Google) gets a proper revenue cut of".
Perhaps Apple is aware that people view consumer devices as appliances that they shouldn't have to worry about; and from Apple's success, I can see why the Pixel XL/Google Play/Google Services seems to aspire to emulate the Apple iPhone ecosystem.
BTW you yourself state "there's no economic benefit at all to the ecosystem" (aka Apple doesn't get a cut), a direct quote from you, as a reason for Apple not to protect jailbreakers, yet I mention the same point and it's "condescending" and a "binary thought-process"? No mirrors in your home?