neoncat

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

It’s a sad day for freedom. 

omg the performative Apple sycophant drama surrounding this whole saga is easily the most insufferable part, even more than either of the Tim’s posturing. 

mike1 said:

I'm sure they will get flack for it, but I hope there will be a way in settings to prohibit the download of anything that isn't from the app store.

I am foreseeing the nightmare ahead when my click-happy mom starts accidentally/unwittingly downloading stuff from all the ads in her games and e-mail etc.

This is a scammer's dream.

I hope people can find the time while clutching all those pearls to realize that this is a problem almost entirely of Apple's own creation. By discarding the value of the safety of their platform to chase every possible cent of revenue, they willingly dismissed concerns like yours. There were measures Apple could have taken to protect the walled garden for all its benefits. They chose not to because those choices would've represented giving up the chance to squeeze every last dime out of the construct.

Now, no one wins: App Store revenue will decline, and safety will be compromised. It's classic Apple—die on every hill, convinced to the end they are right, and at the end having nothing at all to show for it. Blinded by arrogance, avarice, and greed.

Why am I reminded of that scene in The Godfather, Part II where all the various American executives are seated at the table with the president of Cuba as he assures them the insurrectionists are no concern, and only Michael Corleone seemed aware that real trouble was brewing?

Cook is not a dumb man. I'm sure he says what he needs to say to make sure Apple's interests are represented and protected.

davidlewis54 said:

I, for one, shall only get apps from the official Apple Store.  I’d much rather have the protection of Apple and its security.

A conceit you hold due entirely to marketing. With numerous security breaches including scam apps, apps with false premises, apps that have been found to collect far more information than Apple's cursory and worthless review process supposedly vets... and on and on. This is the result of zero competition and zero reason for Apple to do anything but protect its 15/30% moat. 

Abdicate your responsibilities, eventually suffer the consequences. Stupid is its own reward. 

There's so much garbage reporting about this ruling among the sycophant Apple press that it's refreshing to see such a measured and information-dense version. Kudos to AI. 

I've seen some legal discussion about Apple's chances on appeal and the consensus (that I've seen, at least) is slim to none. The nature of Judge Gonzalez Rogers' ruling means that there will be a significant burden on Apple that, in light of the accusations of perjury, may be impossible for them to meet without further implicating themselves in false testimony. 

And speaking of: It is exceptionally rare for a federal judge to accuse a party of perjury and to forward it for possible prosecution. The barriers placed on judges to make those accusations are formidable, and so such an action should be taken extremely seriously. Whether or not the Justice Department intends to pursue it is a whole other question, of course. 

EDIT: spelling