maximara
About
- Username
- maximara
- Joined
- Visits
- 35
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 328
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 409
Reactions
-
Senate Judiciary advances bill that would force Apple to allow iOS side-loading
It's an election year. Increase the odd Congress will do something mind numbingly stupid. The only thing I can hope is is somehow hurts the people wanted the Apple store opened more than it hurt Apple.bluefire1 said:Can’t the government just leave Apple alone. The company flourishes best without outside meddling.
-
Apple urges lawmakers to reject bill that would force it to allow side-loading
Neither do I as at the State level it has been a spectacular failure If it was this bipartisan support thing it would not havegatorguy said:
Not unless this bill were to pass, then it's legal obligation.22july2013 said:Apple has no legal obligation to allow any third party apps on their platforms. Let alone third party app stores.
That said, I don't see a chance in Hades that the bill passes.
1). Failed in North Dakota 36-11, when it came out that the supporters, Coalition for App Fairness which Apple would later claim was little more than a front for Epic-Spotify-Tile which is why the Ninth Circuit denied their brief
2) Arizona's House Bill 2005 would have not just disappeared right before to a scheduled vote that could have sent it straight to the governor’s desk to be signed into law. - "It seems committed members weren’t sure the bill could stand the trial of votes." ie we didn't want a repeat of the North Dakota fiasco.
3) Minnesota House Bill HF 1184, New York Senate Bill S4822, and Illinois SB2311 would have actually gotten a vote as they have been around since Feb 2021. Going to committee doesn't count was 90% of bills don't get pass that point and "die".
4) Some 71% of Congresspeople in a survey would not use iPhones and 98% would not use iPads and they would have not give "security" as their biggest reason.
-
Microsoft says that if Apple isn't stopped now, its antitrust behavior will just get worse...
Have you look at how many free and <$5 apps there are on the App (Mac and iOS) stores? Heck Epic is self admitted it will not see a profit until 2027 with its 13%. Maintaining shrives and having any kind of App oversight costs money.brian.on.android said:I think people would lay off Apple if they would just allow third party payment systems fully.
Developers already spend $99+ a year for distribution of their apps in the app store. 3rd party payments require $0 for Apple to maintain because they use zero of Apple's infrastructure outside of the phone you already paid for.
Apple doesn't need to take a cut in your entire business.
-
New Mac mini with M2 & M2 Pro - all the rumors so far
The removal of the earphone jack is weird. Like why?Cesar Battistini Maziero said:The only sad thing here is the removal of the internal power supply.The rest is gold.
-
Epic vs. Apple takes new turn as 34 US states & DOJ side with 'Fortnite' maker
There have been several attempts already. Even South Korea didn't go as far as to force side loading and every bill in the US to do this has either spectacularly failed (North Dakota), pulled from the voting calendar because it was clear it would fail (Arizona) or went to committee where 90% of all bills die. As the EU's Digital Services Act shows such legislation is just as likely to limit customer choice as help it and it seems to be less about helping the consumers than 'let's stick it to the US Companies' ie a form of protectionism dressed up as "helping the consumer".DAalseth said:
Even if this lawsuit goes nowhere, there is legislation from the US, the EU, and many other countries that will force them to open up iOS and iPadOS to side loading. Apple can fight the tide and lose, or control the outcome and ride the wave. Their choice.Marvin said:
The arguments against Apple amount to nothing, it doesn't matter how bitter people are about it. Apple doesn't have a majority marketshare, Android does and they allow 3rd party stores. Apple allows access to the internet unrestricted and software can run either via the web or streamed. Not that it matters, people keep making the same stupid argument about an iPhone being a general purpose product, every product is designed by its manufacturer whether it's a smart TV, a console, a phone, a PC and they have a right to design it how they want with security restrictions on native software. If a manufacturer designs a Windows PC that can only run a single store and gains a 30% marketshare, it's not anticompetitive if people can buy an alternative product. If they gained a 90% marketshare, it might be different but it likely wouldn't gain that kind of marketshare if it was restrictive.DAalseth said:Apple has a choice. They can either keep fighting this battle to the bitter end and, if what has happened over the last year is any indication, get something really bad imposed on them. Or they can accept where this is going, get out ahead and control the result. The world has changed. Attitudes have changed. Apple needs to change too or they will have something bad for them and their customers forced upon them.
It’s far better to control the landing than to fight to stay aloft and end up stalling and crashing.
The original argument was about Fortnite being accessible on iOS without Apple's control, it can be accessed via the cloud, this was always an option via a browser and here it is currently running on iOS:
Apple doesn't set the prices for in-app purchases. No developers have been monetarily harmed by Apple. Here's the letter they are presenting:
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/States-amicus-brief-for-Epic-v-Apple-appeal.pdf
They talk about the ruling undermining antitrust law but they aren't being honest about what their motives are. For a lot of these politicians, this is about Parler being removed from the store, getting retribution for it and laying groundwork for it not happening again and for some it will be Apple not allowing backdoors on iPhones. They want the ability to install backdoors on iPhones without Apple's permission. There was an article today about this:
https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/01/28/fbi-considered-using-pegasus-spyware-for-us-domestic-surveillance
The proposed legislation has been specifically targeted at companies with over 50m US store users to deliberately target it at Apple and Google. If it ever moves ahead, Apple can easily block access to the store in the 34 states that pushed for this to get the number to stay below 50m. If it moves ahead and they choose to go the route of allowing 3rd party stores instead, they can just create an entirely closed off sandbox for each store possibly running a separate copy of the OS in a VM so that malware is isolated from the boot capability of the device.
Apple has plenty of options to go for but before this is even worth considering, the complainants have to prove what they are arguing about - that Apple is stifling competition and harming developers and users. They haven't demonstrated this at all. The fact Fortnite is currently capable of running on iOS without Apple doing anything discredits the entire argument.
