Comment by realusername
4 years ago
All your talk about scams is just completely outside the topic, you can totally scam people of their bank account on iPhone right now (as you even realized in your message) and it's done daily, you just ask them to create gift cards or wire money for the "taxman".
By the way, in terms of security, the iPhone isn't even the most secure platform right now, you still have tons of private apis, privacy issues and ways to snoop data back, that's exactly why companies ask you to install their app instead of directly going to their website because on the web they can't do any of that...
> And your solution is to drag iOS down to the level of Android or Windows? Who is forcing you? Why can't you use a dumbphone? Is this a "forced because I don't want to change jobs" thing?
Because even banks and government apps are locked down to these two monopolies, that's enough proof as it is.
> Apple owns your device is a lie, you bought it, you own it. Take it apart, take the LCD out and plug it into something else, see if Apple comes at you for breaking "their" device. They won't, because they don't own it. Turning "they didn't build it so I can run Linux on it" is not the same thing as them owning it, any more than Bosch not building a washing machine to let you run Linux on the controller does not imply Bosch own your washing machine in perpetuity.
You don't own your device because Apple can decide to remove everything from it remotely, can decide that you can no longer can switch it on if they wanted to and actively prevents you to see what it does, that's why you don't own it. You should treat Apple's device as Apple's property that could vanish at any point.
> By the way, in terms of security, the iPhone isn't even the most secure platform right now, you still have tons of private apis, privacy issues and ways to snoop data back, that's exactly why companies ask you to install their app instead of directly going to their website because on the web they can't do any of that...
Don't forget the fact that iOS exploits are cheaper than Android exploits because iOS exploits are so plentiful[1][2].
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2020/05/14/zerodium_ios_flaws/
[2] http://zerodium.com/program.html
Imagine if it was a terrible platform, and there was a bigger, cheaper, more sideloadable competitor you could easily use instead. Why would you spend so much time trying to get the courts to force Apple to let you into the ecosystem without following their rules? Why wouldn't you simply use the platform that already does all the things you say you want?
You're asking why I think Apple should follow the law?
Apple should follow the law because healthy, robust markets would benefit hundreds of millions of consumers in the US.
Also, they should follow the law because it's the law. They have no problem using the law against their competitors, and even complementary businesses like repair shops, so they should follow it, too.
> "All your talk about scams is just completely outside the topic"
Only if you completely ignore all the things I've been writing. The appstore has restrictions. Those are useful. They are a layer of defense in depth, user protection.
> "By the way, in terms of security, the iPhone isn't even the most secure platform right now, you still have tons of private apis, privacy issues and ways to snoop data back, that's exactly why companies ask you to install their app instead of directly going to their website because on the web they can't do any of that..."
Then Apple should close those gaps. "It has flaws" is not a reason to turn it into a wide-open free-for-all, that would be worse, not better.
> "You don't own your device because Apple can decide to remove everything from it remotely"
That's like saying you don't own a TV because the TV station can stop broadcasting and then the device is useless. You can throw it in the trash without telling anyone, and nobody will care. You can sell it. You can smash it with a hammer. You own it. What the software and online service licenses are, is a different matter. That you can see a processor inside it and wish it could run Linux and wish Apple had built it differently, is irrelevant to whether you own it.
> Only if you completely ignore all the things I've been writing. The appstore has restrictions. Those are useful. They are a layer of defense in depth, user protection.
That's outside of the point of antitrust issues we were talking about but I personally think they're not as effective as the marketing claims.
> Then Apple should close those gaps. "It has flaws" is not a reason to turn it into a wide-open free-for-all, that would be worse, not better.
The most technically secure platform is currently the web (yes, far above iOS sandboxing), there's no relation between openness and security.
> That's like saying you don't own a TV because the TV station can stop broadcasting and then the device is useless. You can throw it in the trash without telling anyone, and nobody will care
Except the TV station doesn't manufacture the TV, and the TV manufacturer does not control TV stations... It's like every single example you pick reinforce the fact that there's anti trust issues.
> "Except the TV station doesn't manufacture the TV, and the TV manufacturer does not control TV stations."
Sky, the satellite TV company, made Sky boxes and satellite receivers, which tuned into the Sky service, and sold Sky TV channels.
> "The most technically secure platform is currently the web (yes, far above iOS sandboxing), there's no relation between openness and security."
Security is improved enormously by shrinking attack surface area and closing off entire areas of attack. Not being able to be talked into sideloading a program is obviously more secure than being able to be. "Technically secure" is a different matter, and not relevant to the point I was making - which is that restrictions have benefits, and restrictions are part of the reason iOS is great and all the competitors are terrible, competitors that you variously claim are part of a dominant duopoly and also don't exist.
> "It's like every single example you pick reinforce the fact that there's anti trust issues
It's like every single comment you make ignores the fact that you aren't forced into iOS, that you have alternatives, and pretend you don't.