[mrtksn]

I am pessimistic on the issue because people prefer to pay indirectly because it feels like it's free and everybody likes free.

The business model of FB and Google deviates from Apple in a major way, with Apple you give the money and get the service. With Google and FB, you get the service and the cost is added to the stuff you buy. It's not necessarily even a price increase, maybe it's just directing the money from the billboard owners to the technologists.

I don't see how FB or Google can lose unless someone in power(like a politician or an activist businessman) makes it stop despite the popular opinion. The fight between advertisers is vicious and FB doesn't look like afraid of getting its hands dirty.

For someone somewhere "evil" Apple screwed up their entertainment on that FB app which just gives away free stuff and even pays you to use their VPN.

[ProAm]

> with Apple you give the money and get the service

I mostly agree but to be fair with Apple you rent the service. They dictate what you are allowed to install on your phone, only after they deem it suitable.

[mrtksn]

It would cost you billions of dollar to buy the service, that's why you rent it. You can buy the hardware though.

Apple doesn't dictate what you can install on your phone, you can install whatever you want using the developer tools.

What Apple dictates is what people can distribute on their App Store.

[bunderbunder]

For users for whom the developer tools aren't a realistic option, which is the vast majority of them, apple does dictate what you can install on your phone.

For the rest of us, for the low low price of $100 to join the developer program plus $1000 for a Mac, we can get the ability to install software that we can build, which more-or-less precludes sideloading as an option for commercial software.

So, for all practical purposes, yes, Apple does dictate what you can install on their phone. The question is really whether you think that that's a feature or a misfeature.

[mrtksn]

That's different from controlling what YOU as a user can install on your phone. Apple controlls what you can make people install on their phones.

These are vastly different things. You own your phone and you can do whatever you want with it. It's just that you can't use Apple's distribution channels to spread you code.

[bunderbunder]

You also can't put your own code on it without a developer key, and Apple is the gatekeeper for getting a developer key.

Theoretically you could bypass everything by replacing the OS, except that you can't replace the OS without yet another key that Apple isn't sharing with anyone.

[mrtksn]

No, you don't have to hack anything, you can write your code and run it on your iPhone that's running the legit iOS without going through Apple's review process.

People who develop apps do it everyday many times because they need to run their code on devices. You don't ask apple for permission every time you press the build button.

[ProAm]

So I have to pay yearly rent to write and install my own apps onto my phone? And if I do not pay that rent it stops functioning? What if I want to install an app someone else wrote onto my phone but doesn't want to put it in the App Store? I get what you are saying but I don't want my mom approving what I install onto the device I paid for.

[mrtksn]

>What if I want to install an app someone else wrote onto my phone but doesn't want to put it in the App Store?

That other person gives you the sourcecode, you compile it an install it on your device.

Oh BTW, you don't have to pay for dev account anymore if you don't intend to distribute your app.

[Anon1096]

That's not true. This whole story is about Facebook's enterprise signing cert being revoked so they can no longer distribute apps outside the app store. Please stop spreading misinformation.

[mrtksn]

>distribute

There you have it. They can make the stuff opensource, put it on GitHub and let people install themeslves.

This is Apple controlling the distribution, it's not about controlling what's installed on the devices.

People can install the spyware freely.

[johnsea]

> What Apple dictates is what people can distribute on their App Store.

That's the unfortunate status quo. But it would absolutely be possible to legislate Apple (and Google Play Services - grey area) to allow 3rd party stores/apps.

[rootusrootus]

There's no gray area there, Google Play Services is just as much of a lock as the Apple App Store.

[rchaud]

They dictate what you run on the phone if it requires using their native SDK. Aside from the Flash event almost a decade ago, they haven't tried to restrict web content

[nvrspyx]

Except they restrict all browsers to use Webkit, which is rather limited.

To see the differences between iOS Safari/webkit and Chrome on Android:

https://caniuse.com/#compare=ios_saf+12.0-12.1,and_chr+71

I haven't had an Android phone in almost a decade using just iPhones. iOS's web browser game is actually the most frustrating part about Apple's walled garden for me.

[mrtksn]

You can compile your own browser and install it. People act as if Apple is sending the police if they install an App that doesn't meet Apple's guidelines. Limitations are about the distribution on the App Store.

[saagarjha]

> You can compile your own browser and install it.

Not really; you're basically limited to WebKit if you want acceptable performance.

[mrtksn]

Why would that be? Does Tim Cook pray at nights to slow down other peoples code on iPhone?

It's your code and it will run as fast as you make it, you can't expect Apple to make your code as good as WebKit.