Hacker News Reader

Comment by earhart | Hacker News Reader

IMHO, that’s a feature, as long as it’s possible for apps to be malicious.

I’m a relatively experienced dev, but even I don’t have the tools or time to figure out whether some app is safe. So when I had Android hardware, I mostly didn’t install apps.

My kids and parents don’t even have the experience to recognize that an app could possibly be malicious; they wouldn’t be able to figure it out even if they had the source code.

So I buy Apple hardware for all of them, specifically because I like Apple’s gatekeeping. Because 99.99% of app developers might be great people, but if you have an open system, it’ll be abused, and I have better things to worry about.

View on HN

Is there reason to believe apps on Google Play Store are significantly less safe than apps on Apple's app store?

I think that Android provides the best of both worlds: gatekeeping on the official app store, and the option (with warnings) to install from other sources. I believe that families and enterprises can also disable third-party installs.

Let me give an anecdote, which happened to me:

The last Android phone that I had was a Galaxy Note 4. Along with the bloatware that Samsung pushes and can not be uninstalled, there was an app called Peel Remote. This app is also published to Google Play Store and updated from there.

So, after updating my apps from Play store to latest version, as you are supposed to do, at morning I woke up and saw my home screen was changed and showing an ad. Also, I realized, sometimes a full screen ad pops up, randomly when I was using the phone. After a lot of investigation, I found out the uninstallable app that is included in the phone, Peel "Smart" Remote (the irony), which is published and updated through Play store, silently decided that showing full screen ads and replacing my home screen with ads was a good move, through an update.

There is NO WAY that an update like this could be pushed to Apple's App Store.

It also has nothing to do with the issue. The Play Store could be (and has been made) more and more safe, while retaining the option of alternative stores and installation sources.

The approval and screening process were not adequate and stuff like this were always happening. Google still thought they are entitled to get 30 percent.

I am not sure how or when it has improved but my trust was breached and it was not restored still today. There are a lot of junk/fearmongering/placebo applications in Play Store, e.g. "RAM Cleaner" or random "Anti Virus" applications.

Apple should relax their requirements, sure, but I am really willing to stick to the Apple store to prevent stuff like this.

How would you propose Apple "relax their requirements"?

For example, the strict "All purchasing/subscription offers made in the app should be from Apple Store" should be changed to "You are allowed to inform your customers that there are other ways of subscribing, but you have to offer the same options through the app".

I understand this clause is there to protect customers from shady apps that try to trick customers to pay for non relevant things (e.g. app asking people to purchase something else to activate the app outside of app store), while it is too convenient for Apple to guarantee that they will get their cut.

Apple's big lie is that their "curation" prevents bad actors, when historically we've seen that apps will track your usage, location, harvest contacts, etc. etc. even when allowed in the store.

That's great for you to choose to Apple approved apps. Doesn't mean you should prevent others from trusting other authorities.

And you don't think it's weird that you have to buy hardware to get the software you want?

> And you don't think it's weird that you have to buy hardware to get the software you want?

I think software needs hardware to run on. I don’t get the comment.

There are other options for phones if you want to run 3rd party unapproved apps. I use an iPhone partially because there is less garbage in the App Store.

Are you upset that console manufacturers control who publishes games or software on their platform? None of the current (or past) major consoles allow third-party unapproved software (without bypasses), leading to the same situation.

> Are you upset that console manufacturers control who publishes games or software on their platform? None of the current (or past) major consoles allow third-party unapproved software (without bypasses), leading to the same situation.

All software is not equal.

Would you say that gatekeeping video games is equal to gatekeeping software that could be essential to people's lives(finance, health, social media, etc)?

If others want to trust other authorities they can buy Android.

The problem with allowing third party stores is that doing so makes social engineering attacks impossible to stop.

I don’t want to prevent others from trusting other authorities, which is why I think an alternative in the form of Android is essential.

But we need a platform which is not open to social engineering attacks because a lot of people need it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com