Apple is more than welcome to put whatever rules they want on their systems. My phone is not their system though, it’s mine! If I want to run tmux/fetchmail/ocamlc on it then it’s my problem not theirs!
You should not have to rely on security issues in order to install whatever you want on your phone.
Jailbreak should only be needed when you want to replace OS blocks, not just install something.
0: https://blog.talosintelligence.com/2019/10/checkrain-click-f...
They additionally prevent jailbreaking by patching vulnerabilities.
Only one of these things is being called out.
You can get into all sorts of theoretical discussions about how if there was a way to do it, they'd be increasing their attack surface since now they have to make sure this path is locked properly when the user doesn't want it, but people act like the only way for jailbreaking to work is for Apple to stop patching 0 days, which is not the case.
Security loopholes are a different thing.
tHiS IS nOt a Pc BUt a mAc, you know? ;p
The technical and social reality that giving apple the freedom to configure the majority of devices in the US is extremely unpleasant. Enough that it makes me question the principles driving the philosophy that allowed this (in particular, the legality of closed software.)
One of the main roadblocks is intellectual property law. If IP didn't exist, there would be all sorts of iPhone clones with modified versions of iOS.
I'm OK with closed source software being legal, prohibiting closed source would be tyrannical. What I'm not OK is with software patents, copyright, anti-hardware-hacking laws, etc.
We can't deny the security that apple provides over other providers. Part of that is the closed garden - it SHOULD BE a product. The market should provide alternatives.
The only people that benefit from this are big companies - small software devs will have their apps devalued by this move, and the people will just get ripped off more when Epic wins and raises their dumb scam Vbucks to 10$.
Apple saying that I'm not allowed to step outside their walled garden on a device I own is restricting my freedom.
> Apple saying that I'm not allowed to step outside their walled garden on a device I own is restricting my freedom.
Only if there is no remediation - there is. Buy an android and quit moaning. "Freedoms." Laughable. Belarus is shooting people and you're mad because you can't force a company to do what you want when the free market can easily solve the problem.
Except none of those things are the point of antitrust law. But I guess who cares anyway, when genocide is always worse than these things, so we shouldn't care about them?
Anything requiring a single android component goes in the “doesn’t actually work” category.
Neither is nice but at least iOS gets updates.
I don't think you're going to really be able to reliably avoid the problem that very very very few people outside of AOSP are doing any work on OSS for phones.
They sell products. Those products have well-known rules. If you don't like the rules, don't buy the product.
An argument can be made that it's morally wrong, but if you're going down that road, there's a lot of things should be morally more compelling than Apple's AppStore policies.
This is pretty much the whole reason the GPLv3 exists.
No obligation to help vs actively hindering are not really the same thing.