Apple requests to remove WebAssembly support in a-Shell
twitter.com
twitter.com
Then you slowly add support for a proper programming language instead of only offering the UI configuration.
See at which point your app becomes an interpreter of data and configuration which can come from the internet into an interpreter of code. Because there is of course really no sharp line. I'm sure there are dozens of turning complete apps that can download configurations from the internet.
Although at the end of the day you are just seeing when the company decides to apply vague policies to swat you out of their ecosystem.
Apple stopped enforcing the no interpreters rule for years until just now. I honestly can't imagine going back to having the list of approved software for one of my most important computers dictated by a publicly traded company. I'm shocked other people tolerate it!
Maybe they should just remove the app store guidelines completely and replace it with "Apple will allow apps that it finds beneficial to its interests."
Because it isn't the most important computer for many (probably most) people - it's their phone/entertainment device and it does what they want; any semblance of it being a general purpose computer was never there.
Maybe the answer is just that most people don't care as much as nerds on HN do.
I'm not an iOS dev but I believe that it also uses some weird iOS APIs that I've never seen other apps use. The way it makes your phone continuously vibrate with certain notifications is one example.
I'm not defending this particular frustration of iOS App Store policy. But it's worth recognizing that there is a balancing act going on here. Apple and Google are in the difficult position of trying to balance reasonable security policy with people's freedom to use their phones as they want.
If there is a happy medium between where Word Processors are also virus vectors and the walled gardens we have now, I don't think anyone has found it.
It makes complete sense to compare because Apple likes to claim that it imposes its rules and guidelines perfectly uniformly.
I guess this is somewhat rhetorical; the people who would be interested in such a tool are I imagine by and large willing and able to either jailbreak or buy an Android. Presumably getting a nice shell-type environment as a PWA would be tricky also considering the limitations of the browser (I know this makes networking hard).
I wish there was a product like an iPad that came with a root shell out of the box. I like the polish of iOS, but I'm not willing to trust random people on the internet with root code execution to jailbreak my iThings.
Of course, all of this is arbitrary. Apple just wants to be able to control their platform, they don't actually care about having rules and enforcing them with any semblance of fairness.
It's unfortunate that developers have to put up with this. I say "have to" in that my understanding is that Android users (in general, present company likely excluded) won't pay money for high quality ad-free apps. So if you actually want to make something good and be paid for your trouble, it's iOS or bust.
Access to files (or any persistent storage) Any kind of background tasks.
of course you need doordash, an order form, to be a native app.
Absolutely nothing. Web apps are the solution to Apple's equivocation regarding scripting and programming environments.
> Hi, Saagar from the iSH team here. We received a call from someone who runs App Review at Apple earlier this evening. They apologized for our review experience, telling us that they've accepted our appeal and that they will not be removing iSH from sale tomorrow. We'll work out the details with them in the coming days. A huge thanks to all of you for your support of iSH!
Like many of us, I am where I am today because I had access from a relatively young age, to computers that demanded you program them. I was there when you turned a computer on and it said "READY" and you were immediately in a BASIC interpreter. I absolutely recognise the value of that for future generations, which is why I'll be buying a Raspberry Pi 400 for our eldest son's upcoming 10th birthday, but I also recognise the value in being able to have had him use an iPad for the last few years and have it be nearly frictionless.
I mean I'd personally say people's lives have gotten worse because of the iPhone and iPad.
If a computer is in a room people can walk away from it without interacting with it for 30 minutes, not sure people can even manage 5 minutes from their phones.
It was the new Real Computer-alike capabilities (CPU instruction sets, OS and the libraries, RAM and storage amounts - Windows Mobile 6 was incomparable shit) of iPhone and subsequent Android-based devices that made these devices actual tools, capable of browsing the web and enough performance for games and apps, and these same capabilities were what made them the social plague. Seems like we need less Real Computers in the world, not more...
Smartphones are Real Computers, and that's why they're at least as damaging as PCs are. On top of that:
- 3G internet became commonplace and cheap enough to be connected nonstop
- Support for battery-efficient push notifications integrated into the OS
- Internet (social networking) ads became what they are
- Micro transactions and internet payments became commonplace
I'm planning to buy the iPad Air/iPad Pro with the Magic Keyboard to do everything either over RDP or on the device itself (already own an iPad + Apple Pencil). I'm a Math student primarily, so most of my time is spent using the pencil and not as much with a keyboard and trackpad.
Imagine if this were Facebook. People would be screaming in the streets.
I wouldn't personally go anywhere near saying they're doing a perfect job, there are certainly things I would change, but they're doing ok.
These devices are the only connection an entire generation growing up today have with the digital world. It's entirely unethical to limit their potential for creation and expression with computers.
Or is it none of those things, and Apple fights hard against users having any control whatsoever over their devices?
Did Apple know better which apps their users in Hong Kong should be allowed to run? https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/apple-removes-police-trackin...
What does it tell you about Apple, when it insists on remaining the absolute arbiter of what their users may run, even after it was forced to use that power to betray its users to authoritarian governments? That these are the kind of practices, the kind of company, that you should be promoting?
GNU/Linux smartphones: Librem 5 and PinePhone.
and didn't crash randomly
and had good support for MMS by software on the application processor.
I'm not sure what I'm going to do with this device now... hopefully I can find some fun from it.
Yes, definitely.
There are many people who correctly think Apple knows better than they do about what software is safe, and for those people, iOS is a good choice.
I once owned a Mac Mini and iPod. Great hardware, but as a programmer I really hated the software. Too much restrictions. Not enough advanced user power.
That's why I always find it weird that some programmers are big Apple fanboys. I love Linux and the power that it brings. Why would a power user want to dabble in a restricted ecosystem? Never quite got that part.
Not everybody is a tinkerer. I get why, but I'm just not interested.
Programming is about controlling things and Apple hates giving users and developers control. It’s about getting your job done by being able to install and configure things the way you need them without a lot of hassle. If you’re willing to put up with that hassle and live within the confines that Apple has laid out for you than that’s good for you. But there’s a reason that the vast, vast majority of programmers are not using a Mac outside the SV bubble. Even Windows gives you more control! (and hardware freedom of choice.)
I’ve been programming since the early 90s and Apple has always been anti-developer and anti-power user.
The things I have wanted to install have generally not involved hassle on a Mac, and never more hassle than they would have on Linux.
Configuring things has varied; some are less hassle than Linux, some are more, some are impossible, but unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates.
And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc. Yes, the latter is somewhat cheating because I am forced into Apple's hardware, but the hassle-savings from not having to dig through everything on the market to find the laptops that are well-supported by Linux is something I absolutely do not miss.
So I think what it comes down to is that different people find different things hassle-full.
You're right that it comes down to what people find hassle-ful. That's why I say that if you fit into whatever Apple limits you to, then good for you. But those limitations are why most programmers actually don't use a Mac.
> ...unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates.
That's not my experience at all. Using a rolling release (Manjaro) for years I've rarely, if ever, had to re-configure anything major. I have kept three of these machines running without any hassle. They all just work (1 laptop and 2 desktops).
Meanwhile on my Macbook Pro, just upgrading through El Cap, Sierra, High Sierra, Mojave and finally to Catalina - each and every time there's a major upgrade they've broken software that I use to the point where I just stopped using all the third party tools that I had to use to make my Mac work the way I want - tools like Karabiner, Better Touch Tool and so on... because I got sick of having to re-install or re-configure them after one of these updates. Also, Apple updates take forever and the update procedure is so clunky that even if you think you've updated something like XCode - the next time you open it you have to do more updates within the actual app. Package managers are soooo much nicer.
Haven't you read any of the threads here on HN around the time Apple releases a major new Mac OS update? There are always tons of people complaining about what they broke. I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps...
> And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc.
If you had said picking a distro [0], I'd agree with you. But finding a Linux laptop couldn't be easier. Google for: Linux laptop. Also, if you've been scanning headlines here on HN for any amount of time I'm absolutely positive that you could name one right off the top of your head if you thought about it for thirty seconds. Here's a hint: The model name/number starts with XPS.
Regarding drivers - every Linux desktop distro I've used has a GUI for picking drivers. You check off a couple boxes, hit apply and restart. Meanwhile on my Mac, I can't even get full functionality out of common hardware like a MS Natural Keyboard or a standard wireless USB mouse - so I gave up trying to do that too.
[0] I'll save you some time if you ever want to escape Apple: Pick an Arch-based distro.
I suspect we differ significantly in the sorts of configuration we do.
Also, please note that I mostly gave up on desktop Linux around 2006, after using it for 9 years straight as my only desktop OS. I kept using it for some things until earlier this year for work, and the update woes were still present, albeit smaller than in the past (maybe that's a Fedora-specific thing?). It's quite possible that even for a primary desktop the situation is better than it was in 2006, but at least for my use cases I'm at this point in "it ain't broken, don't spend time to fix it" territory wrt my OS. If that changes and there are things I want to do that macOS doesn't let me do, I will of course start looking at other options.
> I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps...
Indeed, and for some people that's a deal-breaker. For me specifically it was a non-issue; everything I use had long ago upgraded to 64-bit. I had to install a newer version of DOSBox than I had before; that's it.
Again, this is not going to be everyone's experience!
Upshot: I'm glad we have the various options we have right now, since it's pretty clear that different people experience them very differently and value different tradeoffs. I would be very sad if any of them disappeared.
Probably the majority of the subset of programmers who hang out on here are but out in the normal world most of us are not.
I need a computer that consistently works without too much fiddling and has a terminal. My setup works fine for me and any time I spend fooling around with it I consider pretty much wasted so I try to avoid that.
I've used linux plenty and it just eats up a lot of my time and energy. I leave that stuff for the servers these days.
WHY do developers find this acceptable?
Supporting these practices will only make things worse ...
* Unix shell
* X
* Virtual desktop support
* Runs my editor of choice
* Runs on a laptop
* WiFi just works
* Audio just works
* Updates don't break nearly as much (e.g. I don't have to mess with X configuration after every major OS update).
I had pretty much stopped trying to do advanced configuration on Linux by that point, because every single major-version OS update would break nearly all of it.
There are some tradeoffs, sure, but the amount of time I no longer had to spend to keep up basic functionality was worth it to me. Others may make other tradeoffs.
Note that this is for macOS. I'm not sure how I feel about iOS yet.
If a shell app were allowed to download and run binaries, so would Epic’s apps.
It’s mostly on who/what Apple likes, and some other circumstances. It’s tempting and comforting to apply a general principle, but it’s just not that simple in my opinion.
This is purely at technical question you have asked.
Also, that's just not true, a general programming language gives you a lot more attack surface, surfaces that are not testable with Apple's suite of verification tools.
The overarching rule for the App Store when it comes to these things that the implementation details are completely irrelevant, the only thing that matters is what a user sees when they open the app.
I don't like how Apple is enforcing it, but that's arguably better than outright banning these platforms.
Every retailer is a monopoly of their own storefront.
It turns the word into a tautology.
Get that stuff out of your life.