Hacker News Reader

Comment by avidphantasm | Hacker News Reader

Apple is acting more and like a rent seeker with these changes in the EU, but it is still hard to deny the tension between openness and safety for naïve users. I don’t want my elderly parents to have to worry about being scammed out of money by accidentally installing an app from a less-than-reputable app store. Having the platform be more open would significantly increase the likelihood of such scams (unless I am missing something).

View on HN

Even though I don't like that approach, the best option (as some others mention) is to have a device installation flag that allows/denies all third party things. When you buy an iPhone it will be off, and no matter what you do you won't be able to turn it on so you can "give it to your grandpa without fear".

But for those that want, just allow reinstalling iOS (a full installation, deleting existing data) with the flag enabled. And just like that you can do whatever you want with your device, and "accepting the risks" of doing so.

What if your grandpa is tricked into enabling it? Well, all the data will be deleted so there will be nothing to steal.

Bought a used iPhone with the flag but still want the "security"? Just reinstall without it and done.

Yeah android phones all have a 0 security mode and no one is saying Android devices are security nightmares.

There are lots of scam apps in Apple’s AppStore with weekly subscriptions for basic functionality. Apple let’s them fly as they get a cut of it.

you're missing something

Apple could:

hide a default off "install third party apps from safari" flag somewhere deep in the settings

make it so you can only install 3rd party apps from the web using a special browser that doesn't come pre-installed, like in Fire TV OS

have a "never allow third party installs" flag that can only be set when initialising the device (or in the BIOS that iOS devices don't have but should). if the user wants a walled garden, they can choose it for themselves

these are simple options I thought of in 5 minutes that would likely solve 99% of cases, or at the very least absolve Apple of responsibility for them

the world's richest and probably most capable tech company could permanently solve this problem with all the resources in their metaphorical left thumbnail, if they wanted to, but they don't want to, because this argument is an excuse for maintaining their market dominance, not a genuine concern

Always the tradeof between freedom and security. There’s nothing more secure than living in a well-groomed prison. In this case though it’s pretty easy : don’t install third party app stores.

S-Mode on Windows is like Apple's walled garden, but it's only a default and the end-user can opt-out at will. That's not without similar downsides--just looked it up:

> Windows 11 in S mode is a version of Windows 11 that's streamlined for security and performance, while providing a familiar Windows experience. To increase security, it allows only apps from Microsoft Store, and requires Microsoft Edge for safe browsing.

You need a Microsoft online account and a tool from Microsoft store to opt out :)

This reminds me of wholinator2's comment two days ago on the 'Apple announces...' thread, regarding the received wisdom that Apple is more secure because it's a walled garden fallacy.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39141228

I wouldn't mind if there was something akin to Windows "S mode" (i.e. a mode that forbids 3rd party apps), set at time of purchase, and reconfigurable with a visit to an apple store.

Lol no, I don't think I should have to identify myself to Apple if I want to use a device I've obtained on the second hand market the way I see fit.

Then don't buy second-hand devices in S-mode

And what if Apple sells in S-mode by default?

Then that would suck, which is why it's not what I said.

reconfigurable with a visit to a physical Apple store is massive overkill. reconfigurable by reinitialising the device or changing a flag in BIOS are both more than enough to deter some demented pensioner from installing malware on their device

> between openness and safety for naïve users

Are you telling me that MacOS is insecure system?

I don't get this safety defense from the Apple side.

They could allow a different store like F-Droid on Android. Nobody would force your elder parents to install that one.

For every other app on the "original store", charge a one time fee for checking the security and be done with it.

Implying that being open = being attacked is fearmongering.

it's a very clear example of a completely disingenuous defence from Apple. Apple could very easily please all parties if they wanted to. they could add safeguards like this and more to maintain the safety of vulnerable users, and still provide flexibility and freedom to advanced users. if you take their market dominance out of the equation, there would be no downside. however their market dominance is in the equation and it illustrates how fake of an argument it is

I totally agree. And most boomers I know have iPhones and iPads. I would hate to have to start supporting my parents using a different app store.

Plus, I don't think the majority of iPhone customers are asking for openness.

then just have it off by default, changeable deep in settings? or let it be a permanent choice when you set up the device? or have a separate browser for side-loading that doesn't come pre-installed?

the majority of chickens aren't asking to live free in the fields

On hacker news they are. Plus there are already app stores, popular ones, that work by rooting ios devices. Surely that menas there's STRONG demand for just that.

I doubt the orange site is representative.

The orange site might not be, but when even EU bureaucrats are aware of the problem and think it's important enough to address, you can't fall back onto Apple-esque "tiny percentage of affected users" reasoning anymore.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com