6 ms·

It's just nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it. Well, Androids don't come with root permissions either ( you should be able to g

It's just nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it. Well, Androids don't come with root permissions either ( you should be able to get it easily if you want imo ) but at least you can install any app, even just create your own.

shrx 3y ago
It's not that easy on Android either. Rooting usually requires a factory reset and several apps (e.g. banking) will not work if they detect the system is rooted. edit: Also, in some cases you lose warranty.
- rezonant 3y ago
  There is no need to root to install software on Android. Rooting is only required for permissions that no app (save pre installed apps), whether installed via Play store or not, can be given.
- pooper 3y ago
  The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode and run locally (used to be at all now I guess seven day limit) is silly. On Android, with Android 12, we can now have apps on neostore (fdroid frontend) auto update. There is no good reason to defend apple here. You as a user are always free to not install third party app stores.
  - boxed 3y ago
    > The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode ...I do right now. So that isn't a fact. It's a myth.
    - pooper 3y ago
      But they die after seven days?
      - boxed 3y ago
        No. It's months at the very least.
        Pfhortune 3y ago
        Only if you pay the $99/year developer fee.
  - BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
    The official F-Droid client has auto updates, too, for what it's worth.
    - pooper 3y ago
      This is good to know. Thank you. I'll just install f-droid app on my next phone. iirc it didn't do this when android 12 was new.
      - BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
        Yep, it was added fairly recently. Exciting times!
- xorcist 3y ago
  Installing F-Droid is not hard. No need for root. In fact, the usual criticism is that it's too easy. There are a number of scary warnings to click through but that's it. Not great for security but the official distribution is good enough that it's not a problem outside a few select countries where doing business is hard.
- kyriakos 3y ago
  There's no need to root. Installing any app outside play store is a matter of clicking 2 buttons.
opan 3y ago
You do not need root on android to install a .apk file. I see too many people thinking iOS and Android are on equal starting ground. Android out of the box is fairly close to jailbroken iOS. Very few things require root.
- theferalrobot 3y ago
  If we're getting technical you don't need to jailbreak to sideload on iOS either. AltStore automates the tedium but you can side load just fine on iOS too (for now).
  - e_y_ 3y ago
    With a 7 day expiration, max of 3 apps. It's more of a "developer account lite" testing tool than a bona fide sideloading mechanism.
    - rezonant 3y ago
      A seven day expiration alone makes it useless. Why would anyone think side loading is supported when you can't open the app anymore after 7 days? More likely to be iOS apologists looking for a narrative, they try it out and proclaim that it works, but have no intention to actually use their side loaded test app, so they don't even realize it only looked like it worked.
      - theferalrobot 3y ago
        It automatically refreshes in the background. You can just set it and forget it. Not sure why people think it is complicated.
  - crashmat 3y ago
    You don't need to sideload on android. You just install it.
boxed 3y ago
Creating your own app is actually pretty easy on iOS. I run an app on my phone right now that I built myself and that is not on the app store.
- Timwi 3y ago
  > Creating your own app is actually pretty easy on iOS. I don't believe you. I believe that you probably left out some crucial detail, such as having to own a Mac first.
  - boxed 3y ago
    Well.. Yea. Sure. But saying "you cannot" is very different from "you need a mac".
    - Timwi 3y ago
      You didn't say “can”, you said “actually pretty easy”.
    - colonwqbang 3y ago
      But this is exactly the kind of behaviour targeted by the DMA. Artificial restrictions in the functionality of iphone are inserted to drive sales of an unrelated product. It's page one of the Monopolist Playbook.
      - tambourine_man 3y ago
        Maintaining a developer toolkit for Windows and Linux is a major hurdle. If they intentionally prevent a third party Xcode-compatible implementation from existing, that’s monopolistic behavior. If they don’t want to provide it themselves, it’s a rightful business choice and theirs to make, in my book.
      - boxed 3y ago
        I noticed that you moved the goalpost. Quite a bit. "Cannot" to "need a mac" is an enormous move. If you think sales of macs are affected in a measurable way by the fact that xcode runs on it you are delusional.
charcircuit 3y ago
No, getting root permissions should not be possible. Having a concept of a super user which can do whatever they want is bad for security and doesn't follow the principle of least privilege. There are better ways for an OS to offer functionality than requiring such a dangerous concept to exist. The fact that desktop and server Linux distros still have a root account, have sudo, or said binaries is evidence of how far behind they are in terms of security.
- rezonant 3y ago
  MacOS also has sudo.
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    and iOS, a newer OS where Apple could easily redo their security model while ignoring legacy baggage does not have sudo.
    - dTal 3y ago
      The superuser on iOS is Apple. Apple can do whatever they want, to any iPhone, whenever they want. Final, ultimate control must always be vested somewhere. Your argument is that it's "more secure" for it to be in the hands of a profit-seeking corporation than in the hands that are holding the device.
      - charcircuit 3y ago
        >Your argument is that it's "more secure" for it to be in the hands of a profit-seeking corporation than in the hands that are holding the device. Yes. The identity a company like Apple is known and trusted. The person holding a device is not a known identity. This is unrelated to not having sudo though. Take for example the ping command. There is no reason why the user must have access to an account that has ultimate control over the device to use ping. ping should be possible to be used by a normal user. This could be implemented with a ping daemon that run with a dedicated user that has the capability to use raw sockets, and then normal users have a ping client that talks to such daemon. You can come up with everything someone would need root for and define a more secure way to offer that functionality to the user.
Karellen 3y ago
For me, the issue is, who do I distrust less - Google or Apple? Yes, they're both shitty in a number of ways. And while is is easier to root Android devices than it is to root iOS ones, last I checked you were still dependent on the vendor kernel and parts of the vendor display server on Android because not all of the necessary drivers and related config are upstreamed (and the lack of TIVO clauses in GPLv2 makes this possible) - meaning replacing 95% of userspace doesn't actually get you very far if your issue is not being able to trust the vendor. I choose Apple because: 1. Apple is primarily a hardware company. When I buy their hardware, I am their customer. When they make noises about protecting my privacy, I am reasonably confident that very few parts of the business are working to undermine that. OTOH, Google is an advertising company. When I buy their hardware, my eyeballs become their product, which they rent out to their real customers, the advertisers. When they make noises about protecting my privacy, I see that as mostly marketing BS (or, "puffery") which large parts of their business are working to undermine. 2. My phone is not my primary computing device. I have a laptop running GNU/Linux that I use for most of my computing needs, including web browsing, email, and software development. I am fine with my mobile phone being an "appliance" that I use mostly for instant messaging, and occasionally checking the news and weather, taking photos, or making short temporary notes that I will (manually) transfer to my laptop later. And sometimes, even, making phone calls. But I generally stay away from "apps". No, I don't want to install your fucking app, no matter which device it would be on. Just make sure your website works. Given those factors, I have an Apple phone. That's not to say Apple is for everyone. My priorities are not everyone else's, and that's fine. Different people have different tradeoffs. If an Android device works better for you, that's great.
- the_gipsy 3y ago
  Apple's no longer a hardware company, they're a platform rent extraction company. They are directly misleading and harming their users with this move, and also with the existing dark patterns around iCloud storage.
  - JimDabell 3y ago
    > Apple's no longer a hardware company, they're a platform rent extraction company. Apple still make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware. All of their service revenue combined is only about 20% of their revenue.
Terretta 3y ago
nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it Xbox, PS, iPad are consoles. Not everyone wants to DIY the OS and app config and maintenance. Using (digital) cartridges gets all those non value added activities out of the way of just playing the game or using the app.

shrx 3y ago

It's not that easy on Android either. Rooting usually requires a factory reset and several apps (e.g. banking) will not work if they detect the system is rooted. edit: Also, in some cases you lose warranty.

rezonant 3y ago
There is no need to root to install software on Android. Rooting is only required for permissions that no app (save pre installed apps), whether installed via Play store or not, can be given.
pooper 3y ago
The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode and run locally (used to be at all now I guess seven day limit) is silly. On Android, with Android 12, we can now have apps on neostore (fdroid frontend) auto update. There is no good reason to defend apple here. You as a user are always free to not install third party app stores.
- boxed 3y ago
  > The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode ...I do right now. So that isn't a fact. It's a myth.
  - pooper 3y ago
    But they die after seven days?
    - boxed 3y ago
      No. It's months at the very least.
      - Pfhortune 3y ago
        Only if you pay the $99/year developer fee.
- BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
  The official F-Droid client has auto updates, too, for what it's worth.
  - pooper 3y ago
    This is good to know. Thank you. I'll just install f-droid app on my next phone. iirc it didn't do this when android 12 was new.
    - BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
      Yep, it was added fairly recently. Exciting times!
xorcist 3y ago
Installing F-Droid is not hard. No need for root. In fact, the usual criticism is that it's too easy. There are a number of scary warnings to click through but that's it. Not great for security but the official distribution is good enough that it's not a problem outside a few select countries where doing business is hard.
kyriakos 3y ago
There's no need to root. Installing any app outside play store is a matter of clicking 2 buttons.

opan 3y ago

You do not need root on android to install a .apk file. I see too many people thinking iOS and Android are on equal starting ground. Android out of the box is fairly close to jailbroken iOS. Very few things require root.

theferalrobot 3y ago
If we're getting technical you don't need to jailbreak to sideload on iOS either. AltStore automates the tedium but you can side load just fine on iOS too (for now).
- e_y_ 3y ago
  With a 7 day expiration, max of 3 apps. It's more of a "developer account lite" testing tool than a bona fide sideloading mechanism.
  - rezonant 3y ago
    A seven day expiration alone makes it useless. Why would anyone think side loading is supported when you can't open the app anymore after 7 days? More likely to be iOS apologists looking for a narrative, they try it out and proclaim that it works, but have no intention to actually use their side loaded test app, so they don't even realize it only looked like it worked.
    - theferalrobot 3y ago
      It automatically refreshes in the background. You can just set it and forget it. Not sure why people think it is complicated.
- crashmat 3y ago
  You don't need to sideload on android. You just install it.

boxed 3y ago

Creating your own app is actually pretty easy on iOS. I run an app on my phone right now that I built myself and that is not on the app store.

Timwi 3y ago
> Creating your own app is actually pretty easy on iOS. I don't believe you. I believe that you probably left out some crucial detail, such as having to own a Mac first.
- boxed 3y ago
  Well.. Yea. Sure. But saying "you cannot" is very different from "you need a mac".
  - Timwi 3y ago
    You didn't say “can”, you said “actually pretty easy”.
  - colonwqbang 3y ago
    But this is exactly the kind of behaviour targeted by the DMA. Artificial restrictions in the functionality of iphone are inserted to drive sales of an unrelated product. It's page one of the Monopolist Playbook.
    - tambourine_man 3y ago
      Maintaining a developer toolkit for Windows and Linux is a major hurdle. If they intentionally prevent a third party Xcode-compatible implementation from existing, that’s monopolistic behavior. If they don’t want to provide it themselves, it’s a rightful business choice and theirs to make, in my book.
    - boxed 3y ago
      I noticed that you moved the goalpost. Quite a bit. "Cannot" to "need a mac" is an enormous move. If you think sales of macs are affected in a measurable way by the fact that xcode runs on it you are delusional.

charcircuit 3y ago

No, getting root permissions should not be possible. Having a concept of a super user which can do whatever they want is bad for security and doesn't follow the principle of least privilege. There are better ways for an OS to offer functionality than requiring such a dangerous concept to exist. The fact that desktop and server Linux distros still have a root account, have sudo, or said binaries is evidence of how far behind they are in terms of security.

rezonant 3y ago
MacOS also has sudo.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  and iOS, a newer OS where Apple could easily redo their security model while ignoring legacy baggage does not have sudo.
  - dTal 3y ago
    The superuser on iOS is Apple. Apple can do whatever they want, to any iPhone, whenever they want. Final, ultimate control must always be vested somewhere. Your argument is that it's "more secure" for it to be in the hands of a profit-seeking corporation than in the hands that are holding the device.
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      >Your argument is that it's "more secure" for it to be in the hands of a profit-seeking corporation than in the hands that are holding the device. Yes. The identity a company like Apple is known and trusted. The person holding a device is not a known identity. This is unrelated to not having sudo though. Take for example the ping command. There is no reason why the user must have access to an account that has ultimate control over the device to use ping. ping should be possible to be used by a normal user. This could be implemented with a ping daemon that run with a dedicated user that has the capability to use raw sockets, and then normal users have a ping client that talks to such daemon. You can come up with everything someone would need root for and define a more secure way to offer that functionality to the user.

Karellen 3y ago

For me, the issue is, who do I distrust less - Google or Apple? Yes, they're both shitty in a number of ways. And while is is easier to root Android devices than it is to root iOS ones, last I checked you were still dependent on the vendor kernel and parts of the vendor display server on Android because not all of the necessary drivers and related config are upstreamed (and the lack of TIVO clauses in GPLv2 makes this possible) - meaning replacing 95% of userspace doesn't actually get you very far if your issue is not being able to trust the vendor. I choose Apple because: 1. Apple is primarily a hardware company. When I buy their hardware, I am their customer. When they make noises about protecting my privacy, I am reasonably confident that very few parts of the business are working to undermine that. OTOH, Google is an advertising company. When I buy their hardware, my eyeballs become their product, which they rent out to their real customers, the advertisers. When they make noises about protecting my privacy, I see that as mostly marketing BS (or, "puffery") which large parts of their business are working to undermine. 2. My phone is not my primary computing device. I have a laptop running GNU/Linux that I use for most of my computing needs, including web browsing, email, and software development. I am fine with my mobile phone being an "appliance" that I use mostly for instant messaging, and occasionally checking the news and weather, taking photos, or making short temporary notes that I will (manually) transfer to my laptop later. And sometimes, even, making phone calls. But I generally stay away from "apps". No, I don't want to install your fucking app, no matter which device it would be on. Just make sure your website works. Given those factors, I have an Apple phone. That's not to say Apple is for everyone. My priorities are not everyone else's, and that's fine. Different people have different tradeoffs. If an Android device works better for you, that's great.

the_gipsy 3y ago
Apple's no longer a hardware company, they're a platform rent extraction company. They are directly misleading and harming their users with this move, and also with the existing dark patterns around iCloud storage.
- JimDabell 3y ago
  > Apple's no longer a hardware company, they're a platform rent extraction company. Apple still make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware. All of their service revenue combined is only about 20% of their revenue.

Terretta 3y ago

nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it Xbox, PS, iPad are consoles. Not everyone wants to DIY the OS and app config and maintenance. Using (digital) cartridges gets all those non value added activities out of the way of just playing the game or using the app.