This is a good example of how innovation, competition and small businesses are being stifled by the anticompetitive behavior of the mobile app distribution cartel.<p>Consider contacting your state's Attorney General office, and the US Attorney General office. Many states' AG offices have antitrust divisions[1].<p>The US Dept. of Justice also has an Antitrust Division[2], along with a page that details how and why[3] to get in touch with them:<p>> <i>Information from the public is vital to the work of the Antitrust Division. Your e-mails, letters, and phone calls could be our first alert to a possible violation of antitrust laws and may provide the initial evidence needed to begin an investigation.</i><p>The FTC has the Bureau of Competition[4], as well.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.naag.org/issues/antitrust/" rel="nofollow">https://www.naag.org/issues/antitrust/</a><p>[2] <a href="https://www.justice.gov/atr" rel="nofollow">https://www.justice.gov/atr</a><p>[3] <a href="https://www.justice.gov/atr/report-violations" rel="nofollow">https://www.justice.gov/atr/report-violations</a><p>[4] <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-competition/about-bureau-competition" rel="nofollow">https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-competi...</a>
The mobile landscape presents a very difficult choice.<p>Choose Android, get actual access to your device and install what you want but have your privacy completely trampled upon by Google<p>Choose Apple, get marginally better privacy but no ownership of your phone and no possibility to install what you want.<p>I wish we had a reasonable alternative, it's so frustrating to have to choose between two bad alternatives and the behavior of those companies that completely disrespect and tramples their customer right makes my blood boil.<p>I just want both the right to use my phone fully and the right to my privacy.
Sigh, this is exactly the rule Apple once falsely rejected iSH for. It’s disappointing to see that they’re still applying their convoluted rationale to take down legitimate apps based on the actions their users take inside the app. As I wrote earlier:<p>> For example, iSH was once rejected with the rationale that “During review, your app installed or launched executable code, which is not permitted on the App Store.” The template itself clearly outlines the case it is meant to apply—an app that is installing code by itself, to bypass review—but in the case of iSH the reviewer chose to install code and then complained that the app did what they told it to do.<p>I can see the arguments from <a href="https://saagarjha.com/blog/2020/11/08/fixing-section-2-5-2/" rel="nofollow">https://saagarjha.com/blog/2020/11/08/fixing-section-2-5-2/</a> applying here.
It's quite bizarre that Apple just released an iPad Pro with a CPU that is more powerful than the desktop CPU in my workstation, but then cripples the device by severely restricting what kind of software you can run on it.<p>I mainly use Linux but was looking for a secondary laptop/tablet hybrid for my office needs. I considered getting an iPad but ultimately went for a Surface Pro, which was the right choice I think. The device and UI (just Windows 10) is not nearly as polished as iPadOS, but at least I can just install normal FOSS software like KeepassXC instead of downloading some proprietary app from the store, hoping it won't exfiltrate my data. I can even play the occasional round of SimCity 2000 in DOSBox. iOS & iPadOS devices are great for media consumption, but I would never consider them for any type of "serious" office work.
When I was younger, my family couldn’t afford a laptop, but I have the distinct memory of wanting to learn to code on the iPads at my school, and being unable to find any app which would let me just write and execute programs. Looking around the App Store now, there do seem to be a couple of apps which would allow this, but it’s still really disappointing to see this kind of removal. The majority of kids these days will likely use a phone lots more than they use a laptop. For those who want to learn to code, why doesn’t Apple make it easier?
I hope Apple will be punished for their behaviour. I could ideally understand them reserving the power to decide what gets uploaded and what doesn't on their stores, but then they must allow sideloading. People paid good money for their phones, and so they must be free to use them as they see fit. To me this sounds like buying a car that's restricted from entering Germany or buying a fruit processor that forbids you to blend fruit, which would universally be considered as an abuse of power from the manufacturer.<p>Apple can't just impose to user what basically boils down to a fee to use your own hardware as you want, while at the same time preventing their competitors from competing at par with their services. Their draconian policies have been getting harsher and more drastic over time, it almost feels like they are really trying to get the EU Commission to punish them somehow.
Honest question - what do iOS users do in such situations? I'm using Android and we can always install things from outside the store, or even from alternative stores (eg. F-Droid). Is there any similar solution? If the app is open-source, can you at least build it yourself and sideload it as if you are the developer and you're testing your app? What solutions are there?
That's fcking my mobile. I paid for it. I own it. If I want to install something on my owned device, who the f is Apple to stop it?<p>Think about it this way: A chair supplier telling Apple to only allow it's employees to sit a certain way. Or architects telling it to only build their HQ's a certain way. Not as an advice, but, enforced.<p>How ridiculous is that!
I guess we need a congressional bill that lets people sideload apps on their phone. It seems ridiculous to have to get to that level but apparently that’s the only way. We have some progress now on right to repair. Next up, right to use.
Microsoft in the late 90s/2000s: Tells OEMs that they can't sell their own PCs with alternative operating systems. Gets forced by the government to stop. Hackers everywhere cheer.<p>Apple since 2008: Tells people that they can't install programs on their own devices. Any mention of asking the government to force them to stop this is met by Hacker News users vehemently defending their right to let Apple (and only Apple, at all times, with no off switch) decide everything.<p>I don't buy it. Something stinks here. This is nothing short of a digital new world order and obviously the current status quo is very, very valuable to the companies who run these platforms but I believe it's also very valuable to the entire power matrix that holds us all in check.
If they put half as much effort into eliminating <i>real scams</i> as they do in eliminating <i>proven useful software</i>, what a different platform it would be.
How funny it is to remove this app because it "loads executable" as they released Swift Playground years ago...<p>Plus the new feature of creating and packaging your iOS / iPadOS app + uploading it, directly on the iPad.<p>Apple seems to contradict its own rules since a few years now.
I feel that Apple solve the problem of freedom vs security quite well on Mac: you can download and run whatever software you want, but there's a sort of "Captcha" involved (where you need to right-click + open to run software from non-registered devs). This prevents mom and dad from installing a bunch of Spyware, but let's me run obscure and cool apps by indie developers as I please.
These stupid limitation by Apple makes me really hope that there will be real competition in the tablet space. Android tablets basically failed because most apps are just bit phone apps. Windows tablet aren’t that successful either.<p>The thing is iPads offer good experience as a tablet but when you want from it a bit more Apple doesn’t allow it because of their Apps Store policies.<p>Personally I think iPad could be a great device for coding on the go.
But the fact that we can’t install anything outside of apple’s control blocks this option.<p>RDP or SSH is nice but it relies on internet connection. I’d like to use the native power of the device. With M1 there’s no reason it wouldn’t be able to do so.<p>Their arguments about security to sounds more like bunch of excuses.
Sad… I played Kings Quest VI on an ipad with this emulator and it workers great. Why does Apple even care if a few people play some old abandonware on an ipad?
Their handling of this situation was not great, and I'm sorry for the author, but I was pleasantly surprised to see them explicitly point out exactly which rules where violated. What a stark contrast with the usual HN posts about apps being removed from the Play Store for vague reasons with little to no explanation. Google has a lot to learn.
FastCompany’s Harry McCracken and How to Geek worked together to publish an article on how to run windows 3.1 using iDOS 2 (and all your old games) on 12 July [0]. It his Mac news sites the same day. TWiT talked about running Win 3.1 and TRS-80 on iPad on 18 July [1].<p>The popularity of these articles and podcast may have shined a light on this bit of hackery. It sucks it is getting booted, but it’s largely interesting because it allowed you to do the thing Apple doesn’t want you to do.<p>[0] <a href="https://www.howtogeek.com/739100/how-to-install-windows-31-on-an-ipad/" rel="nofollow">https://www.howtogeek.com/739100/how-to-install-windows-31-o...</a><p>[1] <a href="https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-tech/episodes/832" rel="nofollow">https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-tech/episodes/832</a>
Build web apps and free yourself from the tyranny of closed ecosystems. It's Closed vs. Open. Only the web is open. 99% of apps on both the Play Store and App Store could be implemented as web apps with no loss in functionality - in fact a very large chunk of them are web apps, simply wrapped in a web view.
Apple can't enforce such basic App Store rules consistently, even when violations are deliberately and clearly mentioned in the submission... and we are supposed to believe that Apple can't allow other stores on the decice because THAT would compromise security...
These rules are applied selectively. I know very popular apps that are loading interpreted code over https and executing it. Also, these same apps are exploiting a flaw in iOS in order to track users across apps and using the interpreted code to hide this.
This sucks. I have an old program called Jazz Guitarist I bought from PG Music, the makers of BIAB back in the 90’s, and its a treat to see it run on my iPad/iPhone. Even the QBASIC example programs for different sort algorithms is so cool.
I’m hoping and waiting for some kind of side loading, which isn’t very easy to do, to be forced on iOS through regulation. It could open the platform up for a lot more possibilities and also keep Apple on its toes in building more useful features into iOS (like what jailbreaking and Cydia did for a long time).
People using iPhones are consenting to Apple deciding what programs they are allowed to run. It may be OK for some people, but not for me. I feel the MacOS is moving int the same direction.
It is ok that phones and tablets are “consume-only” devices. Like for games, watch video, etc.<p>This just opens opportunity for “makers” devices (you can do something uniq) and companies. Ie some cheap phones with OS targeting market in Africa. This also means a new type of VCs / ycombinators.