Apple might be facing an EU antitrust probe

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by HarryT

One of the issues with that is that a misbehaving app could break not itself, but other apps running on the system, leading to issues for their developers. I really, really like the "approval" process for the App Store. It's not a guarantee of quality (there's some utter rubbish on offer) but it is a guarantee that the app doesn't do anything undesirable on the system, such as use unpublished APIs. That latter is a real benefit for the consumer, since it minimizes the chance of an app breaking as a result of a firmware update.

So give the consumer a choice: run only apps with an Apple-approved tag, or choose to take a risk. If they want the benefit of restrictions they have the option to do so; if they want freedom, they have that option too.

Personally, when I consider the fact that Apple approved a $1000 app that displays a big red gem on the screen, I wouldn't feel all that comfortable trusting Apple to make choices for me.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Then you look at threads about people trying to install something on a windows mobile device, and have issues with where it has downloaded the file to, not having the right versions of libraries, etc...; or android devices, and some don't have the right OS version, some are locked so one app store will work and another won't, and you realise that Apple does do some things very well.

Apple of course have the huge benefit of having absolute control over both the operating system and the hardware on which it runs. It's pretty easy to ensure stability in that environment. Compare it to Windows, where Microsoft have no idea which of 1000 different video drivers might be running on your machine. People sometimes accuse Microsoft of being "control freaks" but they have NOTHING on Apple in that area .

[MikeB1972]

As a user I'd never get an apple device as I can't add what I want.

However as someone who has to keep removing virus's and malware from people's computers I say some people are too d@mn computer illiterate to make their own decisions, so good luck to apple

[Moejoe]

Well it looks like that 'vetting' of apps is coming back to bite Apple in the posterior. Now there are reports of 'App Farms' stealing money....http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/07/...al-your-money/

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Apple of course have the huge benefit of having absolute control over both the operating system and the hardware on which it runs. It's pretty easy to ensure stability in that environment. Compare it to Windows, where Microsoft have no idea which of 1000 different video drivers might be running on your machine. People sometimes accuse Microsoft of being "control freaks" but they have NOTHING on Apple in that area .

This is why everyone should use GNU/Linux or BSD or even Haiku

[HarryT]

As I say, Moejoe, my tinkering days are long gone. I still run Windows because that's what all my essential apps run under, but I can seriously see myself going over to the "dark side" and buying a Mac at some point in the future, just to make my "computing life" easier.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Well it looks like that 'vetting' of apps is coming back to bite Apple in the posterior. Now there are reports of 'App Farms' stealing money....http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/07/...al-your-money/

Haven't seen anything suggesting that the apps themselves are doing anything wrong. Someone is gaining access to peoples' account and sending money to themselves by buying apps they have developed.

As with the $1000 red diamond, Apple aren't certifying that the app is actually worth buying, just that it meets the development standards and doesn't do anything underhand.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

As I say, Moejoe, my tinkering days are long gone. I still run Windows because that's what all my essential apps run under, but I can seriously see myself going over to the "dark side" and buying a Mac at some point in the future, just to make my "computing life" easier.

I'm OS Agnostic. Ubuntu is just the easiest for me, the least tinkering needed and GNU/Linux has a philosophy that I can get behind. Windows 7 is pretty good, with enough RAM, but I have more problems with it than I do with Linux. Out of them all my experiences with OSX and Macs have been the worst. I think you'll be surprised at how 'uneasy' the computing life is with a Mac.

[HarryT]

Now you've shattered one of my few remaining delusions... .

[joblack]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I must respectfully disagree - I think that would be an extremely bad thing. When you buy an App from the App Store you know it's "safe" - that it doesn't contain malware, and that it will at least do vaguely what it claims to. In another thread, someone recently compared that to the "open" Android store, where you can have no trust that an App is what it claims to be, and where most apps appear to be unfinished.

The App Store is one of the real strengths of Apple, and a real benefit for the consumer, in my view.

The App Store from Google / Android isn't less secure. They can (and have) deleted malicous apps before.

Do you mean higher prices and less competition is a benefit for the user?

The point is that Apple is trying to block the free market.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by joblack

The App Store from Google / Android isn't less secure. They can (and have) deleted malicous apps before.

Deleted, as in they got onto the store and were then removed.
Rather than never getting on the store in the first place.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Deleted, as in they got onto the store and were then removed.
Rather than never getting on the store in the first place.

Yes I remember about an Apple App called

I am rich

which cost almost 1.000 USD and did only show one gem picture.

Did you mean these kind of apps which were removed later? The same was with magazine apps who showed too much skin

[roebeet]

I never understood why people find closed systems to be a "good" thing. Imagine if we had these same locks in place for things like cars or homes. You'd have cars that could only work on certain roads that are pre-approved by the car maker, or homes with proprietary sockets so only approved appliances could be used. But, since that would make things "safer" for us that's better, right?

Life is supposed to have risks - I'd much prefer open systems where some "bad" things might slip through than having companies spoon-feed me. In the case of Apple, jailbreaking should be a supported option - let people take the risk if they want to and let the others use the official App store. And for ebooks, all devices and bookstores should support at least one book standard. Giving that EPUB seems to be the closest thing to a standard right now, hopefully Amazon will support it at some point.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Apple of course have the huge benefit of having absolute control over both the operating system and the hardware on which it runs. It's pretty easy to ensure stability in that environment. Compare it to Windows, where Microsoft have no idea which of 1000 different video drivers might be running on your machine. People sometimes accuse Microsoft of being "control freaks" but they have NOTHING on Apple in that area .

“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Benjamin Franklin

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by joblack

Yes I remember about an Apple App called

I am rich

which cost almost 1.000 USD and did only show one gem picture.

Did you mean these kind of apps which were removed later?

Your quote was: "The App Store from Google / Android isn't less secure. They can (and have) deleted malicous apps before."

A $1000 app showing a silly picture isn't malware, or malicious, or insecure, just dumb.

Compare that to fake banking apps trying to phish peoples' account information:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01..._phishing_app/

One of these is a security risk, one is not.