Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | gumby271's commentslogin

It sucks that Apple decided to monitize iPhone the way they have, by controlling the owners ability to install software of their choosing. Ignoring the arguments one could make about this making it "more secure" it's clearly disrespectful to the power user that doesn't want to beg Apple's permission to use their computer. I'll grant them their security claims are sound, but it's hard to take them serious regarding privacy arguments.

Our choices are either (A) an OS monitized by tracking user interaction and activity, or (B) monitized by owning the basic act of installing software on the device, both of these options suck and I struggle to give up the more open option for one that might be more secure.


Ignoring the arguments one could make about this making it "more secure" it's clearly disrespectful to the power user that doesn't want to beg Apple's permission to use their computer. I'll grant them their security claims are sound,

I wouldn't say they are sound. First, macOS provides the freedom to install your own applications (ok, they need to be signed and notarized if the quarantine attribute is set) and it's not the case that the Mac has mass malware infestations. Second, the App Store is full of scams, so App Store - safe, external - unsafe is a false dichotomy.

Apple uses these arguments, but of course the real reason is that they want to continue to keep 30% of every transaction made on an iPhone or iPad. This is why they have responded to the DMA with a lot of malicious compliance that makes it nearly impossible to run an alt-store financially.

(Despite my qualms about not being able to install apps outside the app store, I do think they are doing a lot of good work of making the platform more secure.)


The OP is about security and you specifically ignore security when bringing up a common flamewar topic for which much discussion has already been had on this site. Perhaps such discussion could at least be limited to articles where it is less tenuously related.

I guess I bring it up in the sense that no matter how good their security is, it still sucks that Apple products are so hostile to their owners. It's hard to be impressed by their security work with the platform being what it is.

Security, privacy, and ownership aren't equally separated in my mind.


Except neither of those two are the exclusive way to install software on a computer that you own. All 3 have their issues, but Apple is uniquely bad in this way. I don't find myself Hating Steam/Valve.

It functionally is for most users with android phones. 99% of people aren’t side loading apps.

So the company that also lets you support your favorite podcasts via a subscription decided their competitor should pay 30% more just to do the same thing? Cool.

Don't forget they also directly compete with Patreon with podcast subscriptions. You can support a podcast through Apple podcasts or Patreon, but only one of those has a 30% chunk taken out.

IIRC Premium Apple podcasts charge their standard subscription fees (eg 30% the first year, 15% the years after that)

They're really cool, I just wish they weren't an iPhone accessory. If I could do everything from my Mac I'd consider them, but Apple likes to assume every Apple customer also has an iPhone.

It feels like Apple did all of this in reverse. They created a new UI system and effects that look like shit with any amount of fine detail, and now suddenly their design guide says "actually fine details are bad for the user". They didn't come up with a good design, they came up with a shader tech demo and had to make a design that works with that new constraint.


Yeah, rendering at smaller sizes is one thing, but icons being made uninterpretable by system provided shadows and highlighting seems like an unforced error.


Most of their icons became (or have always been) very simple since long, long before that existed.


Slap a gradient on that bad boy and collect your Apple paycheck buddy!


Given the choice between "These icons look a bit garish in a subjective sense" and "what abstract art piece describes the Pages app" I'd rather have the one that's still useful. One benefit of skeuomorphism was the level of detail, that's fully been abandoned along with the affordances that brought.


I've honestly never had an issue with using flat design. Or if I have, it hasn't been enough of an issue to remember. I don't mean this in a judgemental way, just that I legitimately don't understand why people care.


That's fair, it's not like this is completely breaking usability. But I have to ask, do you think the most recent pages icon is really the most accessible and useful version for this app? The logical end of the flat design and minimalism trend got us here and I think it's grossly over done.


That's hard to answer because clearly my opinion is disconnected from most people. If this thread didn't exist I wouldn't give it more than a second though "that's the new icon ok"


I like how the new icon forces you to do product placement for Apple devices just to explain it. Tap the icon with the Apple Pencil and rectangle. Just don't convey it using color, that's now completely unpredictable.


For instance an icon with a pointy stick over top of a horizontal rectangle with a gradient applied conveys a tool for doing document and page layout. Got it.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: