Webkit is __not__ stable in any sense. It is the most buggy render engine I even seen. To make things even worse. Safari restrict the debugging of itself and also viewing the logs in the name of "s e c u ri t y". So you can't even see the reason that causes crashs and workaround it.
Apple goes out of their way to make it time consuming and annoying enough to use that most people won't bother using it, and the alt store has substantial restrictions compared to the App Store.
It's really funny that there are hackers arguing sincerely that software freedom is worth any price but think it's a "pain in the ass" to press a couple buttons for software freedom once a week (or annually, for $99).
That's a disgusting perversion of the word "freedom" -- being beholden to corporation's whims, having to dance to their tune and jump through their hoops is what you unironically call "software freedom"?
Well you argued that paying Apple $100/year to install software of your choice on a device that you supposedly own constitutes "software freedom". I argue that this is perversion of the word "freedom" considering it's neither free as beer, nor free as speech.
Ultimately you're still forced to ask Apple for permission to run your "sideloaded" app, and they can deny that request for any reason. "Software freedom" that you mockingly refer to is just a slightly longer leash inside the confines of their walled garden.
You can sideload for free. You have to press a button to renew your local signature every week. The $100/year is to skip pressing the button. You don’t have to get permission to run locally signed apps.
> You don’t have to get permission to run locally signed apps
You absolutely do need permission, that's how Apple enforces the app expiration. Apple will grant you a developer account and sign your apps for local use, but you cannot load your own apps without them doing so.
1. Valid Xcode signature is subject to Apple's approval. They might blanket approve everything now, but they could pull that rug tomorrow if they wanted to.
2. Having to re-sign every 7 days is a completely unworkable proposal, it means that you can't be away from your Mac for more than a week or the apps that you rely on will just stop working
3. Most people don't own a Mac, much less the have knowledge to sign apps with Xcode, for this to even be a realistic proposal
1. Then tomorrow you could argue human rights are violated. Not today.
2. So like I said: being able to run whatever software you want for more than a week at a time without having to click a button is the human right? Is that so?
2+3. I propose you start a human rights defending company that rents people a Mac Mini in the cloud for a minute a week and auto-signs any locally signed apps. All the necessary API already exists, and the marginal cost is in the cents. Cheapest welfare ever!
(ii) each lease period must be for a minimum period of twenty-four (24) consecutive hours;
It also depends on whether auto-signing qualifies as a Permitted Developer Service, which sounds like it might-
> (B) Permitted Developer Services means continuous integration services, including but not limited to software development, building software from source, automated testing during software development, and running necessary developer tools to support such activities.
Great, 52 hours of rent a year! Marginal cost is approaching $1/yr. Still very cheap welfare if you think this kind of thing is a human rights violation.
I'd be happy if the EU deemed these terms unenforceable. That sounds like it could allow for real innovation.
TestFlight was born out of sidestepping an onerous app provisioning process, so you are unironically correct. Would be nice if the EU weighed in on behalf of Corellium as well.
Hackers do not care about 99% of users, as evidenced by the fact that Apple created the most popular and accessible consumer software in history, not hackers.
You make a reasonable point that the poster didn’t imply painfulness made the Altstore not worthwhile for them personally.
iOS was popular far before it was a dominant global business. It was probably one of the most popular software projects of all time even in its first version.
iPod and iTunes Store were probably more popular than any project ever built by hackers. Why haven’t hackers, who care about 99% of users, ever been able to make software those users care to use? What private API stands between hackers and epiphany?
I just want an operating system free from the types of capabilities attractive to sanctimonious, user-hostile crusaders who have strong opinions about software freedom. I keep a laptop collecting dust with a half-broken install of Arch when I want to experience their paradise.
Making iOS more like macOS (which seems contrary to the current trajectory of the platforms) does not mean turning it into a half-broken install of Arch.
I'm sure there are many ways, but I used https://sabre.io/baikal/ to get a CalDAV and CardDAV server on cheap (shared, bog standard) web hosting, and then pointed Thunderbird to it. Apart from automatic syncing of contacts between devices, I can now edit my phone contacts on the desktop, which is so awesome.
It uses CalDav and CardDav to sync calendars and contacts with the android system, not with these apps.
If you build android from source it doesn't come with the GApps suite and you can use any other calendar and contacts apps which then use the calendars and contacts provided by the system.
