[OT] Draconian computer company policies, was: Mobile LC Apps Downloading Stacks After installation

Richmond Mathewson richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Fri Aug 11 12:54:05 EDT 2017

Well, I always drive below the speed limit and I always wear a seatbelt 
(and have always done so whether or not it was
a legal requirement in the country I happened to be living in at the time).

This is not quite the same as keeping goats and hens in the back of your 
car (which was not illegal last time I looked).

While keeping goats and hens in the car may prove extremely smelly it 
cannot be said to be unsafe
(unless one wants to drive the car with a nanny goat sitting on one's lap).

Now putting a LiveCode standalone onto an iPad that does thing that 
Apple doesn't like isn't always the same thing as putting things onto an 
iPad that is unsafe.

I'm absolutely sure that an awful lot of the creative potential of 
tablets is being lost because of unnecessary restrictions.

On 8/11/17 6:44 pm, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote:
> On 2017-08-11 16:44, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:
>> I cannot quite see how people are prepared to go on buying Apple 
>> iPads when
>> there are such draconian restrictions as to what one can run on them.
>> While the Android "thing" may not be much better, at last one can
>> side-load almost anything one wants.
> One can on iOS too - if you want to Jailbreak your device. Or, indeed, 
> if you have a Apple dev account (which I believe are now free until 
> you want to submit an app - someone please correct me if I'm wrong) 
> you can put on it whatever you like.
>> There is a whole world of difference between a set of actions one
>> cannot do because of the
>> physical limitations of a thing and a set of actions one is not
>> allowed to do because a bunch of people
>> in California want to carry on mucking you around even after they ahve
>> successfully manipulated you into buying their
>> over-priced product.
> That might be true - but as much as these restrictions *might* be 
> because the vendors 'want complete control of their walled garden to 
> scalp us for cash', I honestly do think it is much more about ensuring 
> these devices are *safe* for people to use in regards to all the very 
> critical information we tend to hold on our devices.

I don't see that, so much as the possibility that Apple and Google are 
scalping developers for cash;
and even that does not make much sense as they could still "scalp" if 
the restrictions were not so tight.

I don't think the developers of these machines or their operating 
systems are worried that much about
the end-users' safety; surely they are more interested in keeping their 
shareholders happy.

> It is important to remember that the majority of people who use mobile 
> phones, tablets and computers use them like they do their car or 
> washing machine. They have little interest in how the thing works, 
> just that it does what they need to - does it well and does it safely.

Yes, I am sure you are right. But, by imposing these restrictions they 
do not give the end-user a choice; and a world in which choice seems to 
be increasingly restricted is not good.

It would seem that the use of over-regulation and over-restriction is a 
way of dodging the very heavy moral responsibility of teaching people to
make sensible decisions.
> Sure some people complain about seat-belts and speed limits but the 
> reality is that those *legally enforceable requirements* make the 
> roads a great deal safer for everyone.
> Warmest Regards,

Not half as warm as over here in Bulgaria; hit 43 Centigrade today!
> Mark.

Best, Richmond.

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list