Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes they are balancing the cost/benefit equation of the untold levels of damage to consumers and to Apple itself potentially done by bad apps on one side, versus the relatively less impactful in their judgement benefits of potentially useful apps on the other side. The assessment that this increases the device's suck relies on an certain assumptions about just how bad the damages could possibly be, assumptions that you make, but that they are reluctant to make on behalf of their users.


What potential for damage exists here that doesn't also exist for their millions of App Store apps?


Do you think that it might be possible that different inputs to a situation could lead to different likelihoods for various outcomes?




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

Search: