Thread

Apple has added persistent 'ads' to iOS, and it's driving users crazy

822 points · 601 comments · MC995

kqp · 1790088824 · focus · HN ↗
Relatedly, Apple finally kicked me off the quick update bandwagon with macOS/iOS 26, and I was surprised to learn that no, Apple does not let you just say no to updates. You get a permanent red badge that you can only dismiss by fully turning off system notifications, you get nagged literally thousands of times, and if any of those times you don’t repeat your rejection quickly enough, it overrides your non-consent and updates. That’s all with updates turned off. HN comment sections had led me to believe that consensual updates are a pro of Apple over Windows and an example of Apple’s class, but they don’t exist, the actual software is everything people lambast Windows for.
1. sda2 · 1790089282 · focus · HN ↗
  I have a script to add an /etc/hosts entry for `127.0.0.1 gdmf.apple.com` and that seems to eliminate any nagging, just remove when it's time to update.
  1. Barbing · 1790090285 · focus · HN ↗
    Nice. Someone made a site to notify for updates when you have that subdomain blocked.
    <a href="https://github.com/travisvn/stop-tahoe-update/issues/19#issuecomment-4643073156" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/travisvn/stop-tahoe-update/issues/19#issu...
    This was after Apple broke the trick to prevent Tahoe update nags.
    eviks · 1790112883 · focus · HN ↗
    You'll miss security updates following that site
    Obscurity4340 · 1790119582 · focus · HN ↗
    Probably ad updates too tho
    eviks · 1790135258 · focus · HN ↗
    That's unlikely, those come with the regular version
    wpm · 1790164716 · focus · HN ↗
    Eh, whatever
  2. fsflover · 1790237026 · focus · HN ↗
    So you are starting to fight with your computer, just like users of Windows.
2. hobo123 · 1790095916 · focus · HN ↗
  And even if you have automatic updates turned off, Apple will still start downloading the 15 gigs for MacOS 27, just in case...
  1. itopaloglu83 · 1790098125 · focus · HN ↗
    And disable certain features like Apple Pay if you don’t have auto-updates enabled.
  2. lightedman · 1790105411 · focus · HN ↗
    Sounds like an unauthorized access of my computer - a fine of a dollar per byte, per person, should make Apple turn the hell around. 15 billion dollars times how many Apple users that have been wronged in this manner? Apple would be dead instantly.
    Johnny555 · 1790118471 · focus · HN ↗
    I think you'll find that you agreed to it somewhere in their voluminous terms of service.
    I looked it up and indeed, it's in section 1, paragraph C:
    Your Device will periodically check with Apple for Apple Software Changes. If a change is available, the change may automatically download and install onto your Device and, if applicable, your peripheral devices. By using the Apple Software, you agree that Apple may download and install automatic Apple Software Changes onto your Device and your peripheral devices.
    <a href="https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iOS26_iPadOS26.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iOS26_iPadOS26.pdf
    nmeagent · 1790141552 · focus · HN ↗
    IMO the notion that such one-sided agreements are not made under duress needs to die in a fire. I wish there were a viable grassroots political movement to remove the corporate boot from our neck; until that point, fuck these terms of servitude and every abuse they enable.
    1718627440 · 1790161782 · focus · HN ↗
    Often these clauses ARE deemed null and void, but you need to bring it to a court and who has time for that?
    1718627440 · 1790161739 · focus · HN ↗
    Which is why your parent says this behaviour should be fined. Laws override "consent" between contracting parties.
    Johnny555 · 1790190009 · focus · HN ↗
    He said it's "unauthorized access of his computer", even though he implicitly authorized it by clicking through the agreement (apparently without reading it).
    If people actually read these clickthrough agreements and started sending devices back when they don't agree, it would encourage the industry to change.
    No one "needs" an iPhone, they can support one of the open source phones with far less onerous terms.
    1718627440 · 1790244441 · focus · HN ↗
    You can still consider it unauthorized, if you do not consider the authorization to be valid in the first place. I can also get people to sign away their life on a contract, that's not going to mean anything, because signing away your life is not possible in the first place.
    > If people actually read these clickthrough agreements
    I would live in such a world too, but that is a fairy tale. In a lot of situations, you don't get to see the contract before you have signed it. I had the situation in a bank contract. The bank clerk tells me it's mandatory, to sign that waiver, I tell her it's not. She won't sign the main contract, until I signed that waiver. I tell her that's illegal. Doesn't matter. After I signed it, I get to read the waiver, it clearly states, that it is not mandatory, and whether it gets signed does not have any effect on the main contract, as is required by law (with citation).
    fsflover · 1790237191 · focus · HN ↗
    > Sounds like an unauthorized access of my computer
    This is exactly what Stallman and the FSF have been saying forever, but nobody believed them, <a href="https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.en.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.en.html
3. layer8 · 1790100348 · focus · HN ↗
  You can turn off the nagging by joining the Beta updates (profile) for the older major iOS version.
  This is not to excuse Apple, just a useful trick.
4. srmatto · 1790128773 · focus · HN ↗
  Well it wasn't always this way. There was a time a few years ago (~4?) where you absolutely could avoid updates.
5. mahboi · 1790133820 · focus · HN ↗
  I have automatically download and install (separate toggles) disabled, and it obeys that. Might be notifying me, I don't remember.
6. negura · 1790150721 · focus · HN ↗
  The nagging notifications are only a small part. Apple has far more effective ways of forcing updates on you. On iPhones, for instance, the Unicode tables ship with the OS version, so unless you update, you cannot render newly added emoji codepoints. Given how central emojis have become to pop culture - and how determined the Unicode Consortium seems to keep adding more of them - the whole situation almost looks like a conspiracy, if you squint. But that's just the tip of the iceberg.
  In the App Store, Apple won't let you filter for apps compatible with your iOS version. So sooner or later, you have to manually try installing every search result just to see whether it errors out. There's no explanation for not adding such a trivial filter other than to annoy users on purpose. Without jailbreaking, you also can't install earlier (compatible) versions of a given app. And by the way, updating iOS eventually just turns into buying a new iPhone, once the latest iOS no longer supports your device at all.
  But the worst part is how critical software components are bundled with the OS too. On iPhone, that means WebKit. So very soon your Internet browsing experience starts to rot, because the only way to get a version supporting the latest Web standards is to update the whole of iOS. Likewise, on Macs, your runtimes/frameworks are bundled as well, so you can't update them individually. Eventually, the only way to install even non-native apps is to update the whole macOS.
  This is what you sign up for when you buy an Apple product. Apple has mastered the art of tempting you without letting you realize what's really going on until it's too late. Apple was, is, and always will be evil. The clue is in their logo.
  1. gib444 · 1790230884 · focus · HN ↗
    > Apple has far more effective ways of forcing updates on you
    Let's not forget forcing physical upgrades: a new .x update of iOS that suddenly decides a bit of hardware is now broken and bricks the phone. Apple Store said £400 plus to fix despite my explaining it was their update that bricked it - every component was working fine
    That was my 2nd and last ever iPhone.
    negura · 1790289099 · focus · HN ↗
    I never heard of that. Is this documented anywhere? Also doesn't Apple Store usually replace the whole device for a repair, rather than individual hardware components?
    [deleted] · 1790347143 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    gib444 · 1790354273 · focus · HN ↗
    I can send you my bricked phone to inspect if you like? I did a minor update just sat in the car, then it got stuck in a boot loop, no attempt at DFU rescue etc worked. Phone was perfectly fine up to the update including face ID, speakers etc
    Apple aren't going to document their planned obsolescence at apple.com I'm afraid

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.