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. 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

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.