great, so we should not change the law for the sake of wanting a side load option because majority of customers who bought the device understood well enough that they'll be using the single App Store.
You forgot to quote the next part of my sentence “I don’t mind additional app stores”.
I guess prove “majority”?
There are plenty of examples of laws being changed against common public practice, even sometimes for the better. My parents got a landline with Ma Bell back in the day, understanding well enough that it was the only phone company. One anti-trust suit later, they still had a contract with ATT but also had options.
But really, I don’t feel as strongly about this as I feel like you’re suggesting. My initial post was basically a shrug emoji. If there are people who want to “side load” then let them. Personally I think that’s a loaded term in this conversation.
I think about it like how I talk to my kids about the privacy section on an app page. Generally speaking, I don’t install apps that collect personal info, use my identifiers or location, etc. But there are also legitimate exceptions to that, such as an email client, cloud service, Waze, etc. My general preference for privacy does not negate the ability of those apps to be offered. My general preference for the Mac App Store does note negate the ability to get apps from elsewhere. And my general confidence in a single App Store (or the fact that that’s “how it’s been done) doesn’t mean people shouldn’t have alternatives.
