Sounds like: If you don't have bread, you can eat cake! It's that easy.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Executive Says Users Who Want App Sideloading Already Have That Option With Other Platforms
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A) They can have warnings but it's your phone you should be able to do what you want with it.
B) There are apps in the App store that are somehow getting approved and currently "dupping" people anyway. How is that much different then sideloading? Oh because if people sideload Apple doesn't get any of that in app purchase revenue. Now I get it.
Personally I don't think I'd really bother sideloading, unless it was something I really needed and not in the App store, but I think people should be able to have the choice. That or start giving people devices at lower prices or free and make your revenue off in app purchases and services. If we consumers can't have full control over our $1000 plus devices that we pay for, why are we spending so much for them?
B) There are apps in the App store that are somehow getting approved and currently "dupping" people anyway. How is that much different then sideloading? Oh because if people sideload Apple doesn't get any of that in app purchase revenue. Now I get it.
Personally I don't think I'd really bother sideloading, unless it was something I really needed and not in the App store, but I think people should be able to have the choice. That or start giving people devices at lower prices or free and make your revenue off in app purchases and services. If we consumers can't have full control over our $1000 plus devices that we pay for, why are we spending so much for them?
That's a poor analogy. It would be free electricity after you buy the meter and the devices plugged to the meter need to pay Apple 30-15% per year.
No, I don't have two cars, interesting assumption.
And I get what you're saying, but I just wish iOS would be opened at least a little bit while retaining the security of the platform for the users who don't want to opt in, I think that'd be neat. ^^Because the developers haven’t made them available. It doesn’t require too much development effort. However, many developers have backed themselves into a corner where they’re selling essentially the same code base cheaper on the iPad than it is on the Mac. I doubt these developers are going to just let folks use the cheaper iPad apps on the Mac just because Apple says it’s possible
Agreed. They care about privacy and security, but they care MORE about making money off of those things.
Apple has been the company that said "things have to be this way", only to be met with resistance to things like having larger screens, widgets, etc.
What's nonsense is buying(or supposing a buy) a device that is well known locked against sideloading (and is more secure, and more private, and that is factual) then insisting that it then be opened up for sideloading. That is the very definition of nonsense (or worse)
All of the anti Apple people arguments are just nonsense, just sloganeering and emotional ranting. Those people have a choice to not use Apple. They have a choice, Android, that has plenty of features to offer, a wide variety of model choices, a variety of cost available choices. Sad that because others don't choose their choice they can't feel ok and have to try to force others. Seriously sad. (notice you do not see Apple users forcing the Apple haters to make their choice. That tells anyone A LOT about the difference)
What absolute crock. With rhetorical gymnastics like this any argument can be made to look like it supports any side of a debate.
I think (and I may be wrong) that once developers are allowed side loading, they will then request low level access to the hardware claiming that they can’t do what they want without it. At this point it’s a slippery slope. A judge will rule in favour of this and from there it’s a red carpet ride to finding and exploiting vulnerabilities. I stress, I could be wrong..
I heard just this week that one of my app publishing rivals in the app niche space I work in is quitting.
Reason: Got fed up with having all their apps pirated but also having their apps binary stolen, modified and re-published as someone else work on the Play Store and other android stores.
I don't publish on Play Store. It just 'aint worth it because this "openness" is abused which leads to theft, loss of income and a roasted heart isn't worth it.
Reason: Got fed up with having all their apps pirated but also having their apps binary stolen, modified and re-published as someone else work on the Play Store and other android stores.
I don't publish on Play Store. It just 'aint worth it because this "openness" is abused which leads to theft, loss of income and a roasted heart isn't worth it.
That's what it'll come to. The various world authorities will legislate to force Apple to open up and, in an effort to protect the public which those governments are supposed to be doing, not Apple, Apple will offer 2 options on iOS new device setup. 1) Status Quo. Locked and App Store only. 2) open to do as you like.
I'll guarantee it'll be something close to 99% who pick (1) and the other 1% will be hackers, geeks and those looking for ways to exploit holes in (1) for nefarious reasons.
The public has 2 power plays. One is in the voting booth. The other is in their wallet. We've had a taste of secure iOS, virtually no one is going to want to give that up now.
I've not gone through this fast moving thread in detail but I completely agree with this sentiment based on the way a large number of people I know (barely) use the full power of their phones and just want convenience. These are the majority of users buying devices like iPhones - not the handful of clever but entitled folks in here making demands and strangely not buying a top of the line Samsung or a Linux phone to get EXACTLY what they want.
Why isn't this vocal minority of people who are demanding side loading of apps on an iPhone buying an Android phone? What is it about expensive Apple phones that they like that they aren't getting on the Android platform? They can spend more than the price of an iPhone Pro on the best Samsung S21 that money can buy, tons of software and all the side loading they would want.
I seriously doubt Apple would want the effective reputational fall-out on the iOS platform from alternative stores dropping software that could go from buggy to outright malware - a bad user experience - or people then trying to side load apps direct from dodgy websites. That's before they address the issue of losing their healthy cut of in-app revenue.
If Apple allowed side loading of apps I would say the iPhone would immediately become the single biggest malware target in the world because of the relative wealth and perceived tech unsavviness of the average users on the iOS platform. Imagine the attack vectors that could get bad software loaded onto a device that's internet connected from these non savvy users.
I doubt developers want the complete balkanisation of the App Store either. Even the Epic guys just want a store front in the main Apple Store (thus trading on Apple's reputation) where they can keep more of a cut of the money they charge for their in game currency by allowing users to go direct to an online website to buy in app purchases (bypassing Apple). For me, everything else is so much smokescreen and big threats and they are hoping to strike a deal with Apple for the cut they want.
The average user in the street isn't going to want the extra hoops - even leaving the App to go to the Epic website to buy some add-on is going to be an inconvenience for some users.
Yes, there's the threat of anti-trust and monopoly on top of that from nation state regulators but the ordinary guy on the street probably just wants their phone to work and isn't overly bothered by the big legal words being slung around.
For me, just like in the original post, anyone clever enough to make use of side loading for the apps they want has a clear choice.
Hell yeah I'd pay them if it was all in the name of security. That's why I pay the big bucks for app store apps. I'd especially be first in line if they curated it also, like their news and music.
No you would not, it would be cost prohibitive. You may pay $.99 a month and that’s it, the majority would pay nothing. And that is 100x less than the cost to provide such a service That would be effective.
That seems kind of cheap. If news+ is 9.99, music is 9.99, Apple TV is 4.99, heck 1tb of storage is 9.99. I'd think Apple Internet (I coined it first) should be at least 99.99, now a "curated" version would probably be closer to 199.99. That's not too high of a price to pay for security.
No, I don't have two cars, interesting assumption.
Congratulations, yours may be the first (and maybe only from what I've read) actual thoughtful argument made for sideloading. You'd like it. That's fair. If more customers think this then Apple maybe sees business value in it and they'll do it. If Apple doesn't see a business value in it, they won't do it. If they don't do it then you(me and everyone) weigh the pluses and minuses. Fortunately everyone has a clear choice:
**Android: some cheaper options, more hardware options, sideloading capable, some features better than iOS and some not, a bit more open to Malware, distinctly less privacy features, less EoU eco)
**Apple: Not sideloading capable/closed eco, more EoU eco/devices play modestly better together, some features better then Android some not, virtually no Malware, generally a more expensive option, distinctly more privacy options)
Both have their advantages and their is the choice, everyone has a choice. You are not trying to force a choice, I am not trying to force a choice. I choose Apple while many others don't. But everyone should take notice of those that are trying to force a choice. A general rule of thumb: always be skeptical of those who try to force your choice whether by words or by appeal to authority.
I may misread your post but I believe you are saying most wouldn't pay for security? If so then you are right, most wouldn't. That's one of the reasons most choose Android. However, about 1 out of 6 WW choose to pay more (up front) for security among other reasons (EoU). I can also say post sales some I know would pay for security. Many wouldn't. If you wouldn't that's your choice. I place a high value on security and privacy. Strictly in my own opinion (not quantified) it costs people more in the long run when they won't pay for extra OL security and privacy.
Alright, if that’s a fair price then I will stop putting words in your mouth. And it may be too much or too little, who knows.
As the poster below this says, users do not pay for privacy. And that is pretty much the truth, consumers will not pay extra for it, but if its built into the purchase price they will.
Arguing choice(Apple users/consumers making their own choice) is "Rhetorical gymnastics"? So...
'Apple has to!! do it this way and their users have to accept it! Apple has a demonic scheme to make profits and it must stop! And if your argument against that is 'consumer choice', its rhetorical gymnastics!'.
Step back and read that, really read that.
Regardless, while I appreciate you rising up to protect us Apple users by forcing Apple/my side to be like your choice/Android, I'll respectfully say I(and suspect many of iOS users), thanks but no thanks.
My side: we are happy with our Eco. Your side: no! you can't do it that way, it has to be done the way I chose!
Your side's argument is the very definition of gymnastics of the contoured/rehetorical/mental kind.
Because the developers haven’t made them available. It doesn’t require too much development effort. However, many developers have backed themselves into a corner where they’re selling essentially the same code base cheaper on the iPad than it is on the Mac. I doubt these developers are going to just let folks use the cheaper iPad apps on the Mac just because Apple says it’s possible
One item I have really noticed is that almost all apps have "in app purchases" while that is the minority on my mbp
I don't get why some are so dead set against allowing side loading.
I do it on my Android. have a few really good apps from that.
I don't do it on my iPhone but wish I could. There are some really cool apps I used to use from my jb days.
Most likely don't jb. You will always have a few that want it for nefarious reasons. Same on the Android side.
Neither current app store is totally safe. yet some here love to add the fearmongering rhetoric.
Give users a choice. That "then switch to Android" crap is just nonsense.
I have yet to see a really critical reason why this cannot be done.
The choice is referring to an example like this:
Client A wants a phone with an operating system that has no option for side-loading, a phone and OS that is hardwired to be like that. No one can install, tinker, enable, unthetered upload, etc apps to a phone.
Then Apple is forced to be more like Android, side loading is supported.
Besides the possibility of Client A being a bit too paranoid, that person now doesn’t have a choice of a platform like the one at the beginning.