Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Perhaps slipshod would be more appropriate.

I'm fine with rigorous.

I suspect you are expecting 100.0% perfection 100.0% of the time. Please let me know where those expectations are being met...100.0% of the time.

For me... the only case where that expectation appears to be met has to do with gravitational force.

Don't like Apple's stance and policies? No worries. Simply switch to another phone manufacturer and find happiness. Easy.
 
I guess I just consider that technological darwinism

If you're following random instruction to toggle security settings on your phone and clicking through warnings around dangers to install XXXCasino, you're going to have other problems than side-loading risking your security.
Well … not everybody is tech savvy! We also supply or old family members with iOS devices cause they just work and can’t brick them having you to make a road trip just to see what your grandparents toggled :)

i remember almost 15 years ago when my father was very exited cause he seen a banner who said he’s the 1000 of the website and just won an iPhone! So yeah … not everybody knows how internet “works”
 
Exactly. Imagine if Facebook did this or decided that to get the Facebook apps (FB, IG and WhatsApp, etc..) you would have to install the Facebook App Store. Suddenly, A billion phones would be opened to whatever shenanigans Facebook wanted to do to with unrestricted access to personal data and tracking.

And what's the difference between that and now? I'm confused. Sure, if you change that setting about asking to track, Facebook wouldn't be able to track, but it's off by default. So...
 
In many cases, this simple is not true.

More importantly, my Mac contains far more sensitive data than my iPhone does. Yet, I can side load applications, with caution, onto my Mac....
If Apple were starting the Mac from scratch again, I think they'd go with an App Store model like the phone. Hard to put that toothpaste back in the tube now, though.
 
And Federighi has been very clear that it isn’t good for macOS either. I don’t think it would be a good idea to shut down side loading apps on macOS, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to authorize it on mobile platforms either.
Because clearly Federighi is a champion of the users and has no conflict of interest when he says that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG88
Well … not everybody is tech savvy! We also supply or old family members with iOS devices cause they just work and can’t brick them having you to make a road trip just to see what your grandparents toggled :)

i remember almost 15 years ago when my father was very exited cause he seen a banner who said he’s the 1000 of the website and just won an iPhone! So yeah … not everybody knows how internet “works”
In fairness, if you are someone posting on these boards, you know how all of this works.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Stewie
Maybe their needs to more be platforms besides IOS and Android? That way we can have a spectrum of user experiences and customization options rather than the extremes presented currently i.e., a walled garden vs. a free for all. Also there could be more competition in the ecosystem market place.
 
That's a false dichotomy.

The ability to side-load apps does not necessarily imply a loss of security. Neither does a lack of ability ensure security.

Apple has various reasons for refusing to host an app in the app store that have nothing to do with security.

It really comes down to the narcissistic nature of an ecosystem... "If I don't want something then nobody should have it"... because making an option like, "allow apps to be installed from outside of the app store" that is completely under user control does NOT affect the person who doesn't want to sideload apps.

YOUR iPhone won't magically become "worse" if Apple gives people the option to sideload apps on THEIR iPhone.
Not so fast... if iOS has to open up, it has to open up for MY iPhone as well. This means having to install anti-virus software and all that BS. It's not a simple matter of 'just allow sideloading'. It will be a new attack vector for hackers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
I honestly don’t understand the problem. Why not simply allow sideloading apps if enabled in System settings buried under several popups and warnings about possible consequences when enabling that option? Most people would probably leave the sideloading option disabled and the other ones probably know what they are doing and accept possible consequences or privacy violations.
Because you just gave me a way to hack into your device. Your only as secure as your weakest point. So if any device has a way "in", even if it is set to disable. The attack surface is now that little toggle switch and whatever software enables it. Verses simply not having that attack vector there to begin with. If the only way in is via one controlled method. It limits your exposer, and it takes it off your device. Apple has to worry about keeping the bad apps off the store. Not the user. Which goes to Apples whole philosophy, to remove the complexity from the user experience.

Also, the vast majority of iOS users don't want side-loading. Why should Apple be forced to allow such a thing (and design and invest resources into it) for 1% of those users (just picking a number). If you want it that bad, just get an Android device. They are far cheaper options, and a broader range of options in the Android world than in Apples.
Why are we spending so much time and energy trying to make Apple a company it inherently ISN'T? When you have the choice to simply not use their products and pick another?
 
N
Luckily, for me (as a European user) the EU will throw out this monopolistic strategy of Apple sooner or later.

There is simply no way that Apple's current position is regarded as an open or free market. With the iPhone, Apple created an ecosystem that has forever been used by 3rd-party app providers. And in this regard, Apple is violating the principles of an open, fair and unbiased market.

This would be like you're an electricity provider, and you require all your customers to only use the wall sockets you sell. This is not a plain field for all other competitors of wall sockets. The same is true for the App Store: As long as Apple is providing apps themselves and competing in this regard with other developers, it should not be allowed to leverage the own market to gain an unfair advantage.
no its not the same, apple lets you use third party headphones etc
 
Not so fast... if iOS has to open up, it has to open up for MY iPhone as well. This means having to install anti-virus software and all that BS. It's not a simple matter of 'just allow sideloading'. It will be a new attack vector for hackers.

No, and still false dichotomy, and clearly not understanding what you were told


if Apple decides to allow sideloading. This doesn't hurt your security in your device. Especially if you never turn on the feature, orinstall a 3rd party app.

if you chose to continue to get all your apps directly from Appe's App store, nothing for you changes.

I'm not sure where you're coming up with your nonsense, but most of it is misinformation and incorrect
 
I have been an apple user for years and a reader of Mac rumours for the same time. This is my first time posting because I feel so strongly on the subject.
I have files that I need access via p2p networks/torrents apple hasn’t allowed this on iOS, however on Mac OS this is allowed. I have had to use a sideload method to be able to access these files apple are slowly making this an impossible task that would be simple on any other device.also I want to point out sideloading is not just an issue of security it’s also about who owns the device I am the owner of the device I should be able to make the decision on what applications I can install on my device. Anyone siting sideloading will compromise their iPhones security is simply misunderstanding what this is actually about. Honestly Microsoft would of never got away with this I’m looking forward to the European digital marketing act that will make it mandatory to allow 3rd party apps, if not I will switch to android…
You own your device but you dont own the software
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stewie
Seems Apple's exec stumbled on to the solution. Provide a version of Android for the iPhone. At least the APIs to access the chips that lock them down. Then iOS can remain pure and user have the choice of Android on the hardware they spent a great deal of money on buying from Apple. Any argument that this would cost Apple money would fly in the face of the fact that the iPhone is Apple's cash cow. The cost to make an iPhone is much less than the price of the iPhone. In fact, persons who installed Android would be subsidizing the development of iOS. Apple wins by keeping iOS walled, and consumers win by actually gaining freedom of choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdb8167
Maybe their needs to more be platforms besides IOS and Android? That way we can have a spectrum of user experiences and customization options rather than the extremes presented currently i.e., a walled garden vs. a free for all. Also there could be more competition in the ecosystem market place.
We did, and those companies FAILED. People of the world made a choice. They picked Apple, and Google. Blackberry had their shot, Microsoft (twice) with CE and their mobile OS platforms. Now they both use Android. Palm, and WebOS, Nokia and Symbian. You can still get a flip phone if you want virtually nothing too as an option.

Not to mention, no one HAS to use a mobile device. It's not water or gas, or electricity.
 
No, and still false dichotomy, and clearly not understanding what you were told


if Apple decides to allow sideloading. This doesn't hurt your security in your device. Especially if you never turn on the feature, orinstall a 3rd party app.

if you chose to continue to get all your apps directly from Appe's App store, nothing for you changes.

I'm not sure where you're coming up with your nonsense, but most of it is misinformation and incorrect
Glad you're the security specialist. Have a nice day :)
 
That's a false dichotomy.

The ability to side-load apps does not necessarily imply a loss of security. Neither does a lack of ability ensure security.

Apple has various reasons for refusing to host an app in the app store that have nothing to do with security.

It really comes down to the narcissistic nature of an ecosystem... "If I don't want something then nobody should have it"... because making an option like, "allow apps to be installed from outside of the app store" that is completely under user control does NOT affect the person who doesn't want to sideload apps.

YOUR iPhone won't magically become "worse" if Apple gives people the option to sideload apps on THEIR iPhone.
It comes down to that App Store cut, not security.
 
Because clearly Federighi is a champion of the users and has no conflict of interest when he says that.
Never said that he had no conflict of interest, of course it’s in Apple interest to tell everybody the risk of side loading for security. I was just answering to the argument about MacOS. Not because MacOS allows it that it’s a good idea
 
Seems Apple's exec stumbled on to the solution. Provide a version of Android for the iPhone. At least the APIs to access the chips that lock them down. Then iOS can remain pure and user have the choice of Android on the hardware they spent a great deal of money on buying from Apple. Any argument that this would cost Apple money would fly in the face of the fact that the iPhone is Apple's cash cow. The cost to make an iPhone is much less than the price of the iPhone. In fact, persons who installed Android would be subsidizing the development of iOS. Apple wins by keeping iOS walled, and consumers win by actually gaining freedom of choice.
In order for Apple to do that. They would have to devote time and resources to get the components of the iPhone to work with Androids OS. This is not free. Why should they spend any of that to enable a few end users the ability to download whatever they want? When you can do that by going to Samsung, Microsoft, Sony, Motorola, etc.

Not to mention it would enable those hackers of the world to know exactly how Apples hardware works and a means to defeat the built in security. So in order to hack into someones iPhone, I can create a hardware compatible Android OS based tool to get at the boot or pre-boot phase of the phone and break in.

Im' sorry, I don't want that. If I did, I'd buy an Android device. Don't go making Apple be a company they are not when one already exists and is doing very well at it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Oh, please, that old chestnut. Apple's stated claim for the App Store is that it is safe because they do police the App Store, that they do regulate what shows up in the App Store and that they can through review audit the apps. They don't have legal authority to arrest and try, but they do have the authority to keep bad actors out of the App Store, which is all we ask.
and they aren't very good at doing what you ask
 
I agree with him. If you’re willing to trade security for flexibility, than Android is more for you.

I don’t want Apple to make The iPhone worse to please a noisy minority. And especially not to get the CEO Of Epic another Lamborghini.
I don't get it.

Let's use you as an example. You're not going to download any apps outside of the app store. So you'll be secure always.

If Joe blow wants to, only Joe blow is hurt.

Why does it matter to you if other people can now have the option to side load apps? You are not hurt?
 
That's a false dichotomy.

The ability to side-load apps does not necessarily imply a loss of security. Neither does a lack of ability ensure security.

Apple has various reasons for refusing to host an app in the app store that have nothing to do with security.

It really comes down to the narcissistic nature of an ecosystem... "If I don't want something then nobody should have it"... because making an option like, "allow apps to be installed from outside of the app store" that is completely under user control does NOT affect the person who doesn't want to sideload apps.

YOUR iPhone won't magically become "worse" if Apple gives people the option to sideload apps on THEIR iPhone.

But sideloading does lower the security bar. You're basically sneaking past the lifeguard, and swimming in the pool, or maybe it's you are jumping the fence and swimming outside the roped off area IN THE SAME OCEAN. So whatever is lurking outside of that area is able to 'get you'. And just try blaming it on the lifeguard for your right leg being bitten off. But I'm sure people would react negatively for a nefarious sideload someone experienced.

Light sockets are always around. I just choose not to stick my finger in one. I feel safer, and AM safer because of it. If someone else demands the right to be able to stick their digits into light sockets, that's their deal, and I wish them luck but don't come to me with your story of how bad the experience was. A friend of a friend was chatting with me at a party a decade ago, probably longer, and he was lamenting about how his 'droid' phone had consumed his address book 'again'. He said something along the lines of 'I know you are a tech savvy person, what phone do you use?' and I whipped out my iPhone. He seemed kind of floored that I had an iPhone. 'Oh, you use an iPhone? Why?' Because it works. My previous phone was a 'Windows Phone', and it really sucked. I lost my address book several times, the calendar never seemed to work right, I couldn't send email, or text messages for some reason, and the camera really sucked. Not the iPhone does all that, but the camera sucks too. *shrug* Tradeoffs. It works. He said he was so burned by that early droid his next phone with me an iPhone.

So lowering the bar, and the potential of it being demanded by a court somewhere, is just damned insane. So, should Apple have two different models of the iPhone? An 'Open' and a 'Closed'? What a disaster... I would seriously think of swapping to a 'dumb phone' in that case...

I agree with Apple. No one is holding a gun to your head to choose Apple over a different manufacturer. If you want to be able to run with scissors, go somewhere else. 'Choice' is part of 'freedom'. You can't get filet mignon at McDonald's. If you want that, go somewhere else...
 
More PR from a company trying to keep their cash cow going. Apple has done a great job marketing that they are looking out for users privacy over the last 2-3 years. Some of it’s true. A lot is just marketing.
But Apple is going to keep their cash cow going…sideloaded or not Apple is still going to collect its commission…just have to go about it another way not as easy but it will be done
 
Seems Apple's exec stumbled on to the solution. Provide a version of Android for the iPhone. At least the APIs to access the chips that lock them down. Then iOS can remain pure and user have the choice of Android on the hardware they spent a great deal of money on buying from Apple. Any argument that this would cost Apple money would fly in the face of the fact that the iPhone is Apple's cash cow. The cost to make an iPhone is much less than the price of the iPhone. In fact, persons who installed Android would be subsidizing the development of iOS. Apple wins by keeping iOS walled, and consumers win by actually gaining freedom of choice.
Just go by an Android phone then and not an iPhone. Apple has enough support load with iOS without supporting Android on their phone as well. Jeez, why is this such a hard concept for people to understand. Don’t like the closed ecosystem, go buy an Android phone. Simple. Stop the insane mental gymnastics exercise to force Apple to do something that isn’t in their or users best interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
I think it's funny people still say things like "well, go build your own Google."
There are a lot of companies that are in the position to build their own Google. Right now there is some start up somewhere that is struggling to make ends meet that will be a future multi-trillion dollar company offering some product or service in a category we don't even know exists yet. People who believe that smartphones and the current market-scape will be some pervasive part of our lives from now until the end of time seem to forget how much things change from one decade to the next. Most don't remember the DOJ spending more than a decade trying to break up IBM because it dominated the mainframe market only to have to abandon its case when PCs and clones emerged making their arguments moot. They also made arguments like the barrier to entry in the market was too high and nobody could start another IBM.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.