Apple Executive Says Users Who Want App Sideloading Already Have That Option With Other Platforms

[visualseed]

What's stopping them from doing that now on Android? I suspect they wouldn't risk it because their userbase would decline.

Right now, Facebook is still able to do the tracking they want under Google's PlayStore rules. DJI, did change their android apps for their drones to side load only and I promptly switched from a dedicated Samsung tablet back to an iPad. I have no idea what they were doing that not even Google would allow it in their store, but had iOS allowed side loading too, I'm sure they would have insisted on it there as well. As much as I would protest it, I probably would reluctantly give in as it would make my drones expensive paperweights without their apps. I'm sure others could be convinced to do it as well by finding their particular pain points.

 

[truthertech]

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.

You’re a no it confused. Apple is not like the utility company you describe. They don’t “sell”you the App Store. They give it away! And on top of it, they never require you to buy any of the tiny number of apps they offer.

 

[spinedoc77]

OK I'll bite. Joe Blow has a Facebook account, a contact list, a calendar, a bunch of pictures, my bankaccount (since we split a few bills in the past) etc etc. If his phone is compromised, my data is indirectly somewhat compromised. I might give him a call, not knowing hackers are listening in... Now scale this up to millions of compromised accounts. Then there's all the governments in the world with questionable intentions (and that might include the USA) that might want to compromise my iPhone even before I get it in my hands by requiring official state sponsored appstores...
Yes, I can hurt from Joe's weak protection.

Also a lot of develppers will be tempted to go 'out in the wild' for larger profit margins and lower security and privacy standards. There will be no monitoring of those app stores and apps. Before I know it, an app that I like and use a lot is no longer in the app store. 2 years later and the app store is empty because other people left the app store for cheaper versions without protection. Again: I hurt.

But feel free to disagree

If you are dumb enough to leave your banking credentials on someone else's phone they you really get what you deserve. I don't know, are you saying you also put in your Facebook credentials, contact list and calendar on this other person's phone? THAT is the security breach right there.

I also don't think there is going to be a mass exodus of developers leaving the app store empty. Google has similar fees and Google Play isn't exactly barren, if anything you really have to hunt and have a niche need to have to use a sideloaded app there. There are plenty of security concerns with official Google Play apps, but as others have pointed out Apple has plenty of security concerns and holes even without sideloading.

But honestly I don't really care, let Apple keep their walled garden and users who enjoy that. I'd rather see them do things that are truly for "all" users like such as adopting RCS into iMessages.

 

[jman240]

Apple: "we're going to do our best to lock you into our ecosystem through apps and services we only offer there"
Also Apple: "if you want flexibility then go to our competitor"

Seriously? This is fear mongering BS. We can already sideload things via jailbreaks or other means and they're far less secure than having an official method.

 

[JonGarrett]

Yup… been there done that, once I got past my customizing and stealing apps phase the appeal of Android died. I’ll stick with my stable and more secure iOS devices.

Customizing and stealing apps has been around on iOS for more than a decade through jailbreaking.

 

[alex2792]

Ok, in that case Apple must allow emulators, torrent clients and competing game streaming services into the App Store while also giving developers an option to use their own payment platforms thereby bypassing the 30% Apple tax.

 

[spinedoc77]

So you prefer the app store being the only one, not the best one?

Surely if other companies did add their own stores that were available on the iPhone it would only serve to push the Apple App store up in quality / down in price.



But Safari allows scams, maybe apple should curate the web pages that you can see through safari? That would make your iPhone experience more safe.

I think this makes perfect sense, I'm waiting patiently for Apple to make the internet completely safe by gatekeeping it through the Safari browser. If you wanted a curated version it would just be a 9.99 monthly subscription. If you wanted the non-curated version then you would still have the security, but would be unable to load the curated ones, instead being constantly alerted that you could see them if you just paid the sub.

/s

 

[CMoore515]

Meh. I agree. Android is there for the people who like to tinker and experiment with different apps and app stores.

Personally, after being traumatized by the Android platform from 2009-2015 mainly due to my unwillingness to switch carriers to one that supported iPhone, I will never go back to it.

 

[WhatUp?]

Android is for you, also, if you want removable or exploding batteries

 

[spoljnr01]

Apple earlier today published a detailed report outlining in blatant terms the negative impact that sideloading would have on the iPhone and iPad, specifically calling out the impacts it would have on user privacy and security. Now, the company is continuing its PR push, with an executive suggesting in an interview that users who wish to sideload apps should move to Android.

Speaking to Fast Company, Apple's head of user privacy, Erik Neuenschwander, said that opening the doors to sideloading apps on iPhone and iPad, which would enable users to download apps from the web and other app marketplaces besides Apple's App Store, could lead the user to be "tricked or duped" into "some dark alley."

The executive, who made an appearance at the company's developer conference last year, ultimately said that iOS is not the platform for users who wish to sideload apps, suggesting that those users should move to Android.
Currently, apps must go through Apple's rigorous App Store review process, but if sideloading was allowed, apps would be able to bypass the review process. Neuenschwander also said that sideloading apps would leave the user vulnerable to viruses, malware, and more.
Unlike the tightly controlled nature of the iPhone and iPad, users are able to download and run apps from places other than the App Store on macOS. Neuenschwander attempted to draw a clear distinction between iOS and macOS, pointing out that the iPhone is a device that users have all the time, carrying personal information such as their location. He noted that the data on iPhone is "more enticing" to a potential attacker compared to information on the Mac.
Neuenschwander went on to explain the difference in usage between the iPhone and Mac. According to Neuenschwander, users on Mac tend to only download a few applications needed for their job and not explore other applications. On the contrary, iPhone users are downloading apps continuously, making sideloading more dangerous, according to the executive.
Craig Federighi, Apple's software chief overseeing the development of iOS and macOS, said during his testimony for the Epic Games trail that the level of malware on the Mac is at an unacceptable level, possibly warning that similar levels of malware could make its way to the iPhone if sideloading was enabled.

Article Link: Apple Executive Suggests Users Who Want App Sideloading Move to Android

Well said 👏👏👏👏👏

 

[mi7chy]

Done. Switched to Android so no more Apple shackles. Have already traded one iPad for Galaxy Tab S7+. Have one iPad left that I'll probably use for Galaxy Tab S8 trade in.

 

[alexjholland]

Correct. I have a £349 Pixel 4a for sideloading.

And my iPhone 12 Pro is fundamentally more secure.

I don't want or need to sideload on my iPhone, thanks.

 

[Stewie]

You own your device but you dont own the software

I wish more people understood this.

 

[Stewie]

Sideloading only lowers the security bar if, (A) you choose to sideload AND (B) you sideload a nefarious app. If I do (A) and (B) on my iPhone, it doesn't expose you to any increased security risk.

Until everyone is forced to do (A) since the dev pulled their app from the app store. Then much like fake fortnight apps on the play store, there will be other devs trying to take advantage of the not tech savvy users.

 

[rjp1]

Imagine if Microsoft decided you can't run windows apps except from their store and then said users should switch to Linux if they want to run their own apps.

Same thing here basically. People here do amazing mental gymnastics to defend Apple.

 

[Stewie]

I don’t think that is a real issue. I would imagine that every app is still sandboxed within Apple’s API ecosystem with the exception you can do payments thru 3rd party.

The real issue is that Apple loses control of how they monetize off apps. However believe it or not, most app devs are not malicious

But it is a real issue. Just look back to when Fortnite wasn't available on the google play store. There were many scam apps released trying and succeeding into trick folks.

 

[Brandon916]

OK I'll bite. Joe Blow has a Facebook account, a contact list, a calendar, a bunch of pictures, my bankaccount (since we split a few bills in the past) etc etc. If his phone is compromised, my data is indirectly somewhat compromised. I might give him a call, not knowing hackers are listening in... Now scale this up to millions of compromised accounts. Then there's all the governments in the world with questionable intentions (and that might include the USA) that might want to compromise my iPhone even before I get it in my hands by requiring official state sponsored appstores...
Yes, I can hurt from Joe's weak protection.

Also a lot of develppers will be tempted to go 'out in the wild' for larger profit margins and lower security and privacy standards. There will be no monitoring of those app stores and apps. Before I know it, an app that I like and use a lot is no longer in the app store. 2 years later and the app store is empty because other people left the app store for cheaper versions without protection. Again: I hurt.

But feel free to disagree

So when it comes to competition, Apple folds? Apple doesn't have the skill to compete against another app store? Google is able to w/ Amazon and Samsung App store currently. Is Apple that weak? Really? Sorry but your argument doesn't hold up since FB is still there collecting data. If you buddy is comprised right now on FB, you are also indirectly hurt.
Again, if Joe Blows can side load apps. You are still going to Apple App store, how are you really hurt?

 

[firewood]

If anyone want to sideload apps, they should just enroll in the Apple's Developer program and download Xcode. This allows sideloading any app for which one can write or find source code (on GitHub, etc.) or buildable Xcode project, onto your iOS devices (up to 1000 of them, IIRC).

 

[HarryWild]

Been told that I should move to Android by my techie friends for years. I finally purchased a Samsung Galaxy Tab S7 8GB RAM, 256GB storage at Amazon's Prime days. We shall see how it goes. The upcoming S8 supposedly going to be release in August!

 

[hasanahmad]

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.

This is why euro sucks

Apple is not a service provider . What folks are asking to do is like asking Xbox consoles to have a steam marketplace to side load games. Or PlayStation consoles to allow games not signed by Sony. Or rather force Walmart to sell Target or Amazon branded items in their stores .

 

[Unregistered 4U]

iOS not being as secure as Apple would like people to believe.

This is ABSOLUTELY true. iOS devices in general are physically smaller than non-iOS devices. And, since physical access is one of the best ways to exploit a device, iOS devices, by default, are less secure.

 

[UBS28]

It has nothing to do with security, because Apple allow sideloading on OS X.

The reason is the 30% fee Apple makes from every App Store purchase.

 

[Silverstring]

I think the sideloading vs. no sideloading argument misses the much more concerning point:

The forced purchasing of Apple devices by consumers who don’t like the value proposition Apple offers. That’s an unprecedented power that absolutely needs to be checked!

I don’t like many Apple decisions—the inability for devs to advertise in-app where the user can go to pay directly and bypass Apple’s cut, to name one—but when I bought my iOS devices through my own free will…I knew what I was getting into, and the opportunity cost of the other choices not taken.

I was a PalmOS and Windows Mobile user for many years. Going back to a app installing/purchasing system closer to that? No thanks.

For those who definitively claim that offering some kind of sideloading “toggle” wouldn’t have a domino effect on the rest of the OS, I can only assume: A) you’re not familiar with software development or B) you’re a current or ex- Apple engineer intimately familiar with the iOS source code.

 

[Silverstring]

If anyone want to sideload apps, they should just enroll in the Apple's Developer program and download Xcode. This allows sideloading any app for which one can write or find source code (on GitHub, etc.) or buildable Xcode project, onto your iOS devices (up to 1000 of them, IIRC).

“But…but…I want something retroactively added to my phone for that wasn’t promised or implied when I bought it!”

I agree with you…if you want something badly enough—like sideloading—take the option, it’s there!

 

[dwaite]

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.

Apple is serving as a user advocate using the exclusivity of their platform.

So the expectation is that if you allow side-loading, several large providers like Facebook will push users pertty strongly to side-load to circumvent Apple shutting down their more egregious privacy violations (such as throwing device traffic through a VPN so they see it)