I hope that’s an option as well, because I personally only want to download my apps from the App Store.
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 Privacy Chief: North Dakota Bill 'Threatens to Destroy the iPhone as You Know It'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hope that’s an option as well, because I personally only want to download my apps from the App Store.
You oppose that they charge for a service they provide. Well, some people don’t work for free.
How that has implications on privacy though is tricky for me to understand. They’re a corporation and they’re out there to make money.
This. Apple provides developer tools for iOS for free (though you need access to a Mac to compile). In exchange, you release the app on the app store. If it makes no money, you aren’t out very much.
So Apple can instead charge for the tools for people who don’t sign an exclusive contract to distribute through the app store. The compiler will watermark your app with that covenant, and if it isn’t released through the app store it will be blocked.
I like the protection of the "walled garden" that the Apple App Store provides.
If it isn't in the App Store...i'm not willing to take the risk.
If it isn't in the App Store...i'm not willing to take the risk.
Yes could Apple make it illegal to use an iPhone in ND? There is an argument to say if developers want to make their own AppStore, they should make their own phone too. If they sell a new kind of phones, they can control the apps on them.
Sure, using GPS Apple can just disable the devices in that state, it just displays a message that states, does not operate due to Senator Kyle Davison.
nothing stopping apple from selling an open iOS device, charge $5K or whatever the average value is to Apple based on the lifetime revenue generated from ios devices then bar it from accessing any Apple services, no messages, iCloud, App Store, music etc. Then the user can side load apps to their hearts content.
Last edited:
I will only get apps from the Apple ecosystem, if developers want my business then stay with the Apple ecosystem, as I do not trust them to keep my info safe.
What does “being hit first” have to do with it? Close quarters and being forced inside factor in, and if you haven’t been to ND once the weather turns, you don’t understand just how impossible it is to keep your distance and spend as much time as possible outside.
No it doesn't. You could keep the "unlocked" mode completely separate from the "locked" mode—maybe even have the iPhone boot a completely different copy of the kernel, if Apple wanted to truly paranoid about it.
It seems the hyperbole on MacRumors concerning this topic is evident.
1. May you support an open and free market to install apps directly from the developer or a 3rd party vendor similar to MacOS/WindowsOS/Linux/AndroidOS/etc is the end users free choice regardless which OS developer and device is being used. Don’t want to install app outside the official AppStore that’s fine, no one is forcing anyone to do so. Similar to MacOS the end-user has a choice to install from the MAS, directly from developer or 3rd party stores and mirrors.
2. It seems the supporters and Apple are concerned that if the individual developers are permitted to allow their apps to be installed on iOS/MacOS (Apple Silicone) devices that the AppStore and MAS will be rendered irrelevant. Why pay the annual $99 developer fee and have Apple take a 15-30% cut from your revenue when a developer can host the iOS/MacOS (AS) app on their website under their own terms and conditions with competitive payment methods along with less restrictive measures. If a developer has their app/s on the AppStore/MAS/PlayStore/etc why have these platform stores take a percentage cut when the developer has to have a website too (not always but preferred for marketing purposes). I believe supporters of the AppStore know that if the AppStore and others are opened the developers will abandon it overtime and that means eventually the AppStore will be irrelevant. It’s a financial based interest for Apple, it’s shareholder and people with an AppStore balance.
3. While the AppStore does provide some benefit of advertising and transparency for vendors for example privacy nutrition labels for minimal cost, some vendors resorting to user data harvesting do not want to conform and respect user privacy. The cost of advertising also goes up as there is no single venue for user discovery.
4. If a reputable developer hosts its own iOS/MacOS (AS)/AndroidOS/etc, it maybe have flexibility to lower the cost of its software due to reduced transaction fees and no developer fees, it may also mean less or no subscription software.
5. I believe Apple has an opportunity here, rather than fight change the very thing it aligns itself with such as Environmental Sustainability, Human Rights, etc it can demonstrate to developers and users that rather than have a sole website the AppStore can be the developers website and host iOS/MacOS (AS)/AndroidOS/WindowsOS /etc. One single store, developer pays an annual fee for hosting and permits the developer to offer either ApplePay/GooglePay/SamsungPay/3rd party system.
6. These changes may sound absurd to host competing platform apps for one developer but in reality it demonstrates to the end user that Apple is willing to walk the talk and open its AppStore not only to other companies software being hosted but also payment and support systems possible incorporated via some plugins. Have the AppStore as a service a single point for developers to host all platforms their choose and not have to publish their software on AppStore/PlayStore/Amazon AppStore/etc. Plus it will be a big win relating to antitrust mindset. This one change will be a big boon to its share price and Apple can extend the benefit to offer verified iOS/macOS/AndroidOS/Amazon Apps/WindowsOS/etc under one AppStore with verified and unverified clearly illustrated and opening up the system with a complete rethink vice fighting this wall garden mentality. Innovation through partnership!
Last edited:
If you want an open source platform, why not just buy an Android?
Apple's closed source system is for security, quality, and because they deserve a cut of all sales since they make the phones and provide the main software these apps run on.
I
Yup. Or maybe Apple should simply stop selling its products in that state - and not to business with any devleopers there. I can't imagine there would be much harm to Apple. That fact is, I put up with Apple's expensive hardware becuase of the company's emphasis on pirvacy and security.
I do wish Apple would be a little more permissive on the App Store... Even though I am not really a gamer, I think video game streaming should be allowed. Adult content too, after all, some of us are adults (they don't seem to have a problem with games targeted at kids and teens employing GACHA/gambling-like mechanics, soooo). But I personally would not want a multitude of different app stores with their own exclusive apps and questionnable T&C, Privacy, Customer Service, Return Policy, QA, etc. and I feel that would be inevitable if side loading was allowed.
It doesn't matter how low the fee is if consumers don't actually use the store.
If it turns out that consumers prefer this other store... to me, that shows that Apple actually was behaving anti-competitively all along, by artificially keeping prices up.
Alternately, if as everyone in this thread keeps saying, most Apple customers actually like having a safe app store where Apple screens every app, this secondary App Store would not attract any business.
I absolutely expect the second scenario is what would happen in reality. Either way, give consumers the freedom to actually make choices.
Last edited:
I came in and read this thread and was appalled at the volume of fearmongering I encountered.
What makes iOS and iPadOS so unique that it absolutely has to run in a tightly controlled POS system?
It doesn't for my Win10 PC. Nor my MB. Nor for my Android.
Not seeing the issue.
What makes iOS and iPadOS so unique that it absolutely has to run in a tightly controlled POS system?
It doesn't for my Win10 PC. Nor my MB. Nor for my Android.
Not seeing the issue.
You and the 16 "enlightened" folk who upvoted this must have never heard of California emissions standards.
If you look up smartphone sales you can easily see Apple doesn’t have a Monopoly either, and is not number one by a long shot. So if it’s not a good comparison it is because some TV manufacturers have more of a market share with TVs and their own stores than Apple does with phones.
Also, there is a far larger market for tv manufacturers to have an open store for all devices than there is for Apple or any one phone company.
I didn't read all of the comments...just a couple of pages' worth. But from what I've read, it sounds like the majority here actually dislikes freedom. I guess it shouldn't be surprising given how willingly most people have been giving up their (and others') freedom in the last year.
The catch is that it would only take a few big developers to abandon the App Store in favour of their own stores. Once users broke the ice by installing those other stores, and they saw that developers were charging lower prices there, many would vote with their wallets.
I have no doubt that companies like Epic would craft special deals to woo developers onto their store exclusively, leaving many users with no choice. You want Fortnite or some other popular game? You have to buy it from the Epic Store, as it wouldn't be available anywhere else.
Epic has already played this game with its stunt last summer of dropping 20% off its in-game currency prices just to make a point, but there's no way that was anything more than a disingenuous attempt to take a big stab at Apple — I don't doubt for a second that Epic Games would turn around and sneak their prices back up again even without the "Apple tax," and in much the same way, developers might offer some great deals on alternative app stores to draw customers in, and once those stores become popular, those prices will just sneak back up to App Store levels. On the upside, developers may get to keep more of their money, so that's good for them, but consumers end up paying the same money but having to shop around on a dozen different stores to get all of the apps they want.
To be clear, I'm not saying any of this means that Apple shouldn't make changes in terms of how the App Store is run, but I'm not convinced that allowing multiple competing app stores is the right solution. It's not even the security issue (I think the Apple is the one being disingenuous there), but the level of fragmentation that could occur is going to be annoying. I like having a one-stop shop for apps, and I suspect most average consumers would agree, but nobody will stay with the App Store if they can't find the apps they want on it anymore.
Yup. To be fair, the App Store and iOS are technically two different things. iOS (and iPadOS) are already tightly controlled, even without the App Store. While jail breaking obviously changes that, Apple allowing another app store, or allowing for sideloading, on a standard iPhone that hasn't been jailbroken wouldn't change the sandboxing rules that every app has to follow.
While there are some security and privacy issues, it's not the "sky-is-falling" issue that Apple is making it out to be. There would be a higher risk of apps that collect data that they shouldn't, and do things like background location tracking, and there would be less of a recourse to deal with those apps when they're discovered, but users would still have to grant permission for those apps to do whatever it is they do — just because an app doesn't come from the App Store doesn't mean it won't still have to ask for permissions in the exact same way, as that's an iOS function, not an App Store function.
I just sent that ND senator an email to stop meddling in something that 1.5b don’t want him to do.....everyone here should send him an email. Takes 5 minutes to do. Search “Kyle Davison nd senator email” and an email pops right up...go tell him to stop! The world doesn’t want the govt interfering with our security and privacy
Well, maybe, maybe not. Epic tried this on Android, but came crawling back to the Play Store after a year, when they realized people weren’t willing to sideload. And the Play Store doesn’t even manually review apps for safety like Apple does, it’s all automated.
(Coincidentally, I’m on Epic’s side in their Apple lawsuit, but not the Google one.)
If you don’t live in North Dakota, he definitely won’t care.
(If you do live in North Dakota, call, don’t email, so he will know. Congressmen generally ignore emails since the sendors can’t be verified.)
Nope this just opens it up to anti-consumer practices. If you want proof, look at how Epic treated PC gaming. They TOOK games from Steam and made them Epic Store exclusives. Even games that were already listed and ready for pre-order.