YouTube Vanced?I guess it's technically true, but how many people are sideloading apps? I'm big into tech and I don't think I sideloaded an app since I had a Droid X in like 2009 or so.
YouTube Vanced?I guess it's technically true, but how many people are sideloading apps? I'm big into tech and I don't think I sideloaded an app since I had a Droid X in like 2009 or so.
Apple doesn't their cut when there is no IAP.
Or because it goes against some terms of service.
You can't know that and the part about greed is purely speculative.
I get unrecognized chats all the time. With strange links in them. And my iOS updates are auto enabled. I get and see the alert asking if now is a good time or I can go into settings and general and install now if I like. Same for the watch.Both of my children have automatic iOS updates enabled, and yet as of 2 days ago, they still had 14.7.1 installed, and were vulnerable to the "zero click" messaging hack. Both of them have been receiving multiple, unrecognized group chats with suspicious links in them. On my daughter MacBook, the messages app was pegging her CPU. When I checked, it had racked up 10 hours of CPU use.
Sorry, but they don't get to play the security card.
If that's all true then why not let such a small minority of people do so?
I don't know... it's one of life's mysteries...
Congress can absolutely pass laws regulating businesses. Don’t know why you would say they can’t. Where do you think the three laws I referenced came from, that they were handed down by god? The SCOTUS could rule a congressionally-passed law unconstitutional, but that’s a mighty high bar. And if the the other three antitrust laws have passed constitutional muster, I have no doubt some changes to reflect our digital age would as well. The Commerce Clause in the constitution gives the federal government extremely wide latitude.The US court in California has said that Apple did not violate any laws; thus validating Apples business model in the US. That doesn't mean in the US that congress can't pass some other Monday morning quarterback laws to force Apple to alter a business practice. But that would likely be challenged to the Supreme Court. What happens in the EU remains to be seen. IMO, government in the US should keep it's nose out of this type of micro-managing. So yeah, I'm against passing laws to force change of business practices, unless they are currently illegal. Vote with ones' dollars instead.
I wonder if it could have anything to do with not losing money from people not using the app store :thinkyface:
I didn't. I said laws can be challenged. You said I said they couldn't.Congress can absolutely pass laws regulating businesses. Don’t know why you would say they can’t.
In the realm of possibility then.Where do you think the three laws I referenced came from, that they were handed down by god? The SCOTUS could rule a congressionally-passed law unconstitutional, but that’s a mighty high bar.
Everything can be challenged.And if the the other three antitrust laws have passed constitutional muster, I have no doubt some changes to reflect our digital age would as well. The Commerce Clause in the constitution gives the federal government extremely wide latitude.
a better word would be disingenuous ..
you assume that Apple is "checking" all of the functionalities of all apps in the AppStore which is naive.
numerous shadow and scam apps exist in the AppStore.
Nobody is going to be worried about sideloading apps from known devs.
I want Sony Playstation 5 Spider-Man on my Xbox One X.It is your phone and therefore your should have the power to decide which apps are installed on it. Imagine a TV manufacturer disallowing people to watch a TV channel that is not on their list of "safe" TV channels. Or a car manufacturer that does not allow the customer to drive anywhere he wants.
Security! Also, it maybe incompatible with the newer operating system. Could be buggy, and you have no support etc. This is generally only a good idea if you're going to be static on one device and OS version and to be safe off network.Besides that the ability to load apps from other sources is necessary to load older versions that often are better.
That's great. But, limited use case and while it may work great for you. A system update can come along and break that $#!T. For you that maybe fine, for many like you also.Instagram is a good example. Since last year Instagram spams the news feed of people with posts from accounts they do not follow. That makes all versions since then pretty unusable. As I have an Android phone, I was able to delete Instagram and install an older version that still works fine and does not spam my news feed.
F Yes! You had me at Nipples! Go Germany!Another thing is the censorship of Apple. I live in Germany and here nudity is nothing special. Noone would complain about nipples. However a German newspaper who had female nipples on their front page every day for decades also had them in their app of course, but then Apple threatened to ban that app from the App Store because of the nipples. So some cojnservative Apple Taliban from Silicon Valley forces his middle age moral standards about nudity on German iPhone owners. That should not be possible. If you paid for that phone, you should be able to see as many nipples as you want.
You had me at nipples.Apple also deleted some apps that made fun of Jesus, which also is not a problem here in Europe except maybe Poland. Who wants a phone without apps that make fun of Jesus?
So on a technical front. No, as that would open up how Apple's magic works in regards to the hardware they built. How to connect to the secure enclave or faceID system.I would even go a step further: Apple should allow people to install Android or any other OS if they really want.
Ha on that one. However, there is a company making I think its called Freephone. Totally user serviceable with a replaceable battery! Runs that darn Android OS i'm afraid. But, hey... NIPPLES!I hope the EU will also force Apple to make the battery easily replaceble again.
You’re right, I misread something you said.I didn't.
Please quote that.I said laws can be challenged. You said I said they couldn't.
Never indicated otherwise.In the realm of possibility then.
Agreed, though there’s a wide gulf between being challenged and being nullified.Everything can be challenged.
That is fine when a user can be 100% certain they are downloading from the trusted developer, but I am sure you have a higher degree of technical acuity and have had to show people you know that the site they think LOOKS legitimate is not.
That is fine when a user can be 100% certain they are downloading from the trusted developer, but I am sure you have a higher degree of technical acuity and have had to show people you know that the site they think LOOKS legitimate is not.
That and it's not like you're forced to sideload apps if you have an Android phone. It's just an option. You can easily just stick with google play store.a better word would be disingenuous ..
you assume that Apple is "checking" all of the functionalities of all apps in the AppStore which is naive.
numerous shadow and scam apps exist in the AppStore.
Nobody is going to be worried about sideloading apps from known devs.
Why are you are comparing these two platforms? There are about 100m Macs in use vs 1B+ iPhones — and yet, there are more damaging viruses and malware for the Mac. Why do you think this is? Why is the problem even worse on a PC and on Android?I'm skeptical of Apple's claims.
The Macintosh is wide open: we can side load, we can write our own kexts, we can use alternative boot loaders, and yet the Mac is pretty secure. So I'm not buying it. I am on the side of giving users choice. No one has to use an alternative App Store if they don't want to.
And regarding some apps for school not being available on the main App Store and thus possibly resulting in security risks, why couldn't the school(s) ensure a secure website for users to download the app onto the phone? Just like what happens on the Macintosh? One could argue that with Apple's current policies, certain legitimate apps are unavailable because Apple didn't want to allow them onto the App Store (e.g., Wifi Explorer).
YouTube Vanced?![]()
If I control a reserve currency emission, I don’t care who makes the rules…"Apple Says iOS is Safer Than Android Because Sideloading Apps Isn't Allowed"
Well, with the same argument you could nearly forbid anything (i.e. live in China is safer than in USA because XXX isn't allowed). In the end it mainly protects the one who makes the rules...
There is no evidence to support this at all, but it looks good on a PowerPoint slide I'm sure