Apart from the evidence they cited, you mean?
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 Says iOS is Safer Than Android Because Sideloading Apps Isn't Allowed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
because you never had the option. you just accepted it. are 100% of your mac apps from the AppStore?
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).
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).
I want sideloading just because of the stupid restrictions Apple impose on some tipes of apps, like Stadia and xCloud. It's not piracy, it's legitimate apps from legitimate companies that i'm unable to use natively on MY phone or not at all on my TV, all because apple impose random restrictions on a service that basically is netflix but with games, why they allow movie streamming plataforms but not gamming ones? that's stupid and the only reason I want sideloading at all.
Living up to a user name.
I'm not so sure of this claim, because you can install other markets to get apps from in the iPhone, for instance game emulators. Then you need a PC or Mac to verify them etc. I'm sure that's the case? Not something everyone will know about or so granted, but it's still a way for people to get apps from other places.
I think the it’s even more secure to use telegraph.
For example, if we can sideload, I would get YouTube Vanced. (https://vancedapp.com/)
Without sideloading, Apple can be sued and pressured to remove apps that violate the local law (e.g. China, pirating, politically incorrect) or some other stakeholder’ EULA (e.g. YouTube, DMCA). Apple should just use the same noterization system on macOS.
Im sure this is true. If there was a way to put a virus on iPhone my grandma would have managed hahahahahah
Completely retarded logic. If it's sooo much safer, then they should make "sideloading" apps on macs impossible as well. In fact, just make it impossible for safari to download any installer period. /s
It's greed pure and simple.
It's greed pure and simple.
That is why you can't, Vanced just gets all chance of money making from content creators and just rips it off...
Apple wants to limit malware. Thank goodness you can't sideload buggy software and are protected with the ultra-reliable iOS 15.
That doesn't make any sense, seems they have already moved on from side paying. Now they seem to be working on a system to achieve compliance with the Epic verdict (yes under appeal, but they specifically said to work on ways to be in compliance), they have already agreed to allow subscription service to jump outside the paywall. Other than that, you are right on the money. the money - get it?
I thought kexts is dead after SIP.
Exactly, for example, if we can sideload, I would get YouTube Vanced. (https://vancedapp.com/)
Without sideloading, Apple can be sued and pressured to remove apps that violate the local law (e.g. China, pirating, politically incorrect) or some other stakeholder’ EULA (e.g. YouTube, DMCA). Apple should just use the same noterization system on macOS.
I feel very passionate about this, and this is the biggest restriction that’s nudging me to get an Android.
Last edited:
iOS is only safer for Apple and their profits
Wrong! I won't be sideloading anything that is not in the Apple App store. While not perfect the app store does provide a better experience (being able to view competing apps in one place) as well as the enhanced security of checkout payments and returns or problems. Good luck with cancellations and refunds from individual developers, especially the smaller they get, right now Apple just makes it happen. I also appreciate the Privacy sections of the app store, I'm pretty sure every app is spying on me but at least with this information I can make more educated choices. You think Google would publish that info if they didn't have too? You think Google would have ever published that info for their products, on their app store if Apple hadn't done it first?
Last edited:
IF Apple is forced to allow sideloading of apps... is there some way Apple could limit those apps to make them almost useless? 
For instance... yes you can download an app from some source outside the App Store. But it will be super-sandboxed and not have access to GPS/Location Services, or ApplePay, or any other nifty useful capability.
Apple could make it to where the only apps that can be sideloaded are brochure apps for museums. Not games, Uber, etc.
I only ask because I'm sure Apple won't be too thrilled about letting unchecked and unverified software onto the iPhone.
Yes... scam apps exist in the App Store... and that's with App Review. Sometimes bad apps sneak through.
So imagine the kind of apps that can be downloaded from some random website with no review?
It could be the next addictive Candy Crush game that is only available from the developer's website... that harvests your contacts and starts spamming everyone. For example.
I'm hoping that Apple will sandbox the hell out of those apps. If they are forced to allow them.
For instance... yes you can download an app from some source outside the App Store. But it will be super-sandboxed and not have access to GPS/Location Services, or ApplePay, or any other nifty useful capability.
Apple could make it to where the only apps that can be sideloaded are brochure apps for museums. Not games, Uber, etc.
I only ask because I'm sure Apple won't be too thrilled about letting unchecked and unverified software onto the iPhone.
Yes... scam apps exist in the App Store... and that's with App Review. Sometimes bad apps sneak through.
So imagine the kind of apps that can be downloaded from some random website with no review?
It could be the next addictive Candy Crush game that is only available from the developer's website... that harvests your contacts and starts spamming everyone. For example.
I'm hoping that Apple will sandbox the hell out of those apps. If they are forced to allow them.
Last edited:
Using both iOS & Android on a daily basis, I can assure you its the user not the platform.
Last edited:
"A study found that 98 percent of mobile malware targets Android devices. This is closely linked to sideloading..."
Well, it is misleading when you purposely ignore the fragmentation issue on Android, the general lack of any meaningful software support that could deliver security updates in time, the major market share slice appeal that in one way or another allows a particular malware to target a larger pool of devices, and just focus on one possible vector that is conveniently put in a way that suits to your agenda...
Well, it is misleading when you purposely ignore the fragmentation issue on Android, the general lack of any meaningful software support that could deliver security updates in time, the major market share slice appeal that in one way or another allows a particular malware to target a larger pool of devices, and just focus on one possible vector that is conveniently put in a way that suits to your agenda...
"pretty secure". that is no way the same thing as secure. Yes there are a lot (well not a lot by windows standards, but a lot by way more than there should be) security vulnerabilities exploited and created via third party "side loads". Isn't the goal to make us more secure, not less?