Apple Says Revised U.S. Sideloading Bill Would 'Undermine the Privacy and Security Protections' iPhone Users Rely On

[M3gatron]

Sorry but I had to laugh.
I "side load" even if it is a misnomer, on all my other systems except iPhone and iPad.
I think I understand it very well.

Yeah excluding computer OS's I have years of experience with side-loading apps on 3 different mobile OS's: Windows 10 Mobile, Symbian(I still own a Lumia 950 and the legendary Nokia 808) and Android(including Google TV on a Sony Smart TV) and I never experienced any security breach or problems. I could give many examples of useful apps I've sideloaded and the objective reasons why and how it was very useful that I had this choice.
Anyway, I haven't really read anything constructive or informative from anti-sideloading comments, nothing that could help me learn something new, most are a collection of huge doom and gloom exaggerations.
At the end of the day the winds of change are obvious, sideloading without unreasonable obstacles will be possible on all current mobile OS's.

 

[webkit]

First of all, each market has different purchasing power and market threshold. Second, the numbers you are referring to can differ depending on who takes on what responsibility. Not all retail or distribution channel will take on marketing costs. The margins are way different and that can change drastically for bulk enterprise distribution also.

If you didn’t live in the 90s as an adult who worked in business sector, I would respectfully ask you to quit thinking that you know everything from an article that you aren’t quite sure about. Google can’t teach you actual life experience.

US market is vastly different than the rest of the world but the whole concept was still the same. Less cut doesn’t necessarily mean more money for the developer. Business 101.

Obviously there can be market variations and even the numbers I quoted from the article were ranges, but didn't seem to come close to matching your 70% figure.

I am not "thinking that I know everytihing" which is specifically why I had asked where you got the 70%. In a follow up, you said that this information could be "found online easily" and I responded that the information I found didn't corroborate your 70%. As I stated before, I thought the 70% figure was high but would be happy to read/learn more about this. So, perhaps you could "easily" show me online where there is information about how Circuit City "used to keep 70% of the software sales."

 

[I7guy]

I am sure we are not talking about personal choices but rather talking about principles. Go somewhere else is not an option for me when Apple is the one in the wrong here. Are we in some dictatorship where it is either Apple's way or high-way? Apple should refrain from abusing its position as a gatekeeper. If not, bankrupt it by fining heavily until it complies.

Like I said, the ball is Apple's court. It can always opt out of doing business in all those countries that are hell bent on curbing Apple's abuses.

We are clearly on the opposite side of the fence here. But that is what makes the world go around. Sure you could also opt not to buy Apple products, which sends an even bigger message. Such a simple action. Don't buy products where you believe the company is abusing customers....an innovative thought there.

edit: Fining Apple till it bleeds will just push it out of specific locations. The citizens of those locations will be the losers. Eu will be left with the most modern computing device being an abacus.

 

[PlayUltimate]

Mmmm. . . .wonder if a 2 OS solution would work: one that has proprietary and exclusive access to the iOS App Store and an open iOS that has no access to the iOS App Store. Albeit, those that are complaining want to be able to do whatever they want through the use of Apple‘s software.

 

[dk001]

Android does not impose the strict limitations on tracking and other privacy blocks that prevents apps from monetizing user data. They have no reason to side load on Android (yet, many do). You don't see Mark Zuckerberg complaining about Android like his life depends on it. Apple on the other hand, implementing privacy blocks has been nothing short of an existential crisis for Meta.

The second Facebook and other large data gathering apps (including Google apps) have an alternative to getting their apps on an iPhone that goes around Apple's privacy protections, they will put the app link on their site and have no reason to be in the App Store. You may not care about Facebook but it's just a matter of time before it gets to an app that you depend on and the floodgates will open and everyone will be side loading.

You can however make it as restrictive, even more so than iOS.
Difference is that Android allows this while Apple gives you little choice.

Find it interesting that people equate Google and Meta both as info gluts yet only Meta was significantly impacted?

 

[VulchR]

Yeah excluding computer OS's I have years of experience with side-loading apps on 3 different mobile OS's: Windows 10 Mobile, Symbian(I still own a Lumia 950 and the legendary Nokia 808) and Android(including Google TV on a Sony Smart TV) and I never experienced any security breach or problems. I could give many examples of useful apps I've sideloaded and the objective reasons why and how it was very useful that I had this choice.
Anyway, I haven't really read anything constructive or informative from anti-sideloading comments, nothing that could help me learn something new, most are a collection of huge doom and gloom exaggerations.
At the end of the day the winds of change are obvious, sideloading without unreasonable obstacles will be possible on all current mobile OS's.

That you have these options rather proves government intervention in Apple's unique system is unwarranted. Again, if developers chase a buck and leave Apple's app store, then my choice as a consumer to have apps vetted by Apple will be restricted. I want laws that require any vetting process from any curated app store include a comprehensive security review, not make vetting optional. If you want to sideload, feel free to buy from a brand other than Apple.

 

[dk001]

Lot's of astro-turfing on this thread. People keep repeating the same thing and not listening.

To repeat it again, the App Store and the Play Store are not comparable for the simple reason that the Play Store doesn't limit what data apps can collect about you, or tell you what apps are collecting about you.

Sideloading has a different context on the two platforms because of that. Major apps have no reason to sideload and impose that on their users in the Play Store. They just collect whatever they want, so why would they?

Play Store does tell you permissions and you can selectively turn access on or off for each.
App Store tells you what they claim to collect however this is not verified unless Apple happens to audit the app.

Sideloading has a lot of reasons (IMO) on Android and I can see similar on iOS.
What will be interesting is to see what design Apple comes up with. There is nothing saying it has to copy Google.

From a Play Store app: (Android 11)

 

[M3gatron]

Android does not impose the strict limitations on tracking and other privacy blocks that prevents apps from monetizing user data. They have no reason to side load on Android (yet, many do). You don't see Mark Zuckerberg complaining about Android like his life depends on it. Apple on the other hand, implementing privacy blocks has been nothing short of an existential crisis for Meta.

The second Facebook and other large data gathering apps (including Google apps) have an alternative to getting their apps on an iPhone that goes around Apple's privacy protections, they will put the app link on their site and have no reason to be in the App Store. You may not care about Facebook but it's just a matter of time before it gets to an app that you depend on and the floodgates will open and everyone will be side loading.

First of all things are changing with Android and Google is looking starting with Android 13 into imposing restrictions on user tracking but they have to do it responsibly as to not give themselves an advantage which would make them vulnerable to legal conflicts.
Second your theory is quite unrealistic because it ignores the multitude of +1 billion and +500 million Android apps that don't really monetize user data and haven't left the store or have any intention in doing such a thing. Actually I can't name any major app that willingly left Play Store in favor of sideloading. Also the story with Fortnite is quite interesting as is started off as an APK which Epic heavily promoted(even in partnership with Samsung at one point) just to give in after 18 months and publish their app on Play Store, of course they were kicked out by Google later on for rule violation.

 

[dk001]

Let people sideload, but:

1. Separate their online services from mine so if their stuff gets corrupted or they corrupt the servers, it will not affect me

2. Charge accordingly to cover the extra setup and expenses Apple need to put in place in order to make this happen -and do not charge me

3. Apple need to give me an option to turn off all sideload apps so I do not see them and they can not be on my device.

Okay, I develop a … Super Duper Whammadyne Task Reminder 3000 app and offer it both in the App Store, a couple of alternate stores, and my personal website. Broadest venue for customers.

How can you tell the difference where I procured it?

 

[hans1972]

******** Tim. The cats out of the bag. You have been gaslighting this issue for years. It's about control and revenue. It's not about privacy. It's not about security.

How about it's about control, privacy, security, revenue and customer satisfaction?

Windows has shown us how an open system works and it isn't pretty.

 

[M3gatron]

That you have these options rather proves government intervention in Apple's unique system is unwarranted. Again, if developers chase a buck and leave Apple's app store, then my choice as a consumer to have apps vetted by Apple will be restricted. I want laws that require any vetting process from any curated app store include a comprehensive security review, not make vetting optional. If you want to sideload, feel free to buy from a brand other than Apple.

It doesn't prove anything like that.
If you want apps vetted by Apple only download vetted by Apple. Simple.
Other people no matter if they are developers or simple users also have their own rights to leave the Apps Store or install apps from outside of the App Store.

 

[hans1972]

So tired of Apple whining about this. The bill means you have to allow sideloading. Nobody is being forced to do it.

They don't want to lose the tight control they have of the platform.

We as customers want Apple to be in control, not developers.
We also don't some users to be in control since they'll make stupid decisions.

 

[Aydo2000]

Obviously there can be market variations and even the numbers I quoted from the article were ranges, but didn't seem to come close to matching your 70% figure.

I am not "thinking that I know everytihing" which is specifically why I had asked where you got the 70%. In a follow up, you said that this information could be "found online easily" and I responded that the information I found didn't corroborate your 70%. As I stated before, I thought the 70% figure was high but would be happy to read/learn more about this. So, perhaps you could "easily" show me online where there is information about how Circuit City "used to keep 70% of the software sales."

I am not going to insult you by telling you how to Google information but if you want even easier info to find, Google what Epic’s practices were back in the 90s. Tim Sweeney even admitted and confirmed the information in the recent Epic vs. Apple lawsuit that he filed. That should be easy to find since the whole thing was few months ago. That was the standard practice and it was the standard rate distributors and stores used to take out of each sale.

FYI, Epic lost I think 9 out of their 10 claims and Sweeney is not happy.

 

[hans1972]

Who’s forcing you to sideload anything?

You live in an ecosystem.

Just because you don't own a gun doesn't mean you can't be affected by others who loves guns.

 

[hans1972]

Exactly, users aren’t morons like Apple thinks.

So how do you explain crypto viruses on platforms like Windows?

Most users are terrible at computer security and even those who are good make mistakes.

 

[haydn!]

This is just the first step in most politic processes that will see an original far reaching proposal watered down. Expect more and more revisions before it goes anywhere.

The same will almost certainly happen with the similar EU bill too.

 

[hans1972]

Yep, just like on macOS, works fine.

macOS would be much better if every app was in the Mac App Store.


It's a great example what happens when Apple doesn't have the power to bend developers to their will.

 

[hans1972]

Are there any major apps on Android (Fortnite aside) that aren’t in the Play Store? Or are you just pulling predictions out of a hat?

Are there any major apps on the Mac that aren't in the Mac App Store?

Yes, many of them.

 

[hans1972]

I am sure we are not talking about personal choices but rather talking about principles. Go somewhere else is not an option for me when Apple is the one in the wrong here. Are we in some dictatorship where it is either Apple's way or high-way? Apple should refrain from abusing its position as a gatekeeper. If not, bankrupt it by fining heavily until it complies.

Like I said, the ball is Apple's court. It can always opt out of doing business in all those countries that are hell bent on curbing Apple's abuses.

The principle is that governments and people shouldn't force companies on how to design software and hardware which unless it directly threatens health, national security or something similar.

Just don't buy the products you don't like.

 

[Wildkraut]

So how do you explain crypto viruses on platforms like Windows?

Most users are terrible at computer security and even those who are good make mistakes.

You will always have a few people with less know how, but nannying them like Apple does won’t lead to improvements. What Apple is doing just leads to stagnation and more dependency. Let them try, make errors and learn, that’s how humans learn.

 

[Wildkraut]

macOS would be much better if every app was in the Mac App Store.


It's a great example what happens when Apple doesn't have the power to bend developers to their will.

And we would have less deaths if cars and crosswalks, cigarettes and alcohol were forbidden, and now?

 

[I7guy]

You will always have a few people with less know how, but nannying them like Apple does won’t lead to improvements. What Apple is doing just leads to stagnation and more dependency. Let them try, make errors and learn, that’s how humans learn.

Buy Android. The real thinking persons phone. Does everything those who are in favor of regulating big tech wants.

 

[I7guy]

And we would have less deaths if cars and crosswalks, cigarettes and alcohol were forbidden, and now?

Nothing like comparing smoking cigarettes, which is personal choice, to regulating big tech.

 

[Wildkraut]

Nothing like comparing smoking cigarettes to uploading an app in the app store.

Why not? It’s even severe, don’t it deserve more attention than sideloading Apps? Since many in here point at sideloadeding as if the world will implode once it’s available… isn’t safety the key argument against sideloading?

 

[I7guy]

Why not? It’s even severe, don’t it deserve more attention than sideloading Apps? Since many in here point at sideloadeding as if the world will implode once it’s available… isn’t safety the key argument against sideloading?

Saying the world will implode is hyperbole. The one thing cigarettes and sideloading have is that both ultimately are terrible choices for very different reasons. What they have in common is that second hand smoke has bad side-effects, while side-loading can have a bad side-effect on the ecosystem.