Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You mean the Play Store that allows apps to collect data from their users and that is natively owned by Google, the world's largest data collector whose entire business relies on data collection?

Jesus... people here just keep confirming that walled gardens with curated experiences and built in protections need to exist to protect some folks from themselves. ??‍♂️

Don't want a walled garden? Go to Android. That's the choice.
Why should he go Android? He will get sideloading on iOS, it’s inevitable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beautyspin
Some people are incapable of forward thinking and can't imagine the inevitable path on which side loading goes from a choice to virtually mandatory once apps used by the masses like Instagram, Tik Tok or Google stop making their apps available in the App Store and make their apps only available to install via sideloading.

You can only resist for so long until an app comes around that you need for work or to fit in your social circle. Then the whole privacy and security deck of cards Apple built with the App Store comes crashing down. Why would any major app offer their app in the App Store with privacy and security protections if they have the chance to acquire all of your data?
This is one of the most on point comments in my more than 15 years on this site.

And the same is true with many other whack-o ideas like having sketchy third party payment providers or keeping security and privacy loopholes open. Other companies are salivating at the idea of strong-arming consumers into forcing them into their own payment providers and leeching personal data without their knowledge.

Of course, Apple has a business interest in locking in users to its walled garden, but it’s a bargain I’m happy to make.
 
  • Love
Reactions: ipedro
That’s a lot of hypotheticals that won’t ever happen. First of all, nobody does anything for free. Second, Google already has a store and they call it Google Play Store. They take cut out of every transaction since nothing runs for free. If Elon Musk said such thing, I would laugh and add it to the list of things that he said and never delivered. What happened to his Tesla ventilators, solar roofs and countless other things??? Yes, exactly.

I will eat my words if either Google or Elon Musk decides to be the most profitable charities in the world. Hypotheticals don’t pay bills, my friend.
F-Droid does it for free (depends on donations). Facebook, Insta, WhatsApp are free and so are many others products so your assertion that nobody does anything for free is wrong. They are free for users. Similarly, just because Apple has not been able to find ways to monetize the app store in any way other than fleecing the customers and developers does not mean others cannot find a way to do it that will be beneficial to the developers.
Google has many products that are free and still makes money.
 
I say let Apple run its business the way they want to. If people cared that much about sideloading, they can get an Android. It’s ironic that the gov’t is so concerned about monopolies when they’re responsible for creating most of them with policies that have unintended consequences and/or good ol’ fashioned corruption/lobbying, and the only true monopoly is the gov’t itself.
I say let government run its business of making laws that it thinks are best for its people. If Apple does not want it, they can shut shop and leave the country. Even Apple has a choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron
If you want to sideload apps to your hearts content, but an Android phone. Simple.

Or Apple could bite the bullet and allow it BUT mark your phone as untrustworthy and stop interactions with other Apple phones.

Has anyone read a software agreement lately?
We all click yes and move on but wasnt it always a clause that you only held a limited licence to use the software rather than owned it?

You buy the hardware and own that.
The software comes for free if you agree to the terms.

Sideloading breaks those terms. So you can load whatever system you can get your hands on.

People used to do this years ago to load apps.
It was a challenge but think the novelty wore off. For most people it was too much effort.
Apple is out of choices now. It just has to follow the regulations being brought in by various governments. If it had been proactive instead of being greedy, it could have implemented some of the measures that would have benefited it but their focus on greed has deprived them of those choices. They are no longer setting the agenda. They are just following the agenda set by somebody else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron
So a company needs to be compelled under the force of law to do something because other companies and developers want it? Sounds petulant to me.
Yes, when the law explicitly prohibits anti-competitive behavior. If I call the police to complain about a neighbor blasting his music at 2AM that neighbor will be compelled under the force of law to turn it down, not because I'm imposing my will on the neighbor but because it's my right to ask that the laws regarding disturbances be enforced.
Also, it begs the question WHY most of the mobile app profits are in iOS. So the most profitable setup needs to change to be more like the less profitable setup? And who is this supposed to benefit?
iOS is the most profitable because iPhone users are more affluent on average than Android users.
 
Yes, when the law explicitly prohibits anti-competitive behavior. If I call the police to complain about a neighbor blasting his music at 2AM that neighbor will be compelled under the force of law to turn it down, not because I'm imposing my will on the neighbor but because it's my right to ask that the laws regarding disturbances be enforced.
No, if Apple is breaking the law, enforce it, just like in your scenario. Instead, you’re asking the government to write a new law that requires disco and polka to be in the rotation at 2AM.
 
No, if Apple is breaking the law, enforce it, just like in your scenario. Instead, you’re asking the government to write a new law that requires disco and polka to be in the rotation at 2AM.
What leads you to believe they're asking the government to write a new law about Apple?
 
AT&T was broken up 38 years ago in 1984. The average cost for a long distance call in 1984 was approximately 45 cents/minute, plus the monthly service charge. I now pay $20/line for unlimited calls, data, and long distance on a device I can take anywhere, over a period where the cumulative inflation rate is 156%.

Your example runs exactly counter to the government hurting competition.
Yes. It's a shining example of government intervention that didn't really have the overall desired effects many years later. One company to three companies. Sub-par and expensive cell phone service compared to the rest of the world. Heavily regulated industry nearly impossible to get into not as an MVNO (ie competition). Yes, the example runs exactly counter to the government hurting competition. /s
 
Last edited:
What leads you to believe they're asking the government to write a new law about Apple?
Oh I don't know... just following the course of our discussion:

Because the vast majority of mobile app profits are in iOS and developers are looking for levers to force Apple to reduce their app-store and IAP take. Side-loading is one lever to force Apple's hand.

This still dodges the lack of rationale for not enforcing the current laws that Apple is supposedly breaking. Creating new legislation for this issue is just political theater.
 
Oh I don't know... just following the course of our discussion:



This still dodges the lack of rationale for not enforcing the current laws that Apple is supposedly breaking. Creating new legislation for this issue is just political theater.
Your reply speaks to a motive of why companies would ask for a new law but still offers no argument as to why what they're asking for represents a new law.
 
I don’t think most users will sideload anyways. They are used to the App Store and it’s a lot of marketing needed to make your app visible outside of the App Store. Also show a prompt that the app was sideloaded and might be a security issue. Stop Apple Care, as soon as someone downloaded an app outside the App Store.
Yes, you are right. Most people won’t do any sideloading. Having said that, Apple will need to significantly alter the structure of the OS to allow these app stores in the ecosystem. That means they will need to forgo all these security and privacy measures to open up the OS. That’s the main issue here. It will look very similar to Android (open) and that will open a whole can of worms in terms of how the OS is forced to be. That’s the issue here. iOS will be significantly more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Not whether people will side load or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: siddavis
But would you publish your app if, let us say hypothetically, Google (or Elon Musk) put an Appstore and tell you that they would host your App for free and also make it more discoverable if you give them exclusivity. Would you pull out of Appstore in such a case?
I would not pull out of the App Store unless the second App Store became a success. The absolute best way to sell in app is in the App Store. Also, IMO, exclusivity is as bad, if not worse, as Apple taking a cut. If that App Store becomes unpopular, I’m stuck there making no sales. The cut Apple takes is worth it for small developers because the App Store is a known quantity and a proven success.
 
F-Droid does it for free (depends on donations). Facebook, Insta, WhatsApp are free and so are many others products so your assertion that nobody does anything for free is wrong. They are free for users. Similarly, just because Apple has not been able to find ways to monetize the app store in any way other than fleecing the customers and developers does not mean others cannot find a way to do it that will be beneficial to the developers.
Google has many products that are free and still makes money.
Wow. Facebook, Insta, WhatsApp are free??? Is that what you think?

So tell me. People don’t pay a single cent to use use Facebook, etc. Yet, Facebook generated over $117 billion in revenue last year. How does that happen in your opinion? What is their product and where do you fit in this equation???

Clearly you aren’t too aware how any of this works.
 
Yes. It's a shining example of government intervention that didn't really have the overall desired effects many years later. One company to three companies. Sub-par and expensive cell phone service compared to the rest of the world. Heavily regulated industry nearly impossible to get into not as an MVNO (ie competition). Yes, the example runs exactly counter to the government hurting competition. /s

I compared the cost of a service in the USA pre-AT&T breakup to the cost of that service in the USA now. So now it's time to move the goal posts and start doing random comparisons to other countries that have completely different cost structures, geography, and economies.
 
Yeah I didn't like Apple's solution but I hate the government solution more. Just see what the EU has proposed recently. They seem intent on destroying encryption and privacy in order to "save the children." This proposal that would essentially require algorithms to scan ALL emails, messages, or other communications in order to detect "grooming" not just CSAM. If this proposal passes it would essentially create China level internet surveillance in the EU.


More info in this thread:

The EU suffers from trying to be perfect…rather than good enough. You can’t necessarily stop people from committing crimes if thats what they want to do. You need to be prepared to put people in jail if its necessary to stop them from committing crime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Spinn_
Disallowing APIs to third-party apps is not allowed by the DMA act of the EU (as far as I know). If Apple can access an API, it should be allowed for third-parties also. No more shenanigans. Apple brought it upon themselves due to their greed.
It’s been proposed, but the EU has not passed this rule yet from what I understand.
 
Trolling or not, Macrumors finally started the pull out of USA movement.

For a long time pull out of US just wasn't an option for those who think Apple should pull out of EU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron
So Apple said years ago with the introduction of the ugly iOS7 that users already know how to use touchscreen interfaces, so we don't need buttons and visual metaphors to understand the interface, but.. But after all these years they don't trust us that we are able to decide what should be on our devices. All it would take is just a question and one button to allow opening of the device, just like it's on macOS. Interesting. It's not about money at all, right?
 
I compared the cost of a service in the USA pre-AT&T breakup to the cost of that service in the USA now. So now it's time to move the goal posts and start doing random comparisons to other countries that have completely different cost structures, geography, and economies.
This is a silly comparison. Like comparing the cost of my dad’s 4-function Craig calculator in 1970 against calculator today. The cost of of the calculator did not go down due to any regulation passed by the government. A better example would have been comparing the cost of phone service with ATT vs the early days of cellphones; which had minute limits, text message costs, and high overage costs. Those early cellphones were significantly more expensive than landlines.
 
I find it comical, pretty much every other OS allows “side loading” and it works successfully. Yet with iOS/iPadOS, this activity suddenly becomes all doom and gloom with all kinds of inevitable disastrous results.

Is iOS/iPadOS really that fragile that allowing sideloading, or even allowing alternative apps stores it will crash and burn?
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.