It doesn’t matter how easy or difficult it is, if it’s POSSIBLE for someone to talk a user through the steps, including having them ignore all the warnings as they currently do on other less secure platforms (“The man said he was from Apple, so I figured he knew what I should do!”), they’ll do it. Currently on iOS, you’d have to talk them into buying a Mac, then installing Xcode, then downloading the code, compiling it, then connecting it to their iPhone and installing it. AND, I think, calling them back in 7 days and have them re-install the app. Which is a LOT harder than talking them through ignoring a few warnings.
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's Arguments Against Sideloading on iOS: All Your Questions Answered
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple is diverging iOS and iPadOS slowly but surely. And that's not a bad thing. I don't think MacOS would succeed on an iPad without turning into iPadOS.
But I still won't buy an iPad unless Apple adds a Terminal app and lets you run arbitrary software on it.
Lowers barriers to switching? Right now there are applications that will very easily migrate your data to Android (and Android data to iOS), with iOS being in it’s current state. How much further can you lower the barrier to switching? Forcing Apple to also release all of their software like iMovie, Keynote, etc. for Android?
If Apple has such a small share of the cel phone market, why the worry. How do the number of scams and malicious apps compare between iOS and the Android suppliers. Using the vague term "Plenty" is meaningless.
Why don't the side loading advocates just write for Android. Maybe the Android customer base is not all that keen on paying for product.
Like scanning all of your own photos, on your own device, to compare against a black box third party database that will vary and change over time and jurisdiction, all opaquely to Apple?
That kind of "privacy"?
Actually Xcode is not required for an unsavory party to trick someone to installing a malicious app. You should read up on Testflight and how it's intended use can and sometimes is twisted to be an underground App Store.
Anyway, Your scenario is an edge case, and quite frankly whomever falls for such an attack really should have a tech savvy family member manage their device. My own Mother's phone is under my account, and setup with parental controls to help prevent such a situation from ever happening to her.
People need to take responsibility for their own tech, and if they know of someone is vulnerable or susceptible to such manipulation, spend time training them, or, become a tech advocate for them and help with controls or other methods of protection.
While Apple is a great company with seemingly good intentions, NOBODY should rely on them for personal or data security.
The reality is that social engineering is meant to exploit people’s trust. It’s only going to get worse as society continues to further technology.
It’s a very thin line where you want people to be smart about who they trust vs continuing to foster their naivety
Odd point you make.
Case in point: Android. There is no heavy advertising in regards to the ability to sideload. Matter of fact it is undertaken by the minority of Android users. Assuming Apple is required to allow this feature on iOS/iPadOS, outside of the initial spike, unless Apple prominately pushes this feature into the eyes of consumers, what makes you think this will be widely utilized?
Not seeing it. Unless iOS/iPadOS forks into a very different sideload commerce.
Testflight doesn’t allow installing from outside the App Store. As long as a developer has to risk their credentials and access to the App Store, that’s a far more limited vector than malicious actors being able to install anything from anywhere WITHOUT the App Store.
No, it’s precisely how malicious actors work, and there are legions of them, calling people all over the world, tricking them to decrease the security of their systems using the methods available. So, I guess we should say that once Apple’s confirmed that every iPhone user has a tech savvy family member managing their device, then it’s ok to decrease the security of iOS.
So, the facts are out there that VERY FEW people would utilize sideloading on iOS even if it were available. That’s actually a good point for just leaving the system the way it is. It would benefit, at best, about half of 1% of the users. Not a very good return on investment.
While I appreciate the discussion, kindly do not take my posts out of context.
Minority <> VERY FEW. Aside I was referencing current Android as a point when looking at the prospect of high use side loading in iOS/iPadOS.
That is not correct, TestFlight does allow installing outside the appstore that is the entire point. Do you think unscrupulous people, nation states, or other parties care about losing their developer credentials?
Some developers releasing apps on TestFlight as a less restrictive App Store alternative
Apparently some developers are taking advantage of TestFlight to distribute their apps to users without having to go through the formal review process.
www.idownloadblog.com
Your viewpoint is still an edge case IMO. You are welcome to continue ignoring logical suggestions, and put blind faith into large business security policies. I choose to do otherwise, and protect myself and loved ones.
My mom aInd extended family members are on Apple for the ease of use, and overall stable ecosystem with long support for devices as compared to older Android phones. Apples biggest advantage is long standing security patches for older devices, huge win for them as I don't need to but a new device every 2 or 3 years in order to ensure it remains patched.
That said, I don't own or suggest apple because of a false sense of security or obscurity due to locking people in. There have been plenty of examples of malware and zero day vulnerabilities over the years.
I truly hope that none of our community is ever impacted by bad actors.
We Respectfully disagree and I will leave it at that.
Your post is not where the data came from. About half of one percent of Android users actually use sideloading. Half of one percent = VERY FEW
Google could, tomorrow, force everyone on Android to download from Google Play and they would ONLY affect about half of one percent of their current users. That’s not a lot of folks that care about sideloading. The same would very likely be true if Apple were to allow sideloading. The question for Apple would be, “Is satisfying about half of one percent of ALL current Apple users worth making the change?”
Poor numbers.
Look only at active users on Android that can / have the ability to sideload vs that subset from the same base that do. You need a realistic set of numbers not assumptions or Apple examples or ….
How about some backed up real numbers for your claim? Claims are getting old especially after the marketed play Apple has made on those numbers.
But that is YOU....I am different. And I guarantee you, we are not the only people on the planet that feel this way either. So even one lost sale is bad for Apple when you are FORCING them to do something.
Me, no thank you on iOS iPadOS side loading apps. If I wanted to take a chance on viruses and malware I’d happily go over to android. Here is what in the real world and not in someone’s vision of some stupid woke world will happen.
Users: we demand Apple let us side load apps.
Apple: Nooe not happening!
Some liberal judge in Texas: Apple you have to allow side loading.
Apple: Not a chance in Hades.
Liberal justices after case has been dragged to the Supreme Court: Yes Apple you are ordered to do so.
Users after court ruling: clap clap clap
Users 90 days after ruling: Effing Apple someone has somehow gotten my bank and bitcoin info and now I’m out of $73k.
Apple:told you so
Users: we need a class action lawsuit against Apple and take them for every dime they have
Am I crazy, or didn't Apple at one point want to go "thermonuclear" on Android and erase them from existence? Now they are pointing to them as the alternative? Changing the narrative much?
It's like the way they talk about macOS. Is it secure or insecure? Depends on how they feel at the time. Are they selling a Mac to you right then? macOS is extremely secure and worry-free. Are they defending their stance on iOS? macOS is far too insecure for their liking. Apple truly are the masters of doublespeak (the sweet taste of cashola does that to a person).
It's like the way they talk about macOS. Is it secure or insecure? Depends on how they feel at the time. Are they selling a Mac to you right then? macOS is extremely secure and worry-free. Are they defending their stance on iOS? macOS is far too insecure for their liking. Apple truly are the masters of doublespeak (the sweet taste of cashola does that to a person).
Last edited:
I think you missed my point entirely. You shared your anecdote, and I shared mine. I'm not saying you're wrong, but just that there are (many) people that buy Apple products for other reasons. Likewise, we are also not the only people on the planet that feels this way either.
I found an interesting behavioral research that analyzes the marketing and segmentation strategies for Apple. It might be a good read and could validate your conjecture: https://research-methodology.net/apple-segmentation-targeting-and-positioning/
That's the real reason for the few macOS malware and not the side-loading availability!
In other words, incompetence!
arstechnica.com
In other words, incompetence!
PSA: Apple isn’t actually patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS
Big Sur got a fix 234 days before Catalina did, although both are supported.
arstechnica.com
I didn't miss your point, what made you think that? Its in my first sentence! All my point was you and I are different. And I bet my anecdote is not just MINE and other people on this planet think the same way.
The difference is the knowledge required to operate an Mac Desktop device over a iOS Mobile device is drastically more complex.
This is why Apple don't want it to be on iOS.
MacOS is a legacy platform built upon in the 1970s .... iOS is a operating system built upon from ground up in the 2000s. They want to make mobile devices safe and secure to vast majority of the population without any technical knowledge.
Nah -- that sounds nice and all - very noble - but they really just want it locked down so they can be the toll booth in the middle of all money going both ways.
It's really as simple as that.
The above is why vote with your dollars is so important. Government regulation generally can't stop the profits over customers way of corporate thinking, but voting with your dollars gets companies' attention.
Last edited:
Nah ... if they did they could EASILY have done that with MacOS as well ... YEARS ago when iOS App Store came about ;-)
It's always easy to create his nefarious narrative in your head, but sometimes it's a win/win at the expense of some users not being able to side load and apple making money from it.
Funny how Google and everyone else in the AppStore industry also charges 30% commission. They are free to lower the price to 5-10% if they so choose to create more incentive.
Ultimately, if Apple charges too much, developers leave because of competition. Apple will be forced to lower their prices.
Funny how that works.