This makes zero sense.
If you choose to not use any third party App stores on your devices, literally not a single thing will have changed on your device from how it is right this moment.
This is a completely opt-in only situation
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 Phil Schiller Discusses Risks of Alternative App Stores on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This makes zero sense.
If you choose to not use any third party App stores on your devices, literally not a single thing will have changed on your device from how it is right this moment.
This is a completely opt-in only situation
It’s been explained many times, but there are many reasons why it might change someone’s current experience even without using it, just some examples:
- When it comes to myself, maybe some company decides they don’t want their app to be in the App Store anymore.
- I may want a secure phone for my parents.
- I may want to approve in-app purchases of my children.
Clearly a load of BS.
They don't seem to be talking loudly about the risks of macOS allowing installing programs from outside the app store. On macos they even let you install un-notarized programs - even more 'dangerous' that this iOS change.
It's obviously a $$$ thing, how some people don't see this is hilarious.
They don't seem to be talking loudly about the risks of macOS allowing installing programs from outside the app store. On macos they even let you install un-notarized programs - even more 'dangerous' that this iOS change.
It's obviously a $$$ thing, how some people don't see this is hilarious.
The option you want is available by simply not enabling third-party stores. You get what you want.
But now others can opt-in to getting (some) of what they want if they choose.
If you leave apple.com you are in danger. Zombies will eat you.
It’s just an os man.
I’m going to blow your mind here, but the most secure operating system that exists in the mainstream space at the moment is GrapheneOS. Not only is it Android, but you can also download stuff from where you want 😱🤯🧟♀️
1) I doubt any established apps are going to leave the App Store. Apple has made it so profoundly difficult and unappealing that the only companies likely to use this system are ones selling apps that Apple will not allow in the App Store.
2) Good news, their phone will still be secure. Apple is still checking apps that are installed this way, so unless Apple drops the ball completely, this isn’t an issue.
3) I can’t imagine Apple wouldn’t have this as a toggle in parental controls, so you’re probably still good in this regard.
Sounds like you have no real issues with alternate app stores after all.
Wouldn't these warnings about the dangers of a more open iOS also apply to macOS? Funny Apple doesn't mention that. That means either macOS has always been plagued with security issues and Apple hasn't done anything about it, or they have found a good balance between openness and security that could be adopted by iOS.
There is no security or privacy issue
Apps from third party App stores still get checked and notarized by Apple and are still sandboxed by the OS.
It's amazing to me that Apple has the gall to go public with these absolutely hogwash talking points.
Money truly does corrupt people and entities
Apps from third party App stores still get checked and notarized by Apple and are still sandboxed by the OS.
It's amazing to me that Apple has the gall to go public with these absolutely hogwash talking points.
Money truly does corrupt people and entities
They could only do so if they knew the majority of their customers would follow them, despite the significant friction (and hence attrition) this would entail vs. using the default App Store. It would be unthinkable to most developers. The app would need to be e.g. an insanely popular game to only be available in an alternate store.
Plus, the alt store would need to offer hugely favourable terms compared to Apple to make the attrition worth it. Which raises the question of how much profiteering is in Apple's offer. In practice, Apple would likely just reduce their take a bit.
A key benefit of alt stores is in keeping Apple honest. It weakens their control of the platform, to the customer's advantage, because they don't get the final say on everything - they're forced to earn their customer's favour.
So do I, but they're unlikely to bother with alt stores anyway. They're perfectly capable of using Macs / PCs without getting infested with viruses, and that's without iOS's strict sandboxing. So I'm sure they'll be fine.
Then don't enter your credit card details in any alt stores you don't approve of. Companies like Epic already offer detailed parental controls, that go way further than just approving purchases - https://safety.epicgames.com/en-US/parental-controls.
(probably) without even realising it, you have just neatly made the strongest case against apple allowing side-loading.
I'd have so much more respect for Apple if they'd simply defend their financial cut on the merits of what they provide to developers and customers in terms of "value" through their App Store process and terms.
Many would, of course, dispute the actual amount they should be taking, but then we'd be talking about real things
"Security concerns" are not a thing with 3rd party app stores, as their OS, hardware and proposed way of handling those App store submissions are currently implemented and/or proposed.
i.e. Stop straw manning it Apple. Defend your business model on the merits, unless you think it's indefensible I suppose?
Many would, of course, dispute the actual amount they should be taking, but then we'd be talking about real things
"Security concerns" are not a thing with 3rd party app stores, as their OS, hardware and proposed way of handling those App store submissions are currently implemented and/or proposed.
i.e. Stop straw manning it Apple. Defend your business model on the merits, unless you think it's indefensible I suppose?
No one ever blamed Apple whenever Facebook dataraped us with their third-party app.
Well, that is a perfect example of an oxymoron.
It’s not an oxymoron though. AOSP is already a secure model, and the GrapheneOS team harden it to the max.
Still needs clicking no? And those aren’t gonna be the most tech savvy users out There.
I’m still waiting Apple treat macOS like iOS. No terminal. No disk utility. No file system access. No third party app install. Where is their action to make macOS just as secure as iOS? But oh wait, that shiny expensive Vision Pro STILL rely on macOS to do certain diagnostics and repair?
I think what Apple forgets daily is the developers made the demand for iPhone and iPad made AAPL grow into the behemoth it is. Without developers, the iPhone wouldn’t have become the world class leader it is in the consumer electronics space therefore allowing the ecosystem to dominate. Tim Cook is making as much money for AAPL as he can, but I still fear it’s at the detriment of the future.
After 24 hours with my Vision Pro, I can’t help but think Meta could have spent a fortune and allowed the Quest line to compete in this space but people wouldn’t trust Meta with a $3500 product as they are flat out evil when it comes to you being the product. Apple was in the unique position to create the Vision Pro at $3500, but it could be that without the developers they never got to this position. And I think it’s going to take Developers to drive demand for this AVP.
In the end, developers need Apple and AAPL needs developers. The thing I don’t like is the power we all have given AAPL in this.
After 24 hours with my Vision Pro, I can’t help but think Meta could have spent a fortune and allowed the Quest line to compete in this space but people wouldn’t trust Meta with a $3500 product as they are flat out evil when it comes to you being the product. Apple was in the unique position to create the Vision Pro at $3500, but it could be that without the developers they never got to this position. And I think it’s going to take Developers to drive demand for this AVP.
In the end, developers need Apple and AAPL needs developers. The thing I don’t like is the power we all have given AAPL in this.
The only people who would use these third-party stores are the nut jobs in this forum who have been drooling to use one for a long time. The rest of us will stay within the walls. Not because we’re going to get tricked or scammed but because there’s no reason to go outside and money is not a legitimate reason. I’ll gladly pay extra.
No. There are malicious payloads that can be delivered from compromised websites with no action on the part of the user who visits the website.
but it's already February 2024. Am I missing something?
Seriously though, I don't think that'd fly with the EU
I just dont believe Phil. There’s more reasons than not that users should be able to have more controls over their devices. Dare I say even install a different OS if someone cared to dive down far enough to do that.
The argument certainly isn’t about privacy since Facebook, insta, TikTok, etc are all allowed to gather data at will. Apple won’t ban them for breaching or sidestepping policy which they have been caught countless times doing.
People probably would blame apple if they downloaded a 3rd party app and ruined their phone. They blame apple when a device is dropped onto concrete and breaks. People as a whole dont want to admit their mistakes. But it’s not apples job to lock us in a basement and tell us what’s good for us.
Apple can loosen the liabilities if they put up a “this app is not verified by apples safety team, install anyways?” They do this on MacOS, that desktop atmosphere is still turning without mass chaos.
Let me do what I want with my device Apple.
The argument certainly isn’t about privacy since Facebook, insta, TikTok, etc are all allowed to gather data at will. Apple won’t ban them for breaching or sidestepping policy which they have been caught countless times doing.
People probably would blame apple if they downloaded a 3rd party app and ruined their phone. They blame apple when a device is dropped onto concrete and breaks. People as a whole dont want to admit their mistakes. But it’s not apples job to lock us in a basement and tell us what’s good for us.
Apple can loosen the liabilities if they put up a “this app is not verified by apples safety team, install anyways?” They do this on MacOS, that desktop atmosphere is still turning without mass chaos.
Let me do what I want with my device Apple.
so been having this chat on here and the only people wanting Apple allow sideloading are to put game emulators on it.
they can already play ROMs on other devices.
they probably dont own the original software (or the original hardware has failed).
there are ways to play these without Apple opening the phone up.
and Apple opens itself up to allowing piracy.
why arent these people lobbying for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo being told by EU top open their hardware up?
personally i'd like VLC on a Switch. but Nintendo seem to have no intention of letting a media player on. yes there are work arounds but even phones have VLC as an easy install that doesnt violate app store rules.
they can already play ROMs on other devices.
they probably dont own the original software (or the original hardware has failed).
there are ways to play these without Apple opening the phone up.
and Apple opens itself up to allowing piracy.
why arent these people lobbying for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo being told by EU top open their hardware up?
personally i'd like VLC on a Switch. but Nintendo seem to have no intention of letting a media player on. yes there are work arounds but even phones have VLC as an easy install that doesnt violate app store rules.