Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I’ll plan to explain to my Mom this weekend about side loading apps on her iPhone and the merits of various browsers and mail apps so she can make informed decisions.
Informed decision when there are. Hundred if not thousands of fake stores of pretending to be Apple and other companies to get you to download their Trojan house app. Your mom can then have that app monitor every keystroke and password she types and send it off so they can access her banking information. Or infect every device she connects to that she has privileges.

The worst idea in the world is to give a non tech person a device that requires a lot of technical expertise to stay safe.
 
When Epic threw a hissyfit over Google's similar policies and made its app and third-party store side-load only it was a dismal failure, even on Android where users are used to having additional freedoms. Eventually Epic acquiesced and returned their apps to the Google Play Store and all of the restrictions therein.

That is the free market working as intended. Android users wanted the convenience of the main app store, in turn sales for Epic's software plummeted, so Epic changed course (they later sued, but that's a separate issue).

The same thing will happen on iOS. Developers who try to spin their apps off into side-load only will find their user base plummets and eventually come back to the App Store. Developers who use third party payment systems for in-app purchases, especially game power-ups, will no doubt see their sales drop as the convenience factor is lost and, again, re-enable the feature with the Apple tax.

No one is going to be forced to use third party app stores or sideloaded software if they don't want to, and Apple can still enable similar signing requirements that exist on macOS to ensure that the only software iOS runs is signed by a valid developer and respects the various system security controls.
 
Downgrading at the cost of security risk but better performance should be allowed...

iPhone 4 - iOS 5.1.1
iPhone 4S - iOS 6.1.3
iPhone 5 - iOS 6.1.4/iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 5c/5s - iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 6 - iOS 8.4.1/iOS 9.3.5
iPhone 6s - iOS 9.3.5/iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 7 - iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 8/X - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone XS/XR - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
Except iOS 8 should not be in there. That was a s***-show.

But I do see you left out iOS 7.1 ;) that was mistake 7.1 was awesome. (7.1.1?)
 
Downgrading at the cost of security risk but better performance should be allowed...

iPhone 4 - iOS 5.1.1
iPhone 4S - iOS 6.1.3
iPhone 5 - iOS 6.1.4/iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 5c/5s - iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 6 - iOS 8.4.1/iOS 9.3.5
iPhone 6s - iOS 9.3.5/iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 7 - iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 8/X - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone XS/XR - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
BRAVO!
I realized just 14 minutes ago
that
My itouch G4 can accept albums from my MacBook Air 2020 M1
but wont play to the HomePods via airplay.

which makes me believe that  knows that they are doing more that a corrupt congregation.

I would love to have my 3rdtv, MacBook Air 2010 and 4 other devices and OSxs work in 2023
but would hate to get hacked or have the threat of a security risk
 
Last edited:
You had legislation: The Open App Markets Act. It had bipartisan support in the house and senate. You had a lame duck congress that could've easily voted on it but it never got put on the floor because Chuck Schumer is an old ass boomer who spends all day watching Night Court on Peacock on his work computer.

YOU ARE THE PRESIDENT! DO SOMETHING! You want legislation, put out an executive order for one just like you did with Right to Repair. It's not hard. This is why the EU is laughing at us.
These are not powers the president has. Executive orders are not for this and they are a serious erosion of our system. We don’t elect kings who make decrees.
 
What’s funny is that the government wants to ban TikTok but allow sideloading and third party appstores at the same time, literally a way to get the TikTok app anyways. 🤪
Not really, it would be easy for them to additionally cut off the route to any TikTok server, specially since Oracle is hosting their data.

Anyway a ban by law, does not require the absolute control of devices, being able to sue and fine the ones who offers it is more than enough.
 
Actually just one: Google. That’s it. Over 90% of the phones that aren’t iphones use Android. That’s not good. These giants need to be broken up. We need more alternatives. What about those of us who dislike both Apple and Android? guess we’re going to have to settle with living without a phone.
Most markets have only 2 and sometimes three dominant platforms. There are usually only 2 consoles that really “make it” each generation. No 4th console has ever gotten significant market share. On home computers there are many options but realistically windows (80%), mac (10-15) and other (5). So… two dominant players is not unusual and if they broke them up most likely after the dust settles there would be 1-3 dominant players.
 
Downgrading at the cost of security risk but better performance should be allowed...

iPhone 4 - iOS 5.1.1
iPhone 4S - iOS 6.1.3
iPhone 5 - iOS 6.1.4/iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 5c/5s - iOS 8.4.1
iPhone 6 - iOS 8.4.1/iOS 9.3.5
iPhone 6s - iOS 9.3.5/iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 7 - iOS 10.3.3/iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone 8/X - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
iPhone XS/XR - iOS 12.4.1/iOS 13.7
I don't disagree with this in principle, but I will say that from 14.x on I haven't really had any performance issues on my 7/8/XS/12 iPhones, bugs? Absolutely, but not like the iOS 7 on iPhone 4 days at all. That device became unusable with iOS 7. In fact iOS 16 is quite a bit snappier on my XS than anything before it.
 
Why can't it be both? I want sideloading and more options yet I like the feel and design of IOS and the iPhone. I am sure there are lots of others like me. Remember how popular jailbraiking was? There was a reason for that.
And that reason largely no longer exists. Back in the iPhone 4 days jailbreaking was the big thing - themes and a few capabilities we did not yet have natively (like hotspots and widgets). Even though there are still jailbreaking tools you just don't hear about it much. Even then the jailbreak community was a very vocal very small minority - and mostly more technically minded than the average user.

Making iOS function like android does not add choice. It removes the choice between and open or closed platform.
 
They may have but the mobile OS market wasn’t dominated by just two major players back then. The government doesn't tend to get involved (and even then, it can take a while) unless a market becomes overpowered or too controlled by one or two or so players.
Well, sure.

However, it's a chicken and egg proposition. What killed off the competitors? It wasn't because Apple gave their phones away, nor did Apple give away apps or whatnot. And Apple didn't conspire with Google to create a market where there were only two major players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: siddavis
It's such an exciting time to be in government.

Didn't have enough talent to work at a top-flight company? No problem! Get a job in government, and you can tell the CEO what to do!

Worried that people will notice that your ideas are moronic and destructive to the company? No problem! Wrap yourself in a few high-minded phrases like "Promoting Competition" and "improving competition, reducing barriers to entry, and maximizing user benefit" and people won't even care about your actual recommendations. They'll rush to defend you!

As we see here... sadly.
 
As long as Android exists and has a higher market share than Apple, these arguments are pointless. If you don't like Apple's approach, you have an alternative. I don't understand what the problem is. I acknowledge that Apple's decisions are sometimes very restrictive but I also acknowledge that a lot of those restrictive measures seem to keep their platform significantly more secure and stable. That's a trade-off I'm happy to do. Why should that be ruined because people don't want to switch to Android? If you want a platform with all those capabilities and a million vectors for security issues, stop whining and just switch to Android. If you wanted all that but you bought an iPhone, you're an idiot.
 
Ouch, this will hurt Apple's business bad, but they brought it down on themselves lately. Apple didn't move a single inch in recent years to satisfy legislators and now they suddenly have to shift their platform majorly.

They don't owe them an inch, and as the saying goes, "Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile." Also harder to make a meaningful legal argument if you've caved to overreaching government demands before.
 
None of this is irrational, as far as findings go. And if it comes down to it, Apple will find ways to oblige while still maintaining control of the OS.
They will certainly try. Most likely they will fight this in court as far as they can take it.
Isn't iOS programmed in such a way that an app exists in a sort of "walled space", where its functionality is bound to only itself, and not affected by or able to affect other apps? Or at least, not without express permission?
Only if it came from the Apple Appstore. Anything outside of that mechanism wouldn't have to obey anything Apple has in place. Hence why Apple would fight this as far as they can. The rules would allow anyone to write anything they wanted. It would work however the developer wants it to work.

Even if Apple wanted to restrict access to hardware to only signed developers. The end user could still be tricked into allowing a rogue app access to whatever it wanted.
Because I can totally see something like the above being implemented (if it isn't already) so that while allowing apps from outside sources, their functionality will always be just shy of perfect compared to Apple's own in-house variants.
Most likely this would break the rules (if implemented), and a user could still be tricked into allowing more access to an application than they should or really want it to have. Also any Zero day threats would be made worse by any rogue app to further hijack the device.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is a good reason why Apple made the iPhone and iOS the way it is. And if you don't like it, you can pick Google. No good reason for these laws in my view, when you have a choice in which vendor/manufacture/OS you can pick from. Especially when one of them already allows alt-app-stores, and side loading. One manufacture can restrict access while one of many can allow it. Heck you can even build your own phone with one of them.
 
That's OK.

As long as people are aware that THEY are responsible (and not Apple) for any adverse consequences of side-loading apps (or attempting to side-load apps).

Such as bricked phones, privacy violations, security issues, and monetary theft.
 
I'm glad you accept egregiously sub par performance as 'so... you want a perfect president?'


No, I am an adult I don't need to be coddled in every facet of my life by some imaginative tooth fairy, or be forced to listen to nonstop random generic speeches about emotions to make me instantly forget about the garbage policies they put forth that are incongruent with everything they purport to be about, simply because 'it's the cool thing to do' and to fit in. I will easily settle for someone who ideologically wants US to succeed and be strong and better, not to fail, and be weaker and worse.

"I am an adult I don't need to be coddled in every facet of my life by some imaginative tooth fairy..."

Funny to read that statement made by somebody who supports Apples anti-competitive parenting methods, because it's exactly what Apple is doing. They are coddling every facet of your life, they consider you as immature and unable to cope with life without falling on your face, and pre-chew your food.
 
Pretty darn easy to argue with what they're saying. In fact, you've made a good argument against it right here.

Apple customers aren't lobbying government to make these changes. They are, for the most part, happy, which is why they are Apple customers instead of Android users.

It's companies like Epic Games (Fornite) that want to profit from iPhone's marketplace but not play by Apple's rules that are driving these supposedly consumer-focused plans. They accuse Apple of being "greedy". Fine, Apple is greedy, whatever. But so are Epic and the others, who want all the benefits of being on Apple platforms but don't want to play by the rules, so they whine to and lobby Congress and administrations to change the rules, while pretending their just sticking up for the little guy. This is baptists and bootleggers in action.

You're right; they should keep their hands off, butt out, and let consumers make their own decisions. The last thing we need is government stepping in to "help". Their dream phone would be one with no first party apps installed, and a long list of questions: Which browser would you like to install? Which email client do you want to use? Which of 50 apps stores would you like to shop? Congratulations, your phone is now ready to use, 10 hours later!

Grr, it's hard not to argue with what they're saying. It's such utter BS from clueless people who think that they can run large, successful, and popular technology firms when they can't come even remotely close to balancing a budget. Apple (and Google) is immensely popular; the same cannot be said of politicians and bureaucrats.

(My complaints, by the way, are not in anyway limited to the Biden administration. They apply to both parties, and both the executive and legislative branches).

I realize I'm ranting at this point, but this crap ticks me off. Apple et al are successful because people, for the most part, like them. Stop trying to screw this up!
With the caveat that it’s unknown whether and to what extent the recommendations in this report will eventually be turned into binding regulations against Apple, it’s not like Apple hasn’t had years of warning that stuff exactly like this was coming. Apple has for several years now had ample opportunity to make adjustments on their own terms in order to quell antitrust concerns. They have repeatedly declined to do so, so now governments feel that it’s time to step in and fix it for them.

Imagine for a second that every one of the bullet points in the article is eventually made into law. Had it chosen over the past few years to make targeted concessions, Apple probably could have gotten away with doing substantially less than that while staving off firm antitrust regulations. I agree that that outcome would likely have been preferable for both Apple and the user experience. Alas, it’s too late for that now.

For what it’s worth, regarding people "liking" big tech companies, I think you also might greatly overestimate the popularity of any big tech company among the general public. Most people don't really care and simply pick one of the options presented to them for reasons that have nothing to do with actively liking the brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula
fantastic news. bring the hammer down on apple and break them up.
Agreed but only from the standpoint that we live in a corporatized political system where large corporations buy their influence, politically speaking. So, as long as we have that kind of cronyism, I do not believe companies should be as large or valuable as Apple, google, or any of the other companies like them as they have the potential (and most certainly do) exert far too much influence in our lives.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.