You seem to think that sideloading would somehow affect the security of your hardware...
How exactly would that happen if you choose not to make use of that feature?
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.
Epic Games CEO to Speak in South Korea Next Week Against the App Store Amid Ongoing Tensions With Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How exactly would that happen if you choose not to make use of that feature?
Antitrust laws say otherwise...
They exist to prevent a single company from controlling the entire market and preventing competitors from entering it...
But wait, Apple does exactly that with the App Store and not allowing any competing stores... see the issue?
By wanting another way for developers to serve users, you do in fact want sideloading.
"Sideloading" is such an annoying term because on every other computer it's just the process of installing software.
You don't say you "sideload" an app on macOS when you go to the website of the publisher, download, and install it... you just say you installed the program/app/whatever.
I think this feature is desperately needed on iOS by the way... too many apps are rejected and removed by Apple simply because they pose a threat to their revenue.
Let me install Kodi on my Apple TV, let me install emulators on my iPhone, and in general, let me use my device how I please and not how Apple says I should.
Give us a counter-example.
Name a corporation that puts people before profits.
(Hint: if you do what your very bone marrow demands and say, as you must, “Apple, of course!” I’ll just pull out a few of the many news stories about Apple, say, looking the other way while Facebook does the barest of bare minimums to address its app — distributed by Apple! — being used extensively by human traffickers / slavers in the Middle East, to this very day.)
That might have some truth if it weren't for the fact that Fortnite is also available on Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo Switch which all also charge 30%Epic couldn’t make a profit on iOS with a 30% cut.
Epic offered an alternative payment system that paid Apple 0%. That was their solution.
Apple said that doesn’t work either.
So, Epic and Apple brought it to the courts and the courts said Epic has to pay Apple 30%.
And there’s your answer. You can’t put a game like Fortnite on iOS.
Trump administration reportedly questions Epic Games and Riot about Tencent ties
It’s previously focused its ire on Tencent’s WeChat app.www.theverge.com
And the reason Apple couldn’t allow 0% is because each Fortnite update is at least 100MB.
100 MB * 10,000,000 / update = 1 petabyte in server traffic on the App Store. That obviously was hurting Apple.
Now there is a court ruling that says you can’t stream console games on iOS or Android. Tough luck. Sorry not sorry. Buy an Xbox.
I already left a link with some information. Seems like there is no middle ground here, which was my point to begin with.
Just because a company may have customer-centric tendencies doesn't mean they place those values above profits when in conflict. I point again to the iPad example. Or the middle finger to consumers that is the ridiculously overpriced and outdated $149 ATV HD.
Last edited:
People are saying they have no money, so Apple should give them money (or free things). Apple is rich!
OK, now Apple employees have no money (Apple retail, secretaries, drivers, custodians, daycare teachers, nannies, etc.).
Here's what it's REALLY like to work in an Apple store
"I would think readers would be surprised to see the energy behind Apple’s walls."
www.businessinsider.com
Apple gave all their money away to “poor” people and had to fire everyone.
Why Doesn’t Apple’s State-of-the-Art New Campus Include a Day Care?
From the looks of the spaceship-like monolith that now stands in Cupertino, California, Apple spared no expense in creating its new headquarters. The...
Are you now going to give the Apple daycare teacher who lost her job your salary?
They wanted more money and got no money out of their decision. Karma doesn't play.
You left a link full of PR fluff. Fine, I accept that all that stuff is true. But all that stuff is hardly the whole picture, is it? Isn’t that just you standing at one extreme and berating the folks you imagine to be at the other extreme for being extremists?
Which one of those laudatory things in the link you dropped offsets Apple aiding and abetting human trafficking and genocide by not pulling Facebook’s apps off its store when they are complicit in those things?
The pulled Epic’s apps off the store in a spat over service fees, for costing them money. They left Facebook’s apps on the store even though they were being used for pure evil and Facebook was dragging their feet to stop it. Why? You tell me. Maybe because going to PR war with Facebook over a bunch of dead people in Myanmar and trafficked maids in the Middle East wasn’t worth the hassle. Cold calculus, indeed.
Anyway, I gave you a current example of actual behavior by Apple that is doing real harm to real people. Of course, that’s not to say Apple is only bad — that’s just the straw man you’ve stood up to avoid engaging honestly with the problematic side of Apple. Can you even admit it exists?
Here’s another, unrelated example of Apple putting profits over people:
Coalition demands Apple take more action to defend human rights
A coalition of more than 150 activist groups have penned a letter to Apple urging it to address human rights concerns and to stop "suppressing" criticisms of its current actions.
appleinsider.com
More context:
Apple’s longtime supplier accused of using forced labor in China
New documents show Lens Technology, which makes iPhone glass and is owned by China’s richest woman, received Uighur Muslim laborers transferred from Xinjiang.
www.washingtonpost.com
Slavery. Human trafficking. According to Apple, those things are like rat hairs and droppings, right? You can’t mass produce a can of soup without a few of them finding their way inside, just like you can’t make a few hundred million iPhones or run an App Store without exploiting some slave labor or looking the other way on the occasional bit of genocide or human trafficking.
Of course, I’m still an Apple customer, even a fan. As bad as they sometimes are, they’re still usually better than the rest, on balance. That’s pretty messed up, but that’s the world we’ve built for ourselves.
This is already possible for many years. People were trading items in games for 20 years.
Guess who made millions of dollars with micro transactions and in game items?
Steve Bannon, the fash pig. He ran a big operation in China 15 years ago, owned a company that used Chinese gamers to farm as many game items as possible and then sell them for high prices. It was a rigged game and it financed this terrible person who has been using that money to spread hate and division.
There are many more like him now. Don't feed this beast. Cut its legs off.
Things in our world are not totally black or white. It isn't that Apple or other corporations support these things, its just not in their interest to focus on them. And Apple is still one of the better corporate companies, they are not perfect, in fact far from it, but so isn't USA or any other Western power.
Companies are bound by the laws of the countries they operate in. Did Apple ever condemn Trump in USA? Even Twitter had to wait for him to lose before blocking him. That's the kind of power governments wield and unlike companies they are not reluctant to abuse these powers.
That was my point, in the context of my reply to the other poster, who was expressing the view that Apple is a company that puts people before profits.
That’s a silly lie. You know how I know? Because in the world we live in if they actually did that they’d be out of business in short order.
That’s not Apple’s fault, exactly, but that doesn’t quite excuse the evils they’ve been complicit in, either.
So, no, it’s not black and white. Which is exactly what I was trying to impress upon the poster to whom I was replying.
Edit to add: I 100% include myself in this. I know what it takes to produce the things I demand to buy fast and cheap, but I buy them anyway. What’s the alternative? Throw away all my possessions and go live in a cave?
Same for these companies. Look around the world, fascist powers have taken over every single major economy.
We get to talk and discuss such issue but in China, they are not even allowed to search online about Tiananmen Square.
So appreciate that you have a life in the free world that allows you to publicly discuss such things, and enjoy your gadgets manufactured in the not so free world inside sweat shops.
It also doesn't mean that profits rule over everything either. You've already determined the ipad multi-signon is profit oriented so no sense discussing it. As far as ATV, that's a perfect example of let the market decide....vote with your dollars.
Seems like goal posts are moved in this post.People are saying they have no money, so Apple should give them money (or free things). Apple is rich!
OK, now Apple employees have no money (Apple retail, secretaries, drivers, custodians, daycare teachers, nannies, etc.).
Here's what it's REALLY like to work in an Apple store
"I would think readers would be surprised to see the energy behind Apple’s walls."
Apple gave all their money away to “poor” people and had to fire everyone.
Why Doesn’t Apple’s State-of-the-Art New Campus Include a Day Care?
From the looks of the spaceship-like monolith that now stands in Cupertino, California, Apple spared no expense in creating its new headquarters. The...slate.com
Are you now going to give the Apple daycare teacher who lost her job your salary?
If the link provided is PR fluff, then your link is just showing criticism to criticize. People will always find something to criticize, whether legitimate or just hyperbole, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is room for all opinions, but not all opinions have to be agreed to in a discussion forum.You left a link full of PR fluff. Fine, I accept that all that stuff is true. But all that stuff is hardly the whole picture, is it? Isn’t that just you standing at one extreme and berating the folks you imagine to be at the other extreme for being extremists?
Which one of those laudatory things in the link you dropped offsets Apple aiding and abetting human trafficking and genocide by not pulling Facebook’s apps off its store when they are complicit in those things?
The pulled Epic’s apps off the store in a spat over service fees, for costing them money. They left Facebook’s apps on the store even though they were being used for pure evil and Facebook was dragging their feet to stop it. Why? You tell me. Maybe because going to PR war with Facebook over a bunch of dead people in Myanmar and trafficked maids in the Middle East wasn’t worth the hassle. Cold calculus, indeed.
Anyway, I gave you a current example of actual behavior by Apple that is doing real harm to real people. Of course, that’s not to say Apple is only bad — that’s just the straw man you’ve stood up to avoid engaging honestly with the problematic side of Apple. Can you even admit it exists?
Here’s another, unrelated example of Apple putting profits over people:
Coalition demands Apple take more action to defend human rights
A coalition of more than 150 activist groups have penned a letter to Apple urging it to address human rights concerns and to stop "suppressing" criticisms of its current actions.appleinsider.com
More context:
Apple’s longtime supplier accused of using forced labor in China
New documents show Lens Technology, which makes iPhone glass and is owned by China’s richest woman, received Uighur Muslim laborers transferred from Xinjiang.
Slavery. Human trafficking. According to Apple, those things are like rat hairs and droppings, right? You can’t mass produce a can of soup without a few of them finding their way inside, just like you can’t make a few hundred million iPhones or run an App Store without exploiting some slave labor or looking the other way on the occasional bit of genocide or human trafficking.
Of course, I’m still an Apple customer, even a fan. As bad as they sometimes are, they’re still usually better than the rest, on balance. That’s pretty messed up, but that’s the world we’ve built for ourselves.
No, not so much. Perhaps you can find a single quote where they make such statements in their own interests? I specifically referred to the likes of EPIC and their majority shareholding/investment backers from China.
Meanwhile, others will bury their heads in the sand and mumble "I can't hear you LA LA LA LA" whenever certain unpleasant facts and hard truths are mentioned.
Which is fine. Not everyone has to live in reality with the rest of us.
Pretty much. It's basically impossible to live in the world and have any sort of comfortable modern life if you aren't exploiting a whole bunch of people, some of them literally to death. Even if we make the most ethical choices we can (which I certainly don't, not always and probably not most of the time), people suffer so that we can live lives of relative ease.
It's no wonder some people can't stand to think about it or be reminded of it. They don't want to pick up their phone and have to think, "I wonder how much forced or even child labor was involved in putting this wondrous thing in my hand?"
It's a hard, cruel reality to face and not everyone is up to it.
No by all means, let's discuss it. What's the other logical explanation? Is it simply that the most valuable tech company in the world somehow can't figure out something that has been a feature on computers for ages, including their own Macs? That can't be the case since they've figured it out for education and business clients. Got any other possibilities?
Agreed, the market will decide whether to let Apple rip them off by paying those prices for a product that was released over half a decade ago that only supports resolutions that only the cheapest of TVs top out at nowadays, that uses an over 7 year old processor. I certainly hope consumers will choose to not let "consumer-centric" Apple rip them off.
Good Mr. Sweeney. Stay over there a while please. Your a joke over here with the Legal Strategy of a Baboon.
Desperate times fund desperate trips.
Epic Shareholders: Remember, you can petition the BOD to have him replaced as CEO. It's your investment going down the Chasm of Futility.
Desperate times fund desperate trips.
Epic Shareholders: Remember, you can petition the BOD to have him replaced as CEO. It's your investment going down the Chasm of Futility.
Or they believe their market research shows the ipad to be a personal device, like an phone. It could be they discovered most customers use the ipad as a personal device. If one wants a community device then I guess buy a Mac.
I agree. Let customers speak with their $$$.
Yep it's fine. I'm going to change your hard truths to hyperbolic truths. Because there are those who believe it's Apples' responsibility to defend the weak on a global scale, give endless piles of money to philanthropy (but only those causes the criticizers want), pay their apple store employees more than senior engineers and so on and so forth. Endless streams of conciousness that in reality does not say or communicates anything cogently.
First you accuse me of hyperbole and then you cram a whole bunch of words into my mouth that I never said or even implied.
Well, good for you. You gotta "win" how you can, I guess. I won't be replying further, and should have had the good sense to bow out well before now. So, shame on me. Live and learn.
Even though they market it as a computer replacement? “WhAt’S a ComPuTEr??!?” Interesting that for education and business customers it’s a computer, but for consumers it’s a personal device. So which is it, is it a personal device or is it a computer? It seems that Apple wants it both ways. How about “consumer-centric” Apple allow comsumers to make that decision for themselves? Apple making that decision for them seems pretty Apple-centric, not consumer-centric. If a consumer wants to keep an iPad to themselves, fine. If a household would like to share an iPad rather than have to buy an iPad for everyone, that should also be fine. Of course it’s obvious why that’s not the case. At least to everyone but you.
There are lackluster ways around this such as everyone using the iPad with one person’s account. Although that is also decidedly not consumer-centric and in fact flies in the face of Apple’s claims of prioritizing security. What could be less secure than other people having access to all of your info and files because Apple won’t allow multi-user support. Again, where consumer-concentricity (and security) and profits are in conflict, the latter will always win.
Glad you agree ripping off consumers is not “consumer-centric.”
Last edited: