Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next Apple getting sued by the EU because they refuse to service a device or refund an app when the user downloads from an alternative store.
Apple can't just ignore consumer protection law simply because someone downloaded apps from outside the App Store. Apple will have to prove that sideloading actually caused the hardware or software problem and the blame isn't on them. That's just common sense.
 
Last edited:
They want other app stores so they can install totally not pirated apps all the essential things that Big Mean Apple keeps them from installing.
Because we all are big scary pirates with an eyepatch who threaten to disrupt the stability of your local indie devs. We totally don't have other motivations, no sir.
 
It is your illusion and projection that there will be multiple app stores commonly and that major apps will not be available through most accessible Apple's AppStore. As said before. Sideloading is possible on both macOS and Android and no significant alternative app stores are there.

On my PC I have Steam, EA, Epic, and at least one other, and I hardly play any games. One of the games requires that two launchers be installed to play, one by the company that made the game, the other where the game was "purchased" (it was a free).

macOS has so few app stores because their not needed. Apps can be distributed via DMG or pkg file, and I don't believe Apple is just going to allow users to freely install .ipa files downloaded from the internet.

I think a better comparison than an app store would be a streaming service. At first we had just Netflix and everyone was happy to put their content on Netflix and get their small percentage of the share. Now everyone wants to have their own streaming service and not have to share the recurring revenue.

I personally think it's a double-edged sword. I like the possibility that some day I might get to run an emulator (or whatever Apple's decided I can't do) on my iPhone. But I don't like that A. Their being forced to. I'm not a fan of governments telling private companies what to do. B. I think this could lead to a mess of "app stores" or launchers being required in the future.
 
That’s how it is on the Android devices I have used in the past a well tbh.

On one device I had to tab 5 times on a specific word for the dev settings to even appear
MIUI in particular is particularly annoying, as you have to wait 10 seconds in order to make the "OK" button become clickable, for every app to which you wish to grant the Install packages permission*. It seems like something Apple would do, at least internally.

* Technically you can bypass that (at least on xiaomi.eu ROMs) by opening an APK and accepting the ad-hoc installation dialog.
 
Yes, and? There is no requirement to be able to develop apps for free.
And watch the development rate free-fall. Especially since Apple has "Learn to code iOS apps" playgrounds, both on - well - Swift Playgrounds, and in-store.
 
Same.

I'd personally like to be able to side load apps (other than compiling/signing them through Xcode).

But I do think this could lead to some pretty nasty security issues for the majority of users. I wonder where the line is drawn on Apple potentially blocking known malware even if it comes from another store, and/or if guards are still in place over apps that try to use private APIs in unexpected ways.
I mean, they could implement it the same they've done on macOS, that is, with Gatekeeper ("Do you want to open AppName? Apple has scanned this app for presence of malware and found none" and things like that.) As long as there's a way for power users to bypass it like there is on Mac, I'd be content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone
That's only needed for uploading it to Apple. One can also just download Xcode, create an app and testfly without paying Apple.
Yeah, the only problem is that you're limited to a maximum of three apps and the test certificate expires after 7 days. Basically only usable for short-term testing.
 
I think a better comparison than an app store would be a streaming service. At first we had just Netflix and everyone was happy to put their content on Netflix and get their small percentage of the share. Now everyone wants to have their own streaming service and not have to share the recurring revenue.
That's actually really bad comparison.

If there was just one Netflix, it would probably contain most of the movies and series available now on alternative streaming services - just like on i.e. Spotify. So one payment would get you everything you can get.

With multiple streaming services, you need to pay all of them in order to access the whole available content.

So the comparison with App Store would work if you could subscribe for monthly payment and have all Apple's App Store apps included in such subscription. But that's not the case at all. So from the price standpoint there's hardly any change between one App Store or multiple of them. If anything, it may bring the price down thanks to the competition on the "app store market" and thanks to the cheaper fee for developers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samplasion
They want other app stores so they can install totally not pirated apps all the essential things that Big Mean Apple keeps them from installing.
Some people want other ways of getting apps because Apple has been know to kowtow to government demands and remove apps from their App Store.





Some of these apps are apps that even Tim Cook hoped Apple can put back on the App Store one day



If users could just sideload install apps they download off the internet, this wouldn't be an issue.
 
Next Apple getting sued by the EU because they refuse to service a device [...] when the user downloads from an alternative store.
As they should
Next Apple getting sued by the EU because they refuse to [...] refund an app when the user downloads from an alternative store.
How would that even work? Who would complain to the manufacturer in such cases? Everyone I know at least would complain to Google if something goes awry with an Android app, not to Samsung, Xiaomi, Sony or whoever else
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lyrics23
What happens is Spotify for example says we will not be on the Apple App Store but on ???'s App Store, people will have no option to start using the other one. Apps can already restrict themselves from certain countries in Apple's App Store so would be easy enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kal Madda
How would that even work? Who would complain to the manufacturer in such cases? Everyone I know at least would complain to Google if something goes awry with an Android app, not to Samsung, Xiaomi, Sony or whoever else

Even if their complaint is filed against Apple, the lawsuit would quickly get dismissed for lack of standing.

If an user purchases an App from a third-party the contractual agreement is between the user and said third-party, not with Apple. There is no standing for suing Apple as Apple would be no party in the contract.

I understand Sideloading might be a novelty on iOS, but I don't see why it would invalidate private law as it has existed for ages or create new or uncertain contractual situations. All of this has existed for a long time and it's perfectly clear how it would end up working.
 
Last edited:
So...exactly like it is on Android?




They want other app stores so they can install totally not pirated apps all the essential things that Big Mean Apple keeps them from installing.
Can you stop? It's cute for a while, but eventually people begin to perceive your insinuation that they only want this feature to steal as exactly what it is: a personal attack. If this were the case, all of the applications on my Mac would be from the App Store as they're all for work/play, not piracy. But they aren't, because surprise surprise: it does not indeed have all the essentials that I need.

Can you please stop with the "gentle teasing" that's actually a character attack?
 
Even if they complaint is filed against Apple, the lawsuit would quickly get dismissed for lack of standing.

If an user purchase an App from a third-party the contractual agreement is between the user and said third-party, not with Apple. There is no standing for suing Apple as Apple would be no party in the contract.

I understand Sideloading might be a novelty on iOS, but I don't see why it would invalidate private law as it has existed for ages or create new or uncertain contractual situations. All of this has existed for a long time and it's perfectly clear how it would end up working.
You explained it far better than I did, lol. Either way, their argument makes very little sense.
 
It is going to be fun. Sideloading opens up an avenue potential real app piracy like never before on iOS (besides, of course, Jailbreaking). I am curious to see all the indie and "one time purchase" app developers' opinions once the feature is available... There are benefits in a closed platform. Of course none of the big developers pushing for sideloading are touched by that because they offer subscription services. As for all the rest well.. Let's see. Also, these "modified packages" will probably contain a lot of dubious code, and probably malware...

I suspect we'll see a shift to subscription apps, in the EU at least. If Apple were to implement a way for apps to ID EU vs rest of world iPones developers could offer purchases outside the EU and purchases elsewhere; and a non-EU purchase could revert to subscription if loaded on an EU phone, or simply not work.
 
Can you stop? It's cute for a while, but eventually people begin to perceive your insinuation that they only want this feature to steal as exactly what it is: a personal attack. If this were the case, all of the applications on my Mac would be from the App Store as they're all for work/play, not piracy. But they aren't, because surprise surprise: it does not indeed have all the essentials that I need.

Can you please stop with the "gentle teasing" that's actually a character attack?




When jailbreaking was a thing, iOS piracy rates were much higher. That's obviously dropped as jailbreaks are basically not a thing anymore, but here comes the EU to bring back the old problems, just in time.

No one told you to take simple facts personally.
 
I suspect we'll see a shift to subscription apps, in the EU at least. If Apple were to implement a way for apps to ID EU vs rest of world iPones developers could offer purchases outside the EU and purchases elsewhere; and a non-EU purchase could revert to subscription if loaded on an EU phone, or simply not work.
Yeah I wonder if there’ll be a big swing towards subscriptions given piracy will be so much easier? Although pirating developers apps would be a good way to punish them for pushing this stuff on us.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Kal Madda
Apple can't just ignore consumer protection law simply because someone downloaded apps from outside the App Store. Apple will have to prove that sideloading actually caused the hardware or software problem and the blame isn't on them. That's just common sense.

Only within the original Apple warranty period of 1 year, afterwards the onus is on the consumer to prove the defect existed at time of purchase. In addition,, IIRC, it's the store's responsibility after the manufacturer's warranty expires, so if you did not buy it from Apple you have to go back to the original seller.
 
All this scaremongering about security, it isn't mandatory for users to install other app stores. It's not like Android where the manufacturers and operators preinstall their own app stores.
Wrong. Apps will eventually move out of the App Store therefore leaving NO Option! So the ‘winner’ will be the less secure customers with their BS sideloading!
 
Yeah, I’d rather use Apollo without having to refresh it with AltStore every 7 days.
SideStore is a better choice, allows you to refresh without having access to your computer (the computer doesn't even need to be on or anything), all you need in order to refresh with SideStore is literally any WiFi connection (for technical reasons).

But if things go awry on Android, it’s not picked up by all the news outlets. When someone in the EU gets malware or an app that manages to do something unexpected, everyone around the globe will click on the headlines to read about whatever went wrong with the iPhone made my Apple.
Only because Apple have made such a huge fuss over users installing whatever software they want on devices they own. And the media will get bored of it pretty quickly I think, it'll happen once or twice and then not again.

The EU is a trade organisation that strives for free and open markets between 27 nations. This is their primary driver, not an extra App Store I think.
American mega-corps hate this one weird European trick.
 
Only within the original Apple warranty period of 1 year, afterwards the onus is on the consumer to prove the defect existed at time of purchase. In addition,, IIRC, it's the store's responsibility after the manufacturer's warranty expires, so if you did not buy it from Apple you have to go back to the original seller.

There's a standard 2-year warranty in the EU regulation.
 



When jailbreaking was a thing, iOS piracy rates were much higher. That's obviously dropped as jailbreaks are basically not a thing anymore, but here comes the EU to bring back the old problems, just in time.

No one told you to take simple facts personally.
Using 10 year old articles to relate to the CURRENT condition of the Android and iOS market?
Google has significantly improved it's piracy detection and prevention on devices that use Google Play Services.
Many, not all, pirated apps will be flagged on these devices as they will fail an integrity check if there is a version of that app on the Google Play Store.
A lot of pirated apps that use in-app purchases or subscription services will now simply fail to execute.
You'll be directed to purchase the app.
It's not perfect, but it's always improving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lyrics23
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.