The majority of users of side loading or the majority of Apple users? I’d quite like the choice although to be honest I doubt I’d ever use it.
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.
iOS 17.4 Coming Soon as iPhone App Sideloading Deadline in EU Nears
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It will be quite interesting because most users are celebrating side loading so they can pirate apps again / get around licensing for certain regions. Then you have a small subset of power users who want emulators, different browser rendering engines and so on.
Also, I expect Meta to consider their own store with their apps so they can get around privacy labels and other privacy/security features of App Store. Considering their popularity, they might be able to pull it off.
Plus of course Epic and Spotify who were lobbying EU for a long time and wanted to get this done.
Will be quite funky.
What IS scary is letting people make poor choices that affect others. We don’t make seatbelts a “choice” because keeping a driver, even a stupid one, in their seat during a crash can save others. Giving people the “choice” to make the whole ecosystem less secure is also a poor choice.
Everyone knew when they got an iPhone they couldn’t sideload, but they bought it anyway. They ALREADY made their choice.
Apple's warranty is not part of consumer protection law: it's a voluntary private agreement with its own coverage and clauses.
Consumer law in EU mandates a 2 years minimum mandatory guarantee against manufacturing defects. This guarantee is independent from Apple's own warranty terms: both run concurrently, with consumers having the right to claim service under either one as they prefer.
Note that even if the coverage for the EU guarantee is 2 years, in case of defects the burden of proof can switch to the consumer earlier than that.
Agreed. I have no interest in running apps outside of Apple’s control. Big security risk.
Seat belts are a choice. The car will happily start and drive without you buckling up. You might get a fine, but it is a choice.
The same would be the car refusing to start or drive if not everyone is buckled up. If anyone unclips, it slams the brakes and won't go until it's clipped again. And btw you only allowed to refuel at manned shell gas stations, because locked eco system, not every one are proficient at fueling cars. Apple only adds a 30% fee on top for the service.
Last edited:
Preinstalled malware...Thats the reality on Android.
This exactly how Macs have been for ages. I understand why Apple wants their monopoly to continue (there are many upsides with it) but why not let us users decide if we want to install apps outside of Apple’s store? I mean, Fortnite users haven’t been able to play on iOS for like 4 years. With this, Epic can again offer Fortnite (+other games) to iOS users again. Sure you have to use another store but still, it’s better for the end user.
Yes, but after 1 year it's the seller's responsibility to fix and the seller can claim the defect did not exist at time of purchase, per EU regulation.
True.
Of course. My point was EU consumer law does not obligate the manufacturer to repair an item for 2 years under all circumstances, and it is the seller's, not the manufacturer's, responsiblity for repairs under the law.
Some posters seem to think it means you automatically get 2 years from a manufacturer under EU law d something goes wrong; when there are caveats that mean you may or may not get repairs after a year if the selelr claims it is your fault.
Exactly. It's not a commercial warranty; which is why AppleCare has benefits beyond the EU protections, such as Apple doing the servicing and not having to send teh device to a seller if you did not purchase it locally.
The EU protections are not free either, but baked into the costs of the product by adding a little extra to teh purchase prce for all buyers to cover expected costs during the EU mandated period.
Oh look another market the EU will crash.
Do you think devs are worried about losing the market?
Do you think devs are worried about losing the market?
Under the EU guarantee it is always the seller responsible for service claims, from day 1.
IIRC for defects the assumption is that it's caused by manufacturing if the problem arises within 6 months from purchase, after that it can switch to the consumer having to prove it, but I might be wrong and might differ depending on specific State Member legislation.
Also note that I'm not sure what happens under Apple's warranty in case they decide to dispute the defect being due to manufacturing: I assume the case would have to be decided by preponderance of evidence, so effectively the burden of proof would be on the consumer anyway.
That's absolutely true, but it's also the case for basically any guarantee/warranty.
The EU guarantee does not obligate repair as replacement or refund are also viable options, but Apple's warranty states exactly the same: Apple can decide not to repair but to replace or refund at their discretion.
Both coverages have their own clauses and exceptions, so filing a claim does not always equal obtaining service under either.
That's true, many consumers overestimate how much is covered, but that again is often true in general. It's crucial to read the fine print to avoid surprises, from both the statutory and commercial coverages.
Yep, and a third year where the burden of proof is on the customer.
The EU mandates a reminder system since 2019 I think.
The EU evaluated an interlock system, but the evaluation found that while an interlock system would be more effective than a reminder, it would have a much lower acceptance level from users.
Which is not exactly shocking...
The EU Guarantee is 2 years. After that, you are on your own unless a specific State Member has statutory protections exceeding the EU mandatory ones, or you have a private coverage.
The assumption of the defect being a manufacturer one is I think at least for 6 months, so it can end before coverage ends, but after that you have what any normal warranty requires: the consumer has to prove the defect.
The same thing would happen if Apple disputes the claim under their own private warranty terms: the burden of proof would be on the consumer, but that would be from day 1.
I have to imagine Apple's had to beef up their customer service/support teams in advance of this. The number of customers who are going to end up installing apps on their phones that are bad actors, if not downright nefarious, is not going to be nothing.
Personally, I wouldn't side load anything (related: I was never tempted to jailbreak). If it's good enough from functional, security, performance, and safety perspectives to ask people to install it on their phones, it's good enough to go through the App Store process so we get at least a modicum of due diligence. Otherwise, I have no interest in injecting it into my device.
Personally, I wouldn't side load anything (related: I was never tempted to jailbreak). If it's good enough from functional, security, performance, and safety perspectives to ask people to install it on their phones, it's good enough to go through the App Store process so we get at least a modicum of due diligence. Otherwise, I have no interest in injecting it into my device.
1. You DO need to use it if major developers leave the App Store and make their own. (Like Meta, Microsoft and Epic Games are planning to DO)
2. An iPhone is not a PC or Mac.
3. "only that way to protect Apple's ability to make money" Why would it be illegal for a FOR PROFIT company to make money? I really don't get this! Also EVERY single €0,01 that Apple is going to lose because of this has to come from somewhere else. Which means that:
a. The prices will increase of the phones, ipads.
b. The prices will increase of the developer subscription (currently €99/year, but that will soon be higher because of this)
Which will lead into c. Higher prices for Apps.
And d. Less free apps
And e. More adds in those free apps.
That's not necessarily true.
First of all, part of the money Apple is going to "lose" would have be used to offset costs Apple would not have anymore. As example, the cost of distributing the App would not be on Apple anymore as a third-party App would have to rely on its own content distribution.
Second, Apple is not operating at zero profits, meaning that prices can remain the same as long as Apple is willing to operate at a lower profit margin than before. If they don't it's their choice and exactly the point of a free market for competitors to take advantage of that.
Note that if Apple would be able to increase prices, they would have all the motivation to do so regardless of EU regulations: why would a for-profit company leave money on the table if they believe the consumers would be willing to pay more?
Last edited:
This will be mandatory because many large corporations will create their own stores and remove apps from the Appstore.
For EU customers, this will completely ruin the iOS experience and activate banking fraudsters with fake apps.
Yes, this is big problem. EU destroys iOS.
Yeah and both macOS and Android are perfectly showing why it’s not a good idea. Both have massive loads of malware/scareware/spyware/virusses and are a total mess.
Sideloading is not the Holy Grail that some of them think it is.
But i hope that your Vision on the matter will be right so can enjoy the Appstore and the safety that comes with it.