iPhone App Sideloading Coming to Users in the EU in First Half of 2024

[Dade Murphy]

Also, because in my experience it’s not an obvious setting you need to enable to be allowed to install third party apps.

I’m no longer sure (and can’t check) if you need to become a “developer” on an Android device to be able to do it but that’s at least the way I remember it.

There’s only one legit reason for seeking apps from a different source than the play store, and that’s if an app was just updated and maybe it fixes and issue for you or brings a new feature you like, but hasn’t quite made it to the play store yet (surprise, surprise).

The only other reason to seek an app outside of the play store, is to pirate it

Also, because in my experience it’s not an obvious setting you need to enable to be allowed to install third party apps.

I’m no longer sure (and can’t check) if you need to become a “developer” on an Android device to be able to do it but that’s at least the way I remember it.

The EU doesn't have to care, because they are not the ones who have to deal with the fallout. Any scams will come under the purview of law enforcement and banks, while it's Apple who takes the reputation hit if and when news of the first user to be tricked into sideloading malware from Facebook ads hits the news.

I would totally do the same thing were I in their shoes, and that doesn't stop me from recognising a farce when I see one.

I guess I meant the people of the EU. All I hear is how the EU forced Apple to do this and that and how we’re so happy. First off, the EU didn’t force Apple to do anything. And secondly, we’ll see how long it takes to wipe that smirk off of their faces, LMAO

 

[Ctrlos]

What's not fair is legislating everything to be the same just because you don't like the differences.

Lets put it another way: how many Apple users really hate Siri and wish they could replace it with a different voice assistant but can't because Apple says so?

 

[Ctrlos]

I have no idea how that's not fair. Platforms have always differentiated on the software and features that they offer. Choose the one you like better. Or choose both. Getting everything you want isn't a right.

I want to play PlayStation games but it means cutting myself off from Xbox titles.

I want to play Xbox titles but it means cutting myself off from PlayStation games.

I can buy a Steamdeck and play both sides equally and a whole lot more.

Open platforms are better for everyone.

 

[Dade Murphy]

because

Piracy is a separate issue tho, and an individuals responsibility. Just because people do things illegally doesn’t necessarily mean you should prevent people to use it for legal purposes.

Well you can argue the difference, but the principle of it still is your personal computing device aren’t anymore different just because it’s market as a handheld telecommunication computer.

And EU is winning because it’s their market and their rules.

Well it seems kind of important to protect the principle of the thing, no? Like the principle of some rights are more important than the practical implications such as rights and freedoms we believe in?



Well do you think it will impact them more than when articles pops up once in awhile about some app containing malware that was distributed through the AppStore?

You really need to reply to one person at a time so I don’t have to drag your whole comment down here. Unless there’s a mobile trick I don’t know about.

Now, getting back to it. 9 times out of 10, that’s exactly why people want to sideload, to pirate. Otherwise, grab the app from the store. I can’t tell you how many people wished they could sideload so they could install Vanced. 🤦🏻‍♂️

As far as the principle of a mobile device and a PC, being the same, only remotely. But when you step back for a minute and look at each platform separately, you begin to understand why they don’t want iPhone users doing this. The fact that it’s a mobile device, tied to a dedicated network, makes it a lot more appealing for hackers to try and access. Then there’s antivirus software. Most people have that installed on their computer, on a phone it’s seen more as a gimmick because the user is the first line of defense against malware or viruses. Or in the case of iPhone, Apple made sure you couldn’t download those sort of apps. Not to say that every app in the App Store is perfect, but I don’t think any of them have nefarious code installed. I could go on, but we’ll stop there for that segment, lol.

As far as the EU winning because it’s their market and their rules, you obviously didn’t get my Charlie sheen reference m. He thought he held all the cards as well, until he didn’t….

 

[Ctrlos]

I can understand the desire to having products that don’t require you to make any compromises, but unless you regulate that every product be the same (and thus eliminate competition), you will never get that.

With Software I can get away with it though because the PC marketplace exists. If I don't want the hassle of building my own rig I can always buy a Steamdeck or ROG Ally that plug into the same backend. You can still have an open platform and competition.

 

[Dade Murphy]

The thing is that the iOS App Store is home to far less scams than the google play store at least, and even then, those apps tend to be relegated to attempting to get users to sign up for expensive subscriptions (which can be monitored and terminated via the app store's subscription tab), plus Apple has the ability to remove them at a moment's notice.

I don't believe anyone can argue that a centrally managed App Store is any less secure than simply allowing users to download any app they want from any source.

I think what often goes unacknowledged in discussions like this are the merits of the iOS App Store. A lot of people like to complain about the 30% cut, but they don't recognise the role the app store plays in growing the overall pie for everybody. It's safe and secure for customers to purchase apps via iTunes (since developers never get our payment details), piracy is less rampant (because you can't sideload), which in turn translates to users buying more apps and more sales for the developer.

Whether Apple's approach is heavy-handed or not, one cannot deny that they have solved a lot of the issues with purchasing things online by greatly reducing the friction, and increasing the trust involved in such transactions from having Apple act as an intermediary. Things like this are rarely ever right or wrong in an absolute sense, but rather, a measure of tradeoffs. How does one decide whether the utility of being able to sideload apps for a small group of more tech-savvy users is worth more than say, the ability to prevent a larger populace of less tech-savvy users from being potentially scammed of their life savings?

Because every response I have seen so far in this (and other similar threads) basically boils down to - that is their problem, not mine. And maybe it's a fair thing to say, because that's the truth. It really isn't your problem, or mine, or anyone else but Apple's.

I’m glad you mentioned Apple’s profit take from apps on the store. People can’t seem to understand that.

Well, if you walk into a Walmart or any other major chain store and you want to sell your product, you can be assured that you will be paying not only for that space, but more importantly, for being under the umbrella of a very well known chain. App developers receive more coverage as well as the benefits of being in the store, as you just mentioned.

As far as the whole forkknife(gen x’ers, making fun of Fortnite’s name) fiasco, the same applies. If you want to keep your app in the store, you’re gonna hand over some of the profits you made from people who downloaded from said store.

They’re all happy now because they don’t have to pay apple anything, which is correct, but I guarantee you the downloads as well as profits have undoubtedly taken a nosedive.

 

[Dade Murphy]

Let’s put it another way: how many Apple users really hate Siri and wish they could replace it with a different voice assistant but can't because Apple says so?

Valid point but that’s more of a trade off. Most people hate Siri but understand she’s stupid because she doesn’t have a massive database of user info and recordings to pull from. I imagine any other assistant would be similar.

So, would I like to replace Siri, sure, but with what? If privacy is first and foremost to you, you eat the bullet and trudge on. Whether or not Apple lets you, is moot. But for the record, I am sure you could install any other assistant, it just won’t be as heavily integrated as Siri, naturally.

I mean, I knew well before I purchased the iPhone that the keyboard and assistant were ****, but I was willing to make the compromise and trade off a good assistant and keyboard for not allowing a corporation to track every damn thing I do, even down to
My bowel movements, lol.

 

[MilaM]

Well, if you walk into a Walmart or any other major chain store

This is a great analogy. The App Store is like the only store in town (be it Walmart or any other chain). Because there is no competition, they can set prices as they wish. Very bad for consumers.

Here is a provocative thought. Apple can make the App Store much more attractive for developers so that it's more profitable to stay and not publish their apps in other stores. Developers have complained about many things other than the amount of fees. Arbitrary rules that are not enforced consistently. No upgrade pricing as an alternative to subscriptions. Unpredictable app reviews that take weeks.

 

[wanha]

Well it seems kind of important to protect the principle of the thing, no? Like the principle of some rights are more important than the practical implications such as rights and freedoms we believe in?

Yes, principles are certainly important.

And yet, a principle is only as useful as its implementation.

Implement a poorly thought out policy and you end up causing more harm than good in the name of a good principle, but this is where much of the world is these days - too idealistic and not pragmatic enough.

Implementation is hard, but that's where the real payoff lies.

 

[votdfak]

Let the piracy begin. Because, let’s face it, that why most people want this ability, so they can steal from app devs.

The EU thinks they’re winning, charlie sheen thought that as well. Welcome to the sh*tshow, LMMFAO

As far as why you can sideload on a mac but not on an iPhone? If I have to explain that to you, you probably shouldn’t be on a tech site…

Yes, please explain the difference between macOS vs iOS.

Also, like 90% of apps are free already. Devs can implement activation methods to prevent piracy.

 

[Dade Murphy]

I want to play PlayStation games but it means cutting myself off from Xbox titles.

I want to play Xbox titles but it means cutting myself off from PlayStation games.

I can buy a Steamdeck and play both sides equally and a whole lot more.

Open platforms are better for

I want to play PlayStation games but it means cutting myself off from Xbox titles.

I want to play Xbox titles but it means cutting myself off from PlayStation games.

I can buy a Steamdeck and play both sides equally and a whole lot more.

Open platforms are better for everyone.

This is the exact opposite of what you want, because now you’re cutting off profits from the other two platforms. Which may seem ok right now, until they stop releasing titles and you’re screwed.

Having titles locked to one platform is actually really good business, for the business. Is it good for the consumer, no, but you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

If you want companies like PlayStation and X box to continue to produce titles, they need to be making money and if your cannibalizing their profits because you want the best of both worlds, guess who going to ultimately lose that battle? You guessed it, the consumer.

So, while you may feel like you have a victory in the short term, in the long term, you just screwed yourself.

 

[Dade Murphy]

Yes, please explain the difference between macOS vs iOS.

Also, like 90% of apps are free already. Devs can implement activation methods to prevent piracy.

I told you, if I have to explain it, you’re on the wrong site, lol.

As far as whatever else fell out of your mouth, I’ve no clue what you’re trying to say. No, 90% of apps are not free, and if they are, they hide the pro features behind a paywall.

Now, yes, developers can defend against certain attempts at using pirated apps, but not all and not in every instance.
The reason I know this is why people want it, is not just because they have said as much, but because for the first few years on Android, I did the same thing. Why pay for something you can get for free, f**k the dev.

My only hope is that iOS apps are harder to crack which will leave a lot of upset people. All that armchair activism for nothing, LMAO.

 

[BanjoDudeAhoy]

There’s only one legit reason for seeking apps from a different source than the play store, and that’s if an app was just updated and maybe it fixes and issue for you or brings a new feature you like, but hasn’t quite made it to the play store yet (surprise, surprise).

The only other reason to seek an app outside of the play store, is to pirate it

Piracy is surely an issue, that can't be denied, I think. But I disagree with the other points being the only legit reason.

As mentioned somewhere before, I bought a whole bunch of games from Humble Bundle that the developers provided Android versions for that were (for one reason or another) not on the play store. Those are legitimate.
Of course, it could be (and likely has been) abused if someone decides to just host the APKs elsewhere for free.

Also, as a game developer myself, I exchanged APKs with fellow developers to playtest each other's games. That's possible, too, by uploading it as an unlisted alpha or the like on the play store and adding people as testers. But for games you made for fun for a jam or something that's some unnecessary hoop jumping right there. Also, entirely legitimate.

These are edge cases, I imagine, and it's something I wouldn't advise most users should do.

 

[Dade Murphy]

Apple desperate to fear monger

"Privacy & security"

So iOS/iPadOS users can more readily accept the digital prison they are in.

It’s only a prison if you’re on the outside looking in. 😂

 

[cgs1xx]

Oh God… get ready for iPhones crashing, frozen apps and hacks!! Hopefully, there will be a way to also lock this out (not just choosing to not use it).

 

[Dade Murphy]

Piracy is surely an issue, that can't be denied, I think. But I disagree with the other points being the only legit reason.

As mentioned somewhere before, I bought a whole bunch of games from Humble Bundle that the developers provided Android versions for that were (for one reason or another) not on the play store. Those are legitimate.
Of course, it could be (and likely has been) abused if someone decides to just host the APKs elsewhere for free.

Also, as a game developer myself, I exchanged APKs with fellow developers to playtest each other's games. That's possible, too, by uploading it as an unlisted alpha or the like on the play store and adding people as testers. But for games you made for fun for a jam or something that's some unnecessary hoop jumping right there. Also, entirely legitimate.

These are edge cases, I imagine, and it's something I wouldn't advise most users should do.

Yes they are very niche cases, but still valid. It’s my understanding that Apple allows you to sideload your apps if you are in the developer program. It’s not ideal to have to pay for the feature, but it is there.

To reiterate, yes there are a few one off scenarios for other legit reasons, but let’s be honest, most of the people only want it so they can install modified apps. I’ve heard it from dozens of people,”when will Apple let us sideload so I can install vanced”.

 

[Dade Murphy]

Oh God… get ready for iPhones crashing, frozen apps and hacks!! Hopefully, there will be a way to also lock this out (not just choosing to not use it).

It’s probably similar to ticking the OEM unlock button on Android. Except instead of getting a warning about security, you’ll get a message that says you’re on your own, no more updates for you, LMAO.

 

[jlc1978]

Piracy is a separate issue tho, and an individuals responsibility. Just because people do things illegally doesn’t necessarily mean you should prevent people to use it for legal purposes.

I like to speculate about the impact it will have on smaller developers and ultimately consumers. They and we might wind up being collateral damage as the major companies reap the benefits.

Developers will be forced to implement methods to combat piracy, increasing their costs or forcing them to go to subscription models so as to make pirated copies unattractive. This means finding a way to manage subscriptions and collect payments; adding to costs outside the Ap Store if they so chose to distribute. Consumers will wind up with fewer non-susbcription based apps, particularly popular ones. Companies such as SetApp may get deeper in the iOS business but I suspect the developer's cut is tiny compared to other options.

Sideloading may very well change the model for how iOS apps are sold; even as the App Store remains the platform of choice.

I think what often goes unacknowledged in discussions like this are the merits of the iOS App Store. A lot of people like to complain about the 30% cut

Which is much less than what developers used to get. If it was so bad they would stick to other distribution models and not sell via the App Store; I suspect for many if they do have other distribution models teh App Store generates the most revenue.

I can buy a Steamdeck and play both sides equally and a whole lot more.

Open platforms are better for everyone.

Unless companies release popular titles as exclusives to drive console sales.

Also, like 90% of apps are free already.

A lot of the free ones are also feature limited and require a purchase to unlock others.

Devs can implement activation methods to prevent piracy.

Which generally are quickly broken. I remember in the heyday of jailbreaking developers complaining about piracy and the difficulty of preventing it. A popular mapping software was one example that springs to mind.

I suspect we'll see more fremium with subscription apps as one way to counter piracy.

Sideloading can bring benefits, but there are also downsides to it.

One benefit to Apple is if an app adds features, that can only be done via a sideloaded app, that turn out to be popular Apple can Sherlock it without impacting App Store revenue. Free market testing for Apple.

 

[Ctrlos]

This is the exact opposite of what you want, because now you’re cutting off profits from the other two platforms. Which may seem ok right now, until they stop releasing titles and you’re screwed.

Having titles locked to one platform is actually really good business, for the business. Is it good for the consumer, no, but you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

If you want companies like PlayStation and X box to continue to produce titles, they need to be making money and if your cannibalizing their profits because you want the best of both worlds, guess who going to ultimately lose that battle? You guessed it, the consumer.

So, while you may feel like you have a victory in the short term, in the long term, you just screwed yourself.

Tell that to Sega!

 

[Ctrlos]

Unless companies release popular titles as exclusives to drive console sales.

Open platforms are great but then again so is the pull of Nintendo....

 

[jlc1978]

Now, yes, developers can defend against certain attempts at using pirated apps, but not all and not in every instance.
The reason I know this is why people want it, is not just because they have said as much, but because for the first few years on Android, I did the same thing. Why pay for something you can get for free, f**k the dev.

Free always beats pay if free is easy to get. I remember when developers used disk based copy protection which lead to teh proliferation of bit copiers. Computer club meetings were often swap fests and warz BBS abounded. Now, with the internet, simple Google searches can turn up ways to get apps for free. Of course, it also adds ways to insert malware...

Also, as a game developer myself, I exchanged APKs with fellow developers to playtest each other's games.

I'm curious - what's your take on sideloading and the possiblity of greater piracy?

Oh God… get ready for iPhones crashing, frozen apps and hacks!! Hopefully, there will be a way to also lock this out (not just choosing to not use it).

Chosing not to use it is the best defense, along with Apple implementing various sandboxing protections. The problem is when popular apps decide to be sideload only.

I’ve heard it from dozens of people,”when will Apple let us sideload so I can install vanced”.

Which is a desire to raise the Jolly Roger ...

Seriously, if things like vanced become widespread Google will have to find other ways to generate revenue and make vanced unusable.

The basic problem is human nature - people want things for free, justify it because "they are sticking it to the man," and "the man" looks to other ways to protect their revenue. It becomes a cat and mouse game.

 

[Samplasion]

There’s only one legit reason for seeking apps from a different source than the play store, and that’s if an app was just updated and maybe it fixes and issue for you or brings a new feature you like, but hasn’t quite made it to the play store yet (surprise, surprise).

The only other reason to seek an app outside of the play store, is to pirate it

I guess Open Source developers, new developers who are just getting started, and devs who don't want to pay 99$/year to distribute their apps have just vanished. As it stands, I'm fading too!

 

[webkit]

Other than the EU it’s a take it or leave it package. You don’t get to pick and choose what you want to vote your $$$ with.

The introduction of sideloading and alternative app stores on iOS doesn’t necessarily prevent someone from not sideloading or not using app stores other than Apple's but it does give iPhone users a greater ability to "vote with their $$$" by picking where they want to get their apps. Again, Apple's current restrictions prevent iPhone users from being able to "vote with their $$$" when it comes to purchasing/acquiring apps.

 

[Samplasion]

I’m glad you mentioned Apple’s profit take from apps on the store. People can’t seem to understand that.

Well, if you walk into a Walmart or any other major chain store and you want to sell your product, you can be assured that you will be paying not only for that space, but more importantly, for being under the umbrella of a very well known chain. App developers receive more coverage as well as the benefits of being in the store, as you just mentioned.

As far as the whole forkknife(gen x’ers, making fun of Fortnite’s name) fiasco, the same applies. If you want to keep your app in the store, you’re gonna hand over some of the profits you made from people who downloaded from said store.

They’re all happy now because they don’t have to pay apple anything, which is correct, but I guarantee you the downloads as well as profits have undoubtedly taken a nosedive.

You see, that actually makes sense. But then you factor in that you're not forced to go to Walmart. You can go to Costco, Best Buy or Target (I don't know the difference, i only know them by name, sorry)
To go back to the point being made, the state you live in doesn't force its residents to only shop at a particular store because they get a commission.

 

[Samplasion]

All that armchair activism for nothing, LMAO.

As if that's the main reason for this change.