Typical government BS. Old people writing laws about things they don't comprehend to fix a problem that doesn't even exist. All while ignoring actual, real problems.
Just look at the companies complaining:
Spotify,
Meta,
Tencent,
Epic Games (Tencent),
ByteDance (Tencent),
Microsoft,
Google.
"nothing major", these are the biggest companies in the techworld.
It's their story for the average Joe. In reality they want to be the taxing boi and be able to sell games on the lucrative platform.No but the main reason that say Fortnite (Epic) wants sideloading is so they can avoid the Apple tax.
Typical government BS. Old people writing laws about things they don't comprehend to fix a problem that doesn't even exist. All while ignoring actual, real problems.
How exactly does it affect you in any way, shape or form? It’s a thing on the mac and has always been, how is this any different?Of course, but I would rather not have the side loading code at all. The only device I would like to keep the option to get software somewhere else is my Mac.
Maybe, maybe not. We'd need to find a politician that fixed a problem to know.. lol.Politicians that solve problems don't get re-elected.
It is a duopoly. The open source part of Android is pretty useless without Google Play services. And an Android phone without Google Play Services won't run the vast majority of apps.So, what duopoly?
iPhone users in the EU next year will be able to download apps hosted outside of Apple's official App Store to comply with European regulations, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
![]()
Otherwise known as sideloading, the change coming sometime in the first half of 2024 will allow customers to download apps without needing to use the App Store, which will mean developers won't need to pay Apple's 15 to 30 percent fees.
Writing in the latest subscriber edition of his Power On newsletter, Gurman said Apple will introduce a "highly controlled system" that lets EU users install apps hosted elsewhere. Apple also will reportedly alter Messages and payment apps as part of the changes, likely via a localized iOS 17 update.
Gurman's update contradicts a recent report that suggested sideloading could arrive with Apple's iOS 17.2 software update, which is expected to be released next month. The report mistook as sideloading-related some new code that has to do with an upcoming framework for organizations to distribute apps to employees.
The European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA), which went into effect on November 1, 2022, requires "gatekeeper" companies to open up their services and platforms to other companies and developers.
The DMA will have a big impact on Apple's platforms, and it could result in Apple making major changes to the App Store, Messages, FaceTime, Siri, and more.
Apple has claimed that sideloading will "undermine the privacy and security protections" that iPhone users rely on, leaving people vulnerable to malware, scams, data tracking, and other issues. Regardless of its stance, Apple must comply with the DMA or it risks fines of as much as 20 percent of its global revenue if the EU laws are violated.
In a December 2022 report, Gurman said Apple was considering implementing security requirements such as verification, a process that it could charge a fee for in lieu of collecting money from app sales. Apple has a verification system on Mac that allows users to be safe while giving them access to apps outside of the Mac App Store.
If other countries introduce similar legislation, alternate app stores could conceivably expand beyond the European Union. The United States, for example, is considering legislation that would require Apple to allow sideloading.
Article Link: iPhone App Sideloading Coming to Users in the EU in First Half of 2024
Yes, however. Apple can easily put a warning up before any of that happens to warn the user.I wonder how many will install questionable apps and then blame Apple for data loss.You will see how many people will say that iPhones are no longer as secure.
I can already see the headlines in the manipulative media
No, actually it's not simple. Once alternative App Stores with lower commission (or zero commission if you set up your own) become possible I very much expect the developers of some popular apps to make their apps only available that way, meaning it's no longer possible to get all the best apps in the Apple App Store.
What kind of performance do you expect with Hypervisor disabled on kernel levelI'm dreaming of sideloading a VMware app on an iPad to run macOS (using a mouse and keyboard of course).
My point exactly. It is a kind of natural duopoly, because the investment needed to establish another competitor are so astronomical, that even a giant like Microsoft can't pull it off.There's a distinction between wanting to have an open OS, and forcing access to proprietary resources owned by a company. The "duopoly" you're talking about exists as a natural response to a very complicated app ecosystem that will likely always have very few players.
I disagree. The mere possibility to establish an alternative App Store will keep Apple in check.But the larger point here is what you are saying shows that the efforts by the EU relative to the Apple App Store will very likely have ZERO impact on any of the concerns that the EU says they are trying to address.
Really? Democracy? Are you sure? Is that what you think we have here in the US?Congratulations. You have learned how democracy works.
Yeah, shady scammers will offer you their internet optimizers and iphone cleaners on every corner.I think we'll more likely see app developers offering their apps through multiple sources including Apple’s App Store. Only if they determine that alternative options work much better for them might some pull out of the App Store. The added competition could encourage Apple to make their App Store more appealing to users and developers.
The information on my Macbook is waay more sensitive than my phone. My MacBook is where all my valuable business data is which is worth far more than my messages and contacts. The argument that 'my phone needs to be more secure' is completely illogical.People keep comparing this to MacOS but don't seem to be smart enough to realize the data on your phone is significantly more sensitive than the data on your MacBook. Health, Payment, Accounts, contacts, etc. Most of this data I believe is stored on device as part of Apple's "Privacy" efforts. You know all those times Craig or Tim said "And it all stays on device so we can't see a thing!". That's what is at stake basically.
Lets not forget the whole reason this issue keeps coming up over and over again is due to the usual: Money
These massive corps don't want to pay Apple's tax because it's in the millions and sometimes billions.
It's not about freedom. It is literally a money play. I say that as both a Software Developer and happy Apple user.
And for people who will inevitably say "You don't have to use side loading if you don't want to!"...I find it hard to believe companies won't make whatever the third party App Store version of their iOS/iPadOS app cheaper than on the official App Store. It is quite literally inevitable since it gives them leeway to not be as scrutinized in Apple's privacy efforts 🙂
What duopoly?
In phone sales? There are many more than two sellers of phones.
In OS? There's IOS, and then there's Android OS, which is an open-source OS. Many manufacturers modify Android, are free to modify it. Thus, there are not only "two" OS's, but many OS's.
So, what duopoly?
No banking apps? No Apple Pay? Or you will understand only after you get a text at 3AM that some boi in Singapore paid for Disneyland tickets with your card.The information on my Macbook is waay more sensitive than my phone. My MacBook is where all my valuable business data is which is worth far more than my messages and contacts. The argument that 'my phone needs to be more secure' is completely illogical.
But that's exactly how the world works. Have you noticed what other countries do?You already have the choice.
Supporting a government mandate on how Apple must construct their private OS is the antithesis of "each to their own."