Uh yes it does. Take a look at what Epic is doing on PC. There are some games that you can ONLY get on the Epic Games Store on PC. They are buying exclusives. What if I want the app that's only available as a side load or a separate App Store? Wait, before you respond, let me counter it. If you say "well just don't use that app", let me ask you this. Are there are OMG LIFE SAVING apps that are absolutely needed anyway? No? Then why does limiting it to one store affect you too?
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.
Sideloading Apps Would 'Break' the Security and Privacy of iPhone, Says Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Show us how the security justification is BS. Because you just seem to speak from emotion so far.
View attachment 1754155
So what you're saying is it doesn't really stay on your iPhone since Apple (and others) can still collect personal data. Seems like an oxymoron, don't you think
I am saying privacy is not about not collecting any data or isolating data on a device.
Basically, privacy ≠ secrecy.
Nothing....and I mean NOTHING can ever be perfect. We have laws that are supposed to prevent people from stealing, murdering people, avoiding taxes. Yet there are still criminals. Nothing.....NOTHING is perfect. So we should just not try?
I did not say iOS was perfect. But what it does is better than the alternative.
I have no problems with that. They can even require a special kind of fuel too. Or you can only drive it on certain roads.
As long as I'm informed before I buy the car.
Who actually went to court to just say No when the FBI wanted access to iPhone? We have had more evidence of Apple actually caring about privacy than we have evidence that its just a "line/pr stunt".Does not take too many pages to realise those common talking points got repeated once again here.
Duopoly=competition?
Willing to believe everything a private company tell you but get skeptical about something government would say?
Willing to let private company do whatever they want?
The list probably can go a bit longer than that.
Me would undoubtedly believe Tim Cook saying this cause he cares more about App Store revenue than user privacy. It’s just that saying protecting user privacy echoes user demands better and people would feel Apple is doing good thing for them, which we Apple device users have paid a hefty premium for. Well, only Tim Cook and maybe his inner circles know exactly why he says that.
The good thing is that Android supports:
* Alternative app stores
* Sideloading
* Using third party payment solutions
Seems like it solves every problem people have with iOS.
I already have a bunch of apps side-loaded on my iPhone. I use Xcode, write some apps, and sign them with my Developer ID. Or I download iOS projects from GitHub (there are tons), modify the source code to my tastes, and also side-load these apps to try them out.
This is easier with an Apple Developer ID, but you can use Xcode to side-load your apps for shorter periods of time just using your Apple ID.
Uhhhhh....its their product? You are essentially telling apple to FORCE their developers to enable side loading and probably re-think their entire app distribution process. So yes, they do have the right to say some things. This is like saying what right does a video game company have to prevent me from having this one setting. Devs actually take resources you know.
Seriously, what is happening to this world where product A can not have advantages over Product B and vice versa? This is exactly what is good about competition. I do NOT want ANY of what you stated, so I choose Apple. I do not like this forcing Apple to turn into Android. If you want Android features, go Android.
That is exactly what I am saying.
iOS does not have to support any of those things since Android does.
Well historically the Mac had no App Store until a few years back. If anything the App Store is a side loading method to the traditional Mac approach of just downloading from websites.
They will question it. I have had a dealer request service records before they would perform a repair under warranty, and they tried to say that because I used an aftermarket exhaust I voided the warranty.. They told me to take it up with Mitsubishi.
But, I think honestly, this is not quite the same, but I understand what you are saying.
Beat me to it. Car manufacturer's give you a seriously hard time with warranties if you do maintenance outside the dealership, or do something as simple as change oil yourself.
This is off the beaten path of the thread, but:
The (dealer) would (imo) only give you a hard time when you void the warranty on a part and then want warranty service on something related. For example, you change your ECU on a new car and the engine blows up. Do you think the dealer will replace the engine under warranty if they determine the ECU was changed to a third party?
Last edited:
Ransomware might be a decent argument, but if that's the case, Apple should explicitly state that, instead of tossing out generic buzzwords like "privacy & security."
And the burden should be on Apple to justify precisely how and why they think iOS needs to be a closed system but Mac OS doesn't. I'm kinda tired of only hearing it from people in a forum that enjoy defending Apple's every move.
Last edited:
As a developer: I love the App Store for distribution. It's so much more than just the 'App Store' that Apple provides - financial & legal; metrics; comprehensive review process; etc. Their commission is entirely fair for what they provide.
As a user: I love the App Store as I know that if it's an App in the App Store, the chance of it doing anything nasty is close to 0%
There already is a choice for folks who want to side-load all sorts of garbage: Android.
I have the entire history of major consumer facing general computing operating systems (other than iOS) allowing sideloading as my justification. Apple is the only major player doing this, and so far, the status quo for iOS is the only justification.
All of the defenses so far, from Apple and people in this forum, all resolve down to maintaining the status quo for iOS, because change seems scary.
Maybe some people don't think "change" is necessary. The App Store has been around for 13 years.
I've never thought "gee I wish I could visit some random website to download some untested code onto my iPhone which connects to a vast communications network..."
But yes... I know some people do want that...
You can't get an apple UUID over http, only from iOS apps. So even if Facebook has your iOS UUID, they can't link that with any info they get over a web page.
I’m asking for specific arguments and points, not one generic argument that is in fact fallacious. “All of computing history has done this, therefore we must do this”. There is nothing concrete in that. It is lazy and you come off as if you are engaging in willful ignorance.
There are plenty of arguments to be made to have Apps vetted for use. An open internet does not come without serious considerations into malicious actors out there. There is a lot to unpack in this concept alone.
I would say that macOS is the soul of the Macs. Without macOS, I don't think any Macs will sell. Macs brought in $9B of revenue for the past quarter, so I would think macOS is a key part of Apple's revenue strategy.