By the same token, those who value side-loading can just move to Android. I believe it's called choice. Seems like a win-win.
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 Bill Would Allow 'Malware, Scams and Data-Exploitation to Proliferate,' Says Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it wouldn't.Can you imagine the stock market reaction to this if it goes through? This could _really_ hurt their business.
More than 80% of Apple's business comes from selling hardware. Of their services revenue, a lot is from subscriptions and free money from Google to be default. IAP probably 5-10% AT MOST. Not to mention many apps would continue using the App Store.
Which is why Apple's behavior with this is bizarre. They are acting like this is existential for them when it clearly is not. Tim Cook is known to be a supply chain guru, but his political skills can't be written off either. He has done a great job keeping Apple on China's good side, as well as being the only major tech CEO to keep cordial relations with Trump. Why he and the Apple board are completely ignoring the current political realities is hard to understand.
Objectively speaking, Apple is the best positioned of the tech giants. They are primarily a hardware company, they don't practice surveillance capitalism (CSAM issues aside), the eschew big acquisitions, they have minority market share, and are generally well-liked by the public. Apple was in an incredible position to cooperate with regulators over the small aspects of its business model that are problematic, and then generally be left alone. Look at what Microsoft is doing. They have clearly learned from their arrogance in the 90's, and now lawmakers are leaving them alone and even view them as an ally, even though they are just as big and powerful as the other four.
Yes, you should be concerned, Home Depot was hacked, many large retailers have been hacked. Minimizing the number of places you provide your payment info to is prudent! Good devs can have no-name payment processors, see my post #126 which lists the CC processors of 2 popular apps, one has many hack references, the other I didn't easily find any but again, who are they? How well do they protect my data?
Sure, that protects that one CC, but every bit of your information that gets collected, hacked and sold makes it that much easier for someone else to steal your identity. Please do not try to act like this doesn't happen, why do you think when major retailers are hacked they all give away a year + of credit monitoring? CYA!
And when some folks don't have a good argument they resort to insults, however mild or veiled. Last night I saw one member attack anothers grandparents for falling prey to malware! Uncalled for.
I'm not scared, I'm a realist, hacks can and do happen... often. I also highly value the unique marketplace I bought into and some want to destroy that via legislation just so they can have their cake and eat it too. Please just go to android.
Last edited:
See that I’m more on board with. I don’t want this going after Apple because it’s Apple. And bringing monopoly arguments into the discussion. If you are saying across the board (including consoles) side loading needs to be allowed, I’m a little more agreeable. I would still drop iOS for Android though since the only advantage will be gone.
Any business that through a mechanism is able to charge and control the sale of things it does not sell by any measure is anti-competitive. Furthermore is a threat to the security of anyones properties but theirs.
This is the practice that Apple is enforcing with their App Store policies banking on top of peoples smartphones that it fully controls without even owning them.
The App Store policies effectively reach way beyond distributing and selling software programs / Apps. Selling and distributing software programs is where the a thing started and what was promoted. Yet today it charges the sale of books, lessons, music, dating arrangements, …. whatever sold in software programs that aren’t even theirs. Digital or non digital is just a technicality … there are no boundaries being regulated. So it basically charges a fee for anything it wants, it does really need to sell or distribute none of those things … even if if such a fee is 0 at points, it is what it is at their discretion banking on peoples smartphones and their good will … the perfect Trojan Horse unleashing the practice. Some might consider such thing an abusive practice.
The aim and the function of the App Store in time has changed dramatically. The name of this mechanism, App Store / In App Purchase is totally and absolutely misleading today. It may have started with that aim … but is reaching out to other kinds of properties … that of course the App Store does not technical have the capability to actually sell or distribute … much less serve!!!!!!!
This is the crux of the matter. It’s not sideloading vs sideloading. Its not security vs insecurity. It’s not Android vs iOS .. . Malware vs Non Malware … none of that is the core problem at hand. All of that is being used to deeply hide what is indeed at stake.
This is the practice that Apple is enforcing with their App Store policies banking on top of peoples smartphones that it fully controls without even owning them.
The App Store policies effectively reach way beyond distributing and selling software programs / Apps. Selling and distributing software programs is where the a thing started and what was promoted. Yet today it charges the sale of books, lessons, music, dating arrangements, …. whatever sold in software programs that aren’t even theirs. Digital or non digital is just a technicality … there are no boundaries being regulated. So it basically charges a fee for anything it wants, it does really need to sell or distribute none of those things … even if if such a fee is 0 at points, it is what it is at their discretion banking on peoples smartphones and their good will … the perfect Trojan Horse unleashing the practice. Some might consider such thing an abusive practice.
The aim and the function of the App Store in time has changed dramatically. The name of this mechanism, App Store / In App Purchase is totally and absolutely misleading today. It may have started with that aim … but is reaching out to other kinds of properties … that of course the App Store does not technical have the capability to actually sell or distribute … much less serve!!!!!!!
This is the crux of the matter. It’s not sideloading vs sideloading. Its not security vs insecurity. It’s not Android vs iOS .. . Malware vs Non Malware … none of that is the core problem at hand. All of that is being used to deeply hide what is indeed at stake.
Last edited:
Nicely taken out of context.
Reread my posts.
Sideloading can expose users who do sideload to an increased malware presence. What I am saying is that this increase is small and not the "end all" that Apple and others are claiming. If this was the case, Android, Windows, and MacOS would have been dead and buried long ago.
Apple needs a better argument.
Thank you! Yes, I use ApplePay for as many things as I can and it has nothing to do with "having them be some part of every transaction I make" it has to do with convenience, my phone or watch is easier to get to than my CC, and protection of my CC and data. You cannot possibly mean to argue that exposing your CC and personal data to MORE people/vendors/processors/hackers is a good idea?
Considering the wide variety of places I spend money. Another few devs having my basic transaction info is not that big a deal. How many people actually have tons of apps that cost money in the first place? I think of the dozens of of apps on my phone, only 5 or so actually cost anything. And if a dev or payment processor starts asking for SSN and mother's maiden name, then maybe don't use them.
Why does this argument remind me of the "Think of the children!" argument used not long ago?
Not saying it is wrong, just the scale is.
Is the App Store really the only reason you use iOS? Not the hardware, or software updates, or deep integration with MacOS and the Apple Watch, or AirPods, or any of that? Just the App Store?
I have to say, it sounds like you're missing out on a lot of good stuff.
I'm not sure I get your argument. You actually want to have to look at the "scientific" section of multiple stores for your specialized apps instead of one? You also state login as an issue, while I see that ZDN allows direct downloads do you really believe that alt-iOS stores will give up their chance at your personal info by not forcing you to have an account? This might work for some really specialized small apps but in terms of games? Tell me that the Epic app store won't force you to login? Any app that you need to purchase will require a login or your personal info to be provided.
I still highly value the one stop shop, its what I, and many others bought into, we voted with our dollars!
If you don't like what Apple is doing, vote with your dollars and go elsewhere. If your segment of the market is large enough Apple will change their policies. Forced legislation will not end well for any of us.
Last edited:
Apple does not have the best reputation when it comes to bug bounty.
Example: https://arstechnica.com/information...ang reported a,as security cameras and lights.
I don't see that to be a "problem" that is in the purview of concern for Apple
Again, is this their phone or mine?
(not making a pro piracy stance or anything at all)
Likely installing apps would require authentication of some kind, a stranger shouldn't be able to do it, but your girlfriend might because you could have shared your passwords with her. I would say that if you have those kinds of worries then you need to consider why she is your girlfriend at all to be honest.
Your employer already pays your phone bill and can see all calls made, if they want to they can have man-in-the-middle proxies for web access as well and there's really nothing you can do about it except find a new employer or voice your opinion internally. On top of that it is already possible for corporations to build apps for internal use which are signed using enterprise distribution certificates and don't have to adhere by App Store rules as a result.
Sideloading has nothing to do with any of the issues you mention.
Well that’s a compromise. If that’s a deal breaker make a different compromise.
Life’s full of them and whinging about them makes not the slightest difference.
Does everyone just want to be bubble wrapped?
I don't.
To be clear, on Android, Windows, MacOS, and Linux I get most of my apps from alternative stores or direct from developers.
I would like the same opportunity with iOS.
So you use four completely open platforms... and one that is closed.
But you want that 5th platform forced open to be like all the others?
Dang... can't something be just a little different? Does everything have to fit into the same mold?
I hear ya though. And you might get your wish soon. Keep your fingers crossed.
1. you know that sideloaded apps would still need to ask permission to view your data, right?
2. do you have the same gripe with windows, mac, and android?
Interesting
Can Apple delete an app installed via iTunes or the App Store without your permission?
I had always thought the answer to this was no. I have an app that was pulled from the iOS App Store (VLC) still on my non-jailbroken phone and thought this was proof that Apple can't remote wipe a...
Or, you know, I could discuss things on a discussion board. If reading opinions that are different to yours is a dealbreaker, maybe take your own advice.
Been doing the same on Android for the last few years. No issues.