Developers receive the OS much earlier than the users specifically for this purpose.
But I disagree with the "10-year-period" refund statement. Will you refund your windows xp era software because it does not run on windows 10?
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 iOS Apps No Longer Possible on M1 Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But I disagree with the "10-year-period" refund statement. Will you refund your windows xp era software because it does not run on windows 10?
if they don't mind users from sideloading, they wouldn't mind allowing it in the first place which would negate the need for sideloading.
unless you're talking about banned apps from the app store in which case, my original statement about making a Mac app remains in tact.
They could start by adding an agreement to the developer T&C that gives Apple the right to release the apps source code and elements as public domain if the app is abandoned.
Awesome! I agree! I would like legislation to be passed that makes this possible for the both of us.
Laws can be passed to prevent this. Tim Cook can take a small hit on his yearly bonus for all I care, he gets paid too much anyway relative to his contribution to the business. The whole "additional cost will get passed to the user!" thing is capitalistic jargon that only exists because the system is configured as such.
I agree, Apple's resources should be spent on doing things that benefit the customer. Alas, they just spent developer resources on making sure that "1% of people" can't sideload apps. So either way, they're not exclusively using their resources to help "most users" as they wouldn't have spent the time and effort necessary to implement what was mentioned in the original article.
Incredible that so many people can allow themselves to be duped...
The iPhone, for the intents and purposes discussed is a computer. Just like the macbook pro or a mac pro. Do not be tricked by clever marketing and addition of an atenna.
IOS apps can run on M1 computers and iPhones. Therefore there is no objective rationale for a distinction, other than to allow app devs and apple to maximise thier profiteering from arbitary segmentation of when users use these different computer devices, and the contexts they do so. That is it.
If you can:
When using the same apple account and not face artifical restrictions in these instances, then there is ZERO reason this block should be implemented when you want to download/sideload the same the same app you could run on your iPhone on your apple sillicon computer/s.
The fact that Apple does this with the iPad apps only means there is precedent for this ridiculous practice, it does not mean its justified. The DUBMEST thing on the internet is watching consumers fight for unfair pratices by coporations, what a complete joke that people would defend this stuff.
The iPhone, for the intents and purposes discussed is a computer. Just like the macbook pro or a mac pro. Do not be tricked by clever marketing and addition of an atenna.
IOS apps can run on M1 computers and iPhones. Therefore there is no objective rationale for a distinction, other than to allow app devs and apple to maximise thier profiteering from arbitary segmentation of when users use these different computer devices, and the contexts they do so. That is it.
If you can:
a) Download the same app on to mutiple iphones you own
b) Download the same app when you upgrade to a new iphone
c) Download the same macbook pro app on to your mac pro machine
When using the same apple account and not face artifical restrictions in these instances, then there is ZERO reason this block should be implemented when you want to download/sideload the same the same app you could run on your iPhone on your apple sillicon computer/s.
The fact that Apple does this with the iPad apps only means there is precedent for this ridiculous practice, it does not mean its justified. The DUBMEST thing on the internet is watching consumers fight for unfair pratices by coporations, what a complete joke that people would defend this stuff.
Well no, because their IP should expire 2 years after release.
Do you get a lifetime warranty on every physical good you've ever purchased in your life?
Genuinely curious here, maybe you live somewhere with different consumer protection laws or buy everything at Costco or Nordstrom's.
But it's not a physical good. Right? That's how many argue it's ok to ship a broken product. It will be fixed in an update. The industry is set up to favor developers over consumers under the disguise that issues can be resolved. Only many developers sit on issues for months to years claiming a fix is coming. Meanwhile they sell expansions, DLC, and other products instead of fixing the issue of the item they already sold under false pretenses.
Developers should get paid. They should also be liable.
Too bad that'll never happen. Sony sells their PS5 hardware at a loss. If everyone suddenly went out to buy PS5 and used it exclusively as a PC, Sony would be out of business and PS5 would cease to exist.
There are consequences for overdemanding what a consumer has rights to.
Nope. Warranty and support are already factored into the cost of the device. If warranty can be factored in, so can this additional support cost. A law won't say "you cannot price in support into the purchase cost of the product" but even if it did, there are ways around it.
Preventing 1% of customers from doing something that potentially affects 99% of the customers in a negative way is helping "most users".
This is a wider issue, not only an Apple issue then. Just like Microsoft ending support for Windows 7, EOL of software happens everywhere and there is no perfect solution.
Correct. The issue is magnified on iOS because it's so easy to develop and sell an app without considering what it takes to run a business.
RIP. using ios apps was one of the reasons why i gone for the M1 in the first place.
You're right, they should just allow it without even sideloading. If devs want to give their users a better experience with a Mac-optimized app, they can. Same with how the iPad can run all iPhone apps, but proper iPad versions are better.
Apple walled garden strikes again. If you ask me any iOS app free or bought you have should be possible to install on an ARM Mac without jumping through hoops since the platform supports it. Again, with the disclaimer that the developer might not support it if they don't feel like it and thus it might have some issues.
Prison doesn't help victims, but we still punish people for their behavior. That idea is about reducing the motivation to act against the consumer. Moving code to public domain would, however, give resources to other developers who will help consumers. Maybe someone would come along and fix the issues in the original app and that would help the people who purchased it.
They can fix the issues but won't do it for free, so they'll sell it. If that's not allowed, then they won't fix the issues. It's work. Consumer either pays or gets nothing.
Also, some devs might not like handing over their software rights and just say screw it, won't sell there. It's Apple's fault in the first place that every frikin OS update breaks so many apps. Open source is subjective too; could release obfuscated code as "open source," as long as it builds.
Trick question. Windows 10 is capable of running nearly all past Windows and MS-DOS software ever
And this mentality is the issue. It shouldn't just be be an Apple thing. We need to cut into the heart of this anticonsumer concept of the developers deciding on the terms. If you want to profit via direct sales, licensing, or ads from software development than you need to follow the rules.
That's why developers need to be held accountable. Not companies. Individuals.
The risk reward ratio is way out of wack.
Honestly, it’s surprising to me that they even allowed this loophole in the first place. If I had an M1 Mac I totally would have made the effort to replace crappy Electron app Discord with a native version, but I guess it was only a matter of time before this was disallowed.
I paid for the ARM version of the app and I have an ARM laptop. Understand?
I can run iOS apps on iPadOS even if there isn't a iPadOS version available. This further proves I bought the ARM version of the app. iOS and iPadOS are different operating systems on ARM.
Last edited:
Link me to the Mac version of Prompt 2. As far as I can see, Panic doesn't make a Mac version. If you purchased the iOS version, you didn't purchase the ARM (or Mac) version.
I understand fully that you are trying to manipulate the facts to fit into your sage and dislike of not being able to use a app on the M12 that you didn't pay to use on the M1 Mac.