Tim Cook: Users Who Want to Sideload Apps Can Use Android, While the iPhone Experience Maximizes 'Security and Privacy'

[sracer]

And that all sounds fine and logical, but ... Android exists. That's how it works in Android. How it has always worked in Android, and yet the Google Play store is still the canonical App Store for Android, all these years later. It's going strong. So if all these scary scenarios would come true on iOS, why haven't they come to pass on Android?

We don't have to guess or wonder what would happen -- we have seen what happens. Some truly massive/popular apps (Fortnite) will ask people to sideload, sure. But most apps will happily stay in the Google Play Store, because that's the easiest way, it's the path of least resistance, and it gets their app in front of the most eyes.

For real, someone explain it to me: why would the App Store fall into instant ruin in the face of actual competition but the Google Play store is still thriving?

Of course that's how it works in Android.... but Google is NOT making the kind of money that Apple is from the app store. Keep in mind that Google is an ad company. They sell ads. They make a pittance on Google Play. But for Apple the App Store is a significant profit stream.

For real... if you want to have a discussion, please refrain from hyperbole. "be the beginning of the end" is NOT "fall into instant ruin".

 

[Mockletoy]

No, but you've alluded that people who disagree with your stance have terrible character.

Also, I've not said you should leave, either. I've questioned why you choose to stay around -- inquiries are not commands.

Only the ones who think they get to gatekeep what people are allowed to want from the tools they pay a great deal of money for.

I mean, I could say, "give me sideloading!!!" all day long until I turned purple and passed out and it would mean nothing to the people who will actually make that decision, so I for really real cannot begin to fathom why my saying it makes certain folks so angry.

The truth is I don't even really care about sideloading. I can't really think of anything I'd want to sideload. A DOS emulator maybe? To play around with old software and games and stuff. But that would probably be one of those, "Well, that was cool for 5 minutes" things.

My main gripe is that Apple when it comes to being monopolistic, bullying control freaks Apple, in the glow of their historic success, is rapidly becoming worse than Microsoft ever was. The Apple I started out with hated guys like that. They mocked guys like that.

It'd sure be nice if they'd remember that.

 

[hans1972]

So send them to the Apple Store when they have a problem? If you don't want to do anything then don't, no one's making that your job.

It's the lock down nature of the entire system which makes it more secure and trustworthy. If they have a problem, I have a problem. By giving them a system which they have a hard time changing, they experience less problems.

So with iOS I can both help them and don't do much work to so. And both parties are happy.

Personally, I also want the same. I want just one place to get everything. Side loading goes against this.

 

[jman240]

I think the nuance should be side loading signed vs. unsigned apps. If people were only complaining about not being able to side load signed apps, then the obvious answer is: "stop complaining -- you already can side load signed apps". The issue is people want unsigned apps the ability to run, which is what a lot of the legislation will allow.

By signed are you talking about things like the BuildStore or are you thinking of something else? I'm not really aware of all the options here but really all I want is signed apps. Though I'd like signed apps without needing to install a certificate profile or other app store. I just want to download an ipa file and load it. Signing can happen just like it does for apps on mac where I don't need extra software just to load those apps for instance. Is that something iOS already supports? I'm aware I can use my developer account to load apps with xcode but I need the source for that and a mac to do it so that's not really the same thing we're asking for with sideloading things I can just download on the phone.

 

[Mockletoy]

Of course that's how it works in Android.... but Google is NOT making the kind of money that Apple is from the app store. Keep in mind that Google is an ad company. They sell ads. They make a pittance on Google Play. But for Apple the App Store is a significant profit stream.

For real... if you want to have a discussion, please refrain from hyperbole. "be the beginning of the end" is NOT "fall into instant ruin".

One of the mains reasons Google doesn't make App Store money is because Apple owns so much of the top of the market. Sure, Android has more market share, but it doesn't have the good market share. iOS users tend to be more affluent than Android users. They have more money to spend, so they spend more money.

Sideloading or no sideloading on Android, that would limit Google's profits either way. Also, sideloading is not very common on Android, just as it wouldn't be very common on iOS. Most people wouldn't bother.

 

[boss.king]

And this is a security weakness in iOS which Apple should remove.

Testing apps is a security weakness? Yeah, this is obvious trolling at this point.

 

[hans1972]

For real, someone explain it to me: why would the App Store fall into instant ruin in the face of actual competition but the Google Play store is still thriving?

Because not every application would be on the store.

Having multiple stores or multiple places to get software is not something I want.

 

[Mockletoy]

Of course that's how it works in Android.... but Google is NOT making the kind of money that Apple is from the app store. Keep in mind that Google is an ad company. They sell ads. They make a pittance on Google Play. But for Apple the App Store is a significant profit stream.

For real... if you want to have a discussion, please refrain from hyperbole. "be the beginning of the end" is NOT "fall into instant ruin".

See, I read "the beginning of the end" as rank hyperbole, so I was only responding in kind.

 

[Mockletoy]

Because not every application would be on the store.

Having multiple stores or multiple places to get software is not something I want.

Competition is the life's blood of the free market.

Monopolies breed stagnation.

Apple itself would likely benefit from having to work for it's App Store money for a change, if they were up to the challenge. Its customers absolutely would.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Does it offer Apple's industrial design? Years and years of software updates? Does it allow me to iMessage with everyone in my immediate circle who only uses iMessage? Does it integrate with all my Apple services as flawlessly as my iPhone and iPad do? Does it work seamlessly with my Mac?

All that aside, telling people to quit the brand and go away because they want a freaking feature you don't like is just rude and you should really quit doing it.

We paid our money just like you did.

It’s not a feature. It’s a security hole.

Most - and I really really mean most - people that have an iPhone just have a ‘phone’ in their eyes. Pages and pages of unsorted nonsense apps and things they download and never remove or need, cos someone said ‘try this’ on Facebook.

Toggle or not, people will follow instructions to get to a ‘must have ‘ app. Or follow instructions to ‘win a million quid’. For every 1000 of the Nigerian Prince emails that someone with common sense trashes, 1 person will believe it. That’s why it exists.

These are powerful mini computers in the eyes of everyone on this forum. And we like to mess and tinker. But we are a vastly small proportion of the iPhone masses. It’s not that they’re stupid, they understand the rules on a pc. But this is a phone to them. Safe. It’s not the same argument or comparison or even the same ballpark as a mac allowing it.

There would (obviously, if they suddenly opened up iOS) be a huge influx of trick software, emails and social media posts encouraging the ‘next best AppStore’, or even fake ‘real’ appstores. Like we all get emails that lead to fake PayPal pages asking for passwords to ‘secure your account’.
This means it’s also not any argument saying how android users don’t suffer from this (even though they do).

The absolute fact of the matter is - whilst it would indeed allow more choice, allow for proper floss and foss storefronts, allow devs to bypass apples fees; it would also, without a doubt, open up the os to nefarious factors that just don’t exist right now. No- a random metronome on the mac App Store doesn’t prove or disprove anything - if anything it proves the point. Nefarious apps already exist on the curated AppStore! Giving them easier ways to exist is counteractive.

No one reads pop ups. No one reads eula’s. No one heeds warnings if they are sure there is something at the end that they want. Or they trust the source, whether rightfully or not. People don’t care. Or people are tricked. Or people are stupid. Or people think ‘it won’t happen to them’.

iOS is the only closed ecosystem. The only so called ‘walled gardens’ on a phone. All of the others are not and are open. TC is right, if you want to tinker more or have a more open system, move to literally any other OS. iOS is unique in NOT allowing it, and is in fact a feature.

 

[hans1972]

Testing apps is a security weakness? Yeah, this is obvious trolling at this point.

No developers should have test devices with a developer version of iOS which contains code to help them in their testing.

It shouldn't be on production devices.

I know why Apple doesn't to this since it's more inconvenien, requires more developer resources etc.

 

[hans1972]

Competition is the life's blood of the free market.

Monopolies breed stagnation.

Apple itself would likely benefit from having to work for it's App Store money for a change, if they were up to the challenge. Its customers absolutely would.

I don't care about developers. I don't care about Apple having competitors. The App Store has seen plenty of improvements the last 10 years by having competition from Google and others.

I would in fact like changes to slow down and more competition would help with that.

 

[jman240]

Because not every application would be on the store.

Having multiple stores or multiple places to get software is not something I want.

I agree on this front. I want it work the same what I installed a browser other than Safari on my mac. Just two steps or so. Visit site for brave browser, click download button -> install. I don't need an app store for that and I hope to some day to the same thing on an iOS device.

Here's a scenario. Say Microsoft wanted to release their xcloud app that they actually made but can't put on the app store for apple's dumb rules. I visit a microsoft website and just download the ipa file there and install it. I don't need a microsoft app store on my phone, just the app, but I understand the worry about this also spawning dozens of 3rd party app stores. Thing is, I think you're in the vast majority, if the app isnt on the offical store most people will never go looking for it so to have an audience most devs will still chose to use the offical app store. It would just be nice to have options too.

 

[nebojsak]

It's the lock down nature of the entire system which makes it more secure and trustworthy. If they have a problem, I have a problem. By giving them a system which they have a hard time changing, they experience less problems.

So with iOS I can both help them and don't do much work to so. And both parties are happy.

Personally, I also want the same. I want just one place to get everything. Side loading goes against this.

So, if/when Apple is legally forced to allow sideloading, you'll have to switch?

 

[jman240]

No developers should have test devices with a developer version of iOS which contains code to help them in their testing.

It shouldn't be on production devices.

I know why Apple doesn't to this since it's more inconvenien, requires more developer resources etc.

You do realize you have to provision your device to become a development device to load apps on it from xcode right?

 

[Mockletoy]

No developers should have test devices with a developer version of iOS which contains code to help them in their testing.

It shouldn't be on production devices.

I know why Apple doesn't to this since it's more inconvenien, requires more developer resources etc.

Developers are the absolute worst people to be testing code.

A developer knows how the app is supposed to work. Only random users are dumb enough to find all the ways it can break in the hands of the average idiot.

I think a lot of the problems "regular folks" have with Linux software stems from that: most of the people testing it are too knowledgeable and savvy to be dumb enough to break it properly.

 

[januarydrive7]

Only the ones who think they get to gatekeep what people are allowed to want from the tools they pay a great deal of money for.

I mean, I could say, "give me sideloading!!!" all day long until I turned purple and passed out and it would mean nothing to the people who will actually make that decision, so I for really real cannot begin to fathom why my saying it makes certain folks so angry.

The truth is I don't even really care about sideloading. I can't really think of anything I'd want to sideload. A DOS emulator maybe? To play around with old software and games and stuff. But that would probably be one of those, "Well, that was cool for 5 minutes" things.

My main gripe is that Apple when it comes to being monopolistic, bullying control freaks Apple, in the glow of their historic success, is rapidly becoming worse than Microsoft ever was. The Apple I started out with hated guys like that. They mocked guys like that.

It'd sure be nice if they'd remember that.

Open debate and gatekeeping are different --- only Apple gets to gatekeep.

But posting something like:

I swear, some of these people would defend Apple if they were rounding up children and feeding them into one of those grinders they use to dispose of unwanted baby chickens. ?

suggests that this is more than an open debate. This calls into question the very character of people who disagree with you, simply because they think there actually is a fundamental security issue, and that security is more important than so-called "freedom" to side load apps that, in your case, would be 5 minutes of "that was cool." (Which, by the way, you can side-load emulators like retroarch if you have a dev account).

 

[Appleman3546]

I’m not sure why Apple is still fighting this, a country or court is going to make them do it eventually anyways … doesn’t matter how they spin it or put safety bags on it. Having only two choices (Android or iOS) is not right and is a duolopoly.

 

[hans1972]

Unfortunately for you, the courts / legislatures of the world are probably going to have some bad news for you one day soon.

I'll try not to gloat, but I make no promises.

That might happen but I am hoping for politicians around the world to be slow and make mistakes.

South Korea had a go this year and Apple just told them they're in compliance without making any changes AFAIK.

 

[cupcakes2000]

I’m not sure why Apple is still fighting this, a country or court is going to make them do it eventually anyways … doesn’t matter how they spin it or put safety bags on it. Having only two choices (Android or iOS) is not right and is a duolopoly.

If your above statement is correct then legally forcing Apple to do it would create less choice, as android and iOS would lose their key differentiator.

 

[Mockletoy]

I don't care about developers. I don't care about Apple having competitors. The App Store has seen plenty of improvements the last 10 years by having competition from Google and others.

I would in fact like changes to slow down and more competition would help with that.

Microsoft's monopolistic practices basically plunged the tech world into a years-long Dark Ages once, not too long ago. Apple will happily do the same if they're allowed.

Apple Safari browser might become the new Internet Explorer

WebKit engine is well behind the competition

www.theregister.com

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Wow, is this really Tim Cook talking about iOS vs macOS?

"...customers currently already have a choice between wanting a secure and protected platform or an ecosystem that allows for sideloading..."

I'm shocked to hear that he thinks my Mac is like '...a carmaker selling a car without airbags or seatbelt, saying it would be "too risky."'

Wow, and also Craig Federighi said my Mac is a "cybercriminal's best friend..." Holy moly Apple, and after all those great things you said about the new M1 Pro/Max. I'm so confused. Maybe instead of building these new Macs, and telling us how great they are, they should trash the entire program, and stop selling Macs entirely. They are clearly too much of a security and privacy risk.

 

[Mockletoy]

Wow, is this really Tim Cook talking about iOS vs macOS?

"...customers currently already have a choice between wanting a secure and protected platform or an ecosystem that allows for sideloading..."

I'm shocked to hear that he thinks my Mac is like '...a carmaker selling a car without airbags or seatbelt, saying it would be "too risky."'

Wow, and also Craig Federighi said my Mac is a "cybercriminal's best friend..." Holy moly Apple, and after all those great things you said about the new M1 Pro/Max. I'm so confused. Maybe instead of building these new Macs, and telling us how great they are, they should trash the entire program, and stop selling Macs entirely. They are clearly too much of a security and privacy risk.

All that basically free money they make on the App Store must taste sweet indeed for them to be so eager to throw the Mac, its users, and the entire macOS ecosystem under the bus like this -- they even did it while under oath!

 

[januarydrive7]

By signed are you talking about things like the BuildStore or are you thinking of something else? I'm not really aware of all the options here but really all I want is signed apps. Though I'd like signed apps without needing to install a certificate profile or other app store. I just want to download an ipa file and load it. Signing can happen just like it does for apps on mac where I don't need extra software just to load those apps for instance. Is that something iOS already supports? I'm aware I can use my developer account to load apps with xcode but I need the source for that and a mac to do it so that's not really the same thing we're asking for with sideloading things I can just download on the phone.

The iOS equivalent would be installing certificates or building yourself with a dev account. What you seem to want is the equivalent of a jailbroken device; there's little stopping anyone from jailbreaking their device to get exactly what you're asking for, so that option is also available to you. The issue at hand is the answer to this question: does a jailbroken iOS device have the exact same security as a stock iOS device? I'd argue it doesn't.

 

[dba415]

Another BS statement from Tim Cook!