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.
Tim Cook: Users Who Want to Sideload Apps Can Use Android, While the iPhone Experience Maximizes 'Security and Privacy'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is that so? Where's the independent study for that? Would like to read into it in detail, could you please provide a source?
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
Strawman. The device belongs to the customer and has a feature set. If you are looking for a different feature set but another device or figure out how to make the device do what you want. But apple is not legally obligated to help you.
If you bought a Samsung tv and are annoyed it doesn’t wash your dishes…(have fun with that analogy)
avz
Suspended
Then you will have to force all vendors(banks, government agencies, etc.) to sign up to ALWAYS have the App Store version of the app available at all times so the consumers who prefer a locked down system have a choice to download everything through the App Store.
Maybe having a 50 parties political system WILL make the country less secure and more vulnerable?
Have a look at this forum. This isn’t intended to be a formal study. Stop using your haughtiness as a counterpoint.
So you have nothing, ok. Just say so, it's ok. You tried to make a point and it backfired, because you made it up.
This forum isn't representative for all iOS users and doesn't show anything to back the claim (quote) "that a great percentage of the user base does not want sideloading of apps" for which you're required to provide a source by forum rules (quote):
But again, since you confirmed you made it up, that's ok. If you go to reddit or other forums you'll find opinions all over that place, many people who want sideloading, many who don't, depending on where you look. That means nothing of course, the only credible source would be a independent party study which is statistically relevant.
Even then it wouldn't matter, this will be decided by countries/courts and depending on how they rule, Apple can either play along or decide stop selling in that area if it's not in their favour. What that means to their just under 14% market share remains to be seen, could rise or drop further. I personally don't care either way. If my iPhone doesn't allow me to do what I want with it, I go somewhere else. I care about "getting a job done", but sometimes these discussions seem more like a religion or cult where people are brainwashed, become sheep and then defend anything to the death... oh wait... 😂
randfee2
macrumors 6502
what a ridiculous argument. Who ever claimed that not all apps (also other app stores) would have to stay within the limits of what apple allows on the operating system?
Where on earth is the difference to any (!) computer on the planet. On your mac, windows or linux machine, security is not worse off because you as a user can download and install just about anything your want, as long as you agree by typing in your admin/install/root password....
Nuno Lopes
macrumors 65816
Apps features aren’t part of the device feature set. The ability to install apps and as such augment the device abilities is … In fact is one of the cornerstones of such a device compared with previous art. Have fun with this one too.
Raist3001
macrumors 65816
I see both sides of this argument. However security for me trumps any other argument and for that reason I totally agree with Tim. Buy an Android if you wish to side load apps.
I still like it better when I know the AppStore is the only possible way to install apps so an exploit of some kind where somebody installs something against my will is less likely.
False equivilency.
Many things are “criminals best friends” - should we oulaw them all?
(I personally distrust any form of crypocurrency, but that’s my personal choice)
Mousse
macrumors 601
Meh. I wouldn't mind so much if Apple did a good job of keeping scam apps out of the AppStore. Protecting consumers my derriere. This morning my wife asked me about some recurring Apple Pay charge on her bank statement. Looking back, she had been charged $5 a month for the past 6 months by some rubbish translation app. $5 a month for something you can do for free. That us the very definition of a scam app. There are
My wife is to tech savvy, so she got tricked into the subscription by an unscrupulous developer the Apple approved.
I'll say again. If they're serious about protecting their customers, cull the scam apps out of the AppStore. And build a firewall feature into iOS.
No matter how they spin it, Apple ain't about protecting you. They're about profit.
My wife is to tech savvy, so she got tricked into the subscription by an unscrupulous developer the Apple approved.
I'll say again. If they're serious about protecting their customers, cull the scam apps out of the AppStore. And build a firewall feature into iOS.
No matter how they spin it, Apple ain't about protecting you. They're about profit.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
I don't see the validity of this statement, I think it's a cop-out trying to hide the real reason.
Abusing people's desire for security as a false pretend to maximize Apple's profit!
Users who are not sideloading apps on iOS would be just as safe as they are now, how is their safety affected when other users sideload? Exploits of iOS are constantly found anyways, jailbreaks keep happening. Whoever wants to attack non-jailbreakers/sideloaders won't gain much here, at least not in comparison to the gains of the iOS users who want to sideload! If the OS is truly sandboxed well, where is the harm?
These devices (iPhones) are not a connected server cluster, they're individual devices!!!
Quick question: Why would it be unsafe on phones when it's normal for computers?
Take a guess 😛 iOS basically is a variant of MacOS, they claimed so at least (LOL). Does that mean that they do sub-par security for iOS, maybe get some devs from the MacOS team over to help? LMAO
I can imagine the entire Apple board of directory having dreamt of forbidding software installs on Mac computers just as much as they did on iOS for years now.
In the end, it's just common law. Everybody is used on it on iOS, so most people believe this makes sense and must remain like it is.... think again!
with Phil Schiller's words: "COURAGE!!!"..... c'mon Apple + Apple-Users, how about some courage!
I predict, Apple will lose this argument in court and will have to change their stance on this within the next few years.
____
edit
interesting to see, majority opts for the "courage" option of allowing what has been normal on any computer ever since they were invented.... so Apple, do the same for these pocket computers please!
I'm very curious about your post.
1. how much personal data do you store on your computer, I mean your personal computer NOT your work computer?
2. what is the value of your personal data on your personal computer vs your smartphone of choice?
- vaccination validation,
- passwords for various sites (if you're on windows the likelihood of the number of passwords could drop vs your smartphone of choice if not sync'd by the browser or a password management app).
3. you're critically forgetting THE most sensitive information on a smartphone that just cannot match equivalently on your personal computer:
- digital payments/ where you purchase how often the pricing amounts. Yes people shop online on their computer, but never to the amount of their smartphones today (also consider very intimate personal online shopping needs).
- The Secure Enclave - your physical and digital representation of your fingerprint!! THAT alone could hold some serious value to those praying and pushing for side loading to get personal data from a smartphone.
- Full contact information for auto-entry on iOS/iPadOS and somewhat MacOS. If this gets circumvented ... Apple would have to do some serious work to regain trust or push to persecute those that make that happen.
- Location data!
> where you shop, whom you see, how often , times of day/night,
- live camera data!
> camera's see ALL and combine that with location data is a very scary thing, not that the some info leaked by those in digital security space informing us of specific entities that can already access that. I still don't want some average Joe Blow getting that.
A flip to your inquiry about hogwash for iOS but open on macOS ... if open on macOS WHY are a few people so hell-bent on opening up beyond the App Store?
> what Apps or features MUST you have that is not available? Now?
> why not make suggestions as a collective to Apple and developers to bring it over to iOS or App Store?
> If you want to side load get an Android device it does and allows tinkering like crazy ... what WHY do you want to use an iPhone for?! Hmm. It's like wanting the best acceleration, top speed, sexy looks in a car BUT you bought a civic CRX and clamouring for Honda to make what that Lamborghini has lol. Yeah I know about the NS-X but that's very different than what Lambo/Ferrari or Bugatti makes currently or has in the past.
I have a HUGE feeling those that agreed or want side loading on iOS WANT the reliability of iOS or the flare yet mostly just want Apple to fail so everyone is forced to use Android.
Oh yeah and BTW your reaction count was taken far too soon being the first page post.
Attachments
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
You seem to forget about:
Play Store
PlayStation Store
Microsoft Xbox store (whatever it's called).
How come nothing about 'Control' in your statement about them huh?
Many of you may not recall smartphones of a bye-gone era. Many of you forgot the very FIRST mobile stores were from Carriers on feature phones or on the very first Nokia Symbian S60, SE UIQ / Motorola UIQ or Microsoft Windows Pocket-PC or Smartphone Edition platforms.
Moreover I encourage you to look up Nokia's N-Gage and how easily games where hacked. The amount of money that big game developers lost when a hacker leaked how easily it was to get a 256MB (2003) SD/MMC card with a file and download and install tones of games on it for any Nokia S60 2ND edition device was insane! This is what probably was the first side-loading effort. It didn't help Nokia at all, nor the game developers nor their market share. it ONLY helped users NOT willing to pay for the work it took to create games or purchase legit games on memory cards to use - that was the way back then as inbound storage was costly and very minimal in those days.
One of the biggest and oldest forums for S60 game hacking/sideloading was Symbian-Freak (no longer exists as of early this year). had huge amounts of threads and listed step by step guide.
How To Install & Play Ngage Games On S60 Devices
This method has been tested by me on E5,E71,E63,N95 & E72.. NOTE : Your phone MUST be hacked to do this. If its not hacked, clic...
harotechinfos.blogspot.com
It is NOT a wonder why people choose iOS, nor that iOS commands the biggest revenues/profits for software from within the App Store nor why it's worked SO well spawning PlayStore from Google to follow suit and then just why that platform has so few people willing to pay for apps. Moreover this leads to the hate against Apple and this push to force iOS to allow official side loading - when it'll only affect developers loosing their wares or spending a lot more time maintaining their updated software code across multiple sites or protecting their code across multiple sites that have corrupted and caused lost revenues.
THAT is what those that want and push for official side loading on iOS want that to occur. They're not willing to pay for apps nor are they willing to support developers. show me the numbers of revenue on Cydia and others for developers there vs users paying for such apps compared to the App Store and prove me wrong.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
True but I think the issue is whom (which developer or team or company) would get approval for such a certificate from Apple and what are the guidelines therein? How different is it from iOS?
As per your example Adobe, Microsoft and other major companies are big partners. Apple works closely with Microsoft (there team started off as developers FROM Apple originally to create office suite), as they do with Adobe and Apple promises more customers that would NOT goto Windows platform so it's a win win of revenue for each.
Can you see the same happening on iOS like that on Android? Most suers on Android don't even know what side loading is, less so how to do it, and more that don't care. Only the techs or geeks are the loudest voices of side-loading.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
lol .. pour diesel in your Porsche see how far it goes with your want. I don't recall Volvo making a diesel car but I could be wrong here. You can put any tires you want - that fit, but there are specifics in your owners manual that have recommended tire pressure, sizes, oil choice for the engine, maintenance windows that if you don't follow voids warranty in some aspects. Your rebuttal is too generic to apply to this specifics in a smartphone conversation.
Nuno Lopes
macrumors 65816
Just because sideloading could be there it does not mean you need to use it.
In fact if sideloading becomes the gate of hell (popular) as some people think, it simply would be indication of how the App Store model is flawed and unjust to users and developers.
But I suspect that would not be the case. And would instead pressure Apple to do better with the App Store and not rely so much in the stop gag to get a passive income on top of device and iOS licensing sales.
Apple is simply denying AB testing to device users …
Anyway, Tim Cook actual issue has nothing to do with privacy or security but Apple total control of users devices and profit from such a control. What gets in and what’s gets out and profit from that as well has sherlocking features into the OS and launch new competing services with great advantage has he sees fit. This is nowhere near the concerns of users privacy and security …
Now all this in abstract is not necessarily against the law. But the way it is done might be … considered anti competitive and abuse of users good will and Trust as well as market power. That is why it is called Anti Trust. In particular some instances in the policy it seams to be using device buyers not as its customers but as products it sells third parties access to for 30% of their digital services revenue.
EDIT: As for the arguments that its their product so they should be free to do whatever. Well that stance is mostly a luxury really in the modern age … that does not happen with foods and drugs, telecommunications, transportation, real state and housing, financial services and many other sectors of economical growth and innovation. Meaning the products and services in most areas of the human activities are built around specific governamental policies developed to protect consumers and suppliers against abuse … based on experience. Only big tech seam to be escaping from any sort of policies that protect users properties, such as their devices and digital assets but also including their privacy and data against potential predatory practices sustained purely by formidable technical control.
In fact if sideloading becomes the gate of hell (popular) as some people think, it simply would be indication of how the App Store model is flawed and unjust to users and developers.
But I suspect that would not be the case. And would instead pressure Apple to do better with the App Store and not rely so much in the stop gag to get a passive income on top of device and iOS licensing sales.
Apple is simply denying AB testing to device users …
Anyway, Tim Cook actual issue has nothing to do with privacy or security but Apple total control of users devices and profit from such a control. What gets in and what’s gets out and profit from that as well has sherlocking features into the OS and launch new competing services with great advantage has he sees fit. This is nowhere near the concerns of users privacy and security …
Now all this in abstract is not necessarily against the law. But the way it is done might be … considered anti competitive and abuse of users good will and Trust as well as market power. That is why it is called Anti Trust. In particular some instances in the policy it seams to be using device buyers not as its customers but as products it sells third parties access to for 30% of their digital services revenue.
EDIT: As for the arguments that its their product so they should be free to do whatever. Well that stance is mostly a luxury really in the modern age … that does not happen with foods and drugs, telecommunications, transportation, real state and housing, financial services and many other sectors of economical growth and innovation. Meaning the products and services in most areas of the human activities are built around specific governamental policies developed to protect consumers and suppliers against abuse … based on experience. Only big tech seam to be escaping from any sort of policies that protect users properties, such as their devices and digital assets but also including their privacy and data against potential predatory practices sustained purely by formidable technical control.
Last edited:
randfee2
macrumors 6502
I store MORE personal data on my computers and home network. In fact I don't sync with iCloud because I don't consider cloud storage safer than my own storage at home. iCloud backups are being hacked left and right and Apple refuses to encrypt them properly because of FBI demands - not sure why but that fact alone is a security nightmare. Any loophole for officials is a loophole others can abuse too. You tell me how this computs? Any iPhone security advantage is immediately nullified by Apple's lack of encryption for the backups that it wants every user to use.
stealing vaccination validation is worth nothing, I readily hand this certificate over to everybody asking. It's a personalised certificate that is linked to my name and address. In my country, everybody takes photos of each other's vaccination certificates in order to validate their validity.
I store my not so important level 2 and up passwords (like for macrumors) on every device's browser. I'm far too lazy to pasting them in everywhere (1password). The top level passwords are stored nowhere, not even in a password manager. So, absolutely no difference there.
That's why I keep underlining, that there is zero difference in security risks between computers and phones for me and most people.
I'm not forgetting it. I have the SAME data on my home computers than on my phone! Even 'worse', I have all of my banking history and medical data on my computers, which is not the case with the phone because I access it all via VPN in my home network.
what are you talking about? I have the same fingerprint information on other devices, Macbook, Apple provides it. This is my key argument. No difference between phone and computers!
So not allowing users to install software of their choosing is simply patronizing iPhone users.
I really can't accept any of this as an argument. You claim "full contact information" and other such data is only on people's phones, not their computers? Come on, what do people do with their computers, just watch videos and play games? No bills, no letters, no contracts?
I don't store location data on my phone other than image location metadata, sports routes etc. 'Find my' information is available on my Macs just as much as on phones. Triangulation is available in anything with a cellular modem, so many more devices.
it's getting old... where is the difference to computers? I and many people definitely shop more on their computers than on their phones, it's a matter of preference. Where when and how often is typical metadata that doesn't discriminate between phones or computers.
yeah... scary cameras.... Laptops have those. Even more critical is live microphones because they're multi-directional. Not just laptops, "smart speakers" and stuff. And again... no difference between computers and phones.
who ever claimed that allowing other ways to install applications is an end in itself?
first of all: it's about payment. I don't agree with Apple demanding a percentage of software sales prices. THAT is a key argument. A super expensive software can't be offered on a platform like iOS, because it doesn't allow competitive pricing!
open source apps that I want to compile and use... or my own written apps. Why should I have to either pay a subscription Dev Account or wait for somebody to compile and then offer via App store? All I and many are asking for is the same ability than on a computer.
oh I make tons of suggestions to devs... I am one myself. Do you think apple cares, LMAO. I made countless of feature suggestions or complained about features being removed.
Many of the suggestions I make and I have made can't be implemented in app store apps, because of App Store rules, examples and most of them have ZERO security implications, GUI customizations for instance.
Funny: The suggestion to lift the App-Storer restrictions are what you've just implied: SUGGESTIONS TO APPLE! ;-)
I prefer the hardware and the underlying system. I also prefer the underlying system security, yes ;-)
None of what I personally and most like me are asking for is getting rid of iOS, it's all about the App-Store!
By the way, I own windows PCs, Macs, iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, Android devices etc. I prefer the Apple devices for many things. The ONLY reason for owning android devices is their sometimes much better feature set software wise. For example proper Wifi-Scanner/Mapper, with actual signal strenghts - stuff that Apple doesn't 'allow' apps access to with ZERO security implication or actual programmable (!) HomeKit stuff. Why wouldn't apple offer an app that can run actual 'scripts'. Or GUI, phone settings... no, they don't know best. Why can't I see my battery percentage, why can't I 'program' the charging behavior to protect my battery life, why can't I...... these things have ZERO security implications!
I and most others don't want iOS security to be underminded... if you don't get that, I can't explain it any better to you and your kin ;-)
nonsensical analogy. While indeed I want the speed and power of iPhone hardware (I love it!), I don't want the car company to tell me that I can only use tires they approve and sell, or that I can't mount a phone on the console because they think it's bad ... LMAO. I purchase the car, I own it, I can mod it in any way approved by the FMVSS and NOT have to listen to what the car company says!
there might be some, yes. I want no such thing in general. However, I do want Apple to get told otherwise by government agiencies in many of their behaviors:
Right to repair, forcing them to sell original parts on the open market!
Customers OWN what they purchased. No company must not be allowed to simply dictate what you can and cannot do with your property (in accordance with environmental and legal rules of course!).
Nuno Lopes
macrumors 65816
All personal data on iOS is being synced with macOS. So if you use Apple ecosystem … basically all the data you have in your iPhone is available on you MacBooks and iMacs. Check Apple solution on macOS … it’s perfect when it comes to this. Are there such a flood of third party App Stores? … no. The concept of sideloading is there but it’s fundamentally transparent. Heck now even the core hardware is the same … it even runs iOS apps go figure.
Apple says Jump … some just Jump … Pavlovian reflexes I guess.
The current App Store configuration in iOS is no technical fatality driven by users security and privacy concerns. Write that in your mind even if emotionally painful.
Last edited:
randfee2
macrumors 6502
is this a straight opinion or sarcasm... can't tell 😛
I might add to my prior statement "in accordance with environmental and legal rules of course", that 'right to repair' is actually not a right but a MUST regarding all environmental challenges we face.
So a mandatory rule ensuring that servicing the device (hardware AND software!) is not just possible but incentivised! Doesn't mean that a company MUST provide this themselves indefinitely, but it means that they MUST NOT hinder others to service something... which implies that they can either do it themselves or allow third parties enough insight to provide it once the manufacturer stops servicing a product (repair documentation for instance!). In Apple's and everybody else's case: either provide free software updates and paid (obviously) replacement hardware to everyone who wants to acquire it OR hand out the documentation to do so (source code and circuit board documentation) to everybody.
regarding hardware:
Certified repair shops could happily allowed to exist but what's certified is skill, limiting supply to those is against the free market that is usually brought up in order to defend Apple's behaviour. It should be up to the customer (rating) to choose which repair shop to visit, same applies to App Stores!
I for instance don't need any 'genius' repair shop myself, so why would I want to pay extra for it. People who want their kitchen from a design studio can still opt to set it up themselves. I can repair most circuit boards myself, I find it absolutely outrageous if they won't sell me the parts or brick certain software features after repairing it myself.
It is this type of unacceptable behavior that must be stop and it stretches way past the App Store!
By not allowing customers to limit the charge current or cap charging limits (15-85% of communicated battery charge for instance), the companies effectively artificially prevent people from enhancing their devices lifespan and thus preventing people from less pollution. A simple but effective example of things that must not be allowed anymore!
sorry for deviating so drastically... other posts I forgot to quote now led me here 😛
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
Agreed. It’s your device do what you want with it. But apple isn’t obligated to help you outside the scope of functionality that they designed into the feature set.
Vote with your dollars is important to send a message to a company where you disagree with facets of their operations.
edit
interesting to see, majority opts for the "courage" option of allowing what has been normal on any computer ever since they were invented.... so Apple, do the same for these pocket computers please!
Never confuse random anonymous internet responses for representing real life. These numbers are 100% meaningless in the great scheme of things.
That’s how it would work. That’s how it works on computers. You don’t really know who you can trust on th e Internet. The App Store cuts that guess work out for the everyday average consumer. At the end of the day it’s Apple’s product if you don’t like for whatever reason but a different phone.
We're definitely not saying the same thing. I do not think iOS is castrated, at all. I think it's an elegant solution for a mobile OS that maintains user security with very little compromise.