Join the jailbreaking community then so that you can do whatever you like with the software.
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.
Apple's hypocrisy with app "sideloading"
- Thread starter DeanL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
…like supporting legislation and regulation to enable the software installation that’s unimpeded by Apple.
If I don‘t get what I want, if developers don‘t get what they want - let’s make the government force Apple to give in! 💪
No - Apple should just stop to impede the installation from other sources.
And enabling the same model as on macOS isn’t bending over backwards - it’s a small concession.
Yeah, **** everyone who doesn’t want it, as long as I get what I want!
Sadly, the typical selfish attitude that’s so pervasive in modern society.
Imagine that you are running a business and doing well. Then people step up and tell you that you now have to change everything in a way that you really don't want to. How would you feel? Of course you're not going to contemplate this, since your bias is already apparent.
For some people, all choices must be the same so that they can pick from a number of different options. They don’t care if that takes a choice away from another group. Everything must operate like the traditional windows/android model and nothing is allowed to operate in a different way.
Selfish? If anyone’s selfish, it’s Apple in their greed for money.
Did they develop the OS and tools? Absolutely.
Should they enjoy the fruits of their labour and make good money from it? Absolutely. They do and will do.
But mobile operating systems have become too useful, too important for other businesses and everyday life in society, to let Apple be a single gatekeeper for installation of software. The power needs to be wrested from them.
Calling it „changing everything“ is laughable - when the technical basis exists today, and Apple, as zorinlynx already (correctly) stated above, Apple does not need to change their operating system one iota. They just have to stop withholding the signing certificates from smaller, non-enterprise developers - and allow them to get them, just as bigger enterprise developers can.
I get that some people like and find comfort in being protected, nurtured, and governed by an almighty Big Brother.
But slavery isn‘t freedom.
Let‘s stop the newspeak.
Having less choice isn’t having more choice.
Providing new, additional choice doesn’t mean choice is taken away.
I fully support you being given the choice of limiting your software purchases to the first-party Apple App Store.
The choice is not being taken away in any way.
You may be unable to install a particular app from a particular store (your preferred store).
Those two choices are tied together today. Untying them isn’t taking away choice.
Last edited:
The way to ‘wrest control’ away from Apple is to create regulation that fosters more competition in the smartphone OS and ecosystem market. That way;
A) Apple gets to stay just as they are for the many millions who like that.
B) Apple’s control is diminished but virtue of there being many more players in the market
C) Consumers have loads more choices of different operating systems and ecosystems.
Win, win, win.
Yet we don’t seem to be prepared to address the actual problem.
I want the choice to buy an OS that does not allow sideloading. That’s the choice I want to keep. Any regulation should make sure consumers have that choice available to them else a choice is being removed.
Choosing to eliminate a feature from a device is a valid choice that consumers make, especially when it’s something that keeps them more secure. For some reason you don’t think of that as a consumer choice.
Last edited:
Pointless. Users and developers will converge on one, two, maybe three platforms.
They basically form natural duopolies.
Since iOS does allow sideloading, you never had that „choice“ anyway (since enterprise apps are a thing).
You‘ve been using a system that allows sideload for years.
If it’s just about who can sideload - well, you still can choose not to.
Just don‘t pretend, restricting me and others from doing it is giving you choice.
Absolute rubbish the above opinion. If apple went under tomorrow Samsung (and Samsung shareholders) would be happy to step in. Don’t let your narrative of having government intervene and break apple apart be confused with that smartphones are useful and important, not apple.
70% (more in Europe) of the market is for Android phones from multiple competing manufacturers. Android - despite having been created by Google - is a highly customisable, forkable, open-source, Linux-based operating system that should allow manufacturers to offer a diverse range of phone features... There are also a few non-Android Linux phones out there. You have plenty of choice - if you don't like the alternatives then that's not Apple's fault.
Your "dichotomy" problem seems to be with Google and its history of using its search engine/advertising dominance to force the independent phone manufacturers to use Google's proprietary Apps, browser, payment and search features (inc, presumably, the tracking to which you object) on top of generic Android. Heck, even Apple uses Google Search. Google have already faced several anti-trust fines from the EU - then suddenly we have this new directive that makes Apple - just one phone manufacturer with a significant, but still minority, market share - the bad guy for using the same business model that some games consoles have been using for years.
Is a one stop shop ecosystem unique? Yes
Should consumers have access to a one stop shop ecosystem as a choice? Yes
Will alt stores fragment and essentially destroy this ecosystem? Yes
If the walled garden is too restrictive will people leave? Yes
If people leave will Apple adjust their ecosystem? Yes
Let the market decide.
Really?
Again with veiled insults. You don't think the same way I do so your opinions are "poorly considered". Try and be better. We might never agree on the topic at hand but you can do so without resorting to this kind of crap.
Last edited:
Meaningless in this discussion. It wasn‘t and isn’t about smartphone sales - it‘s about software installation and the underlying operating system.
No one is talking about breaking Apple apart.
Your original assertion is meaningless. It’s a red herring, which is why the response was left in the first place.
The DMA is essentially breaking apple apart.
Obviously you are not capable of civil discourse without little jabs in every comment, noted. Also, it has nothing to do with my particular anything, you were replying to @mrochester not me, I simply commented on your lack of civility. You must have agreed since you changed your dig at him from "poorly considered" to "ill-considered", guess you thought that was better dialogue on your part.
Apples to Oranges comparison, AT&T was a monopoly at the time, unless you consider yelling out your window to your neighbors an alternative. If I were you, I might consider this analogy "ill-considered".
Anyway you frame it, it’s about operating systems and software installation.
Not Samsung stepping in - they use the same OS as every other relevant smartphone manufacturer (except Apple).
And two such systems controlled by single gatekeepers each (that have been largely in collusion about commissions, especially when there was very little threat of regulation) entail too much gatekeeping power.
It’s not. No company is broken apart.
As evidenced by the new business terms and Core Technology Fee that Apple want to charge:
They’re hardware manufacturer/seller, operating system developer and software application store operator - all in one.
Can you point to any actual case of collusion? And yes, there are multiple vendors, multiple version and multiple app stores. DMA threads the needle with some pseudo-legal regulations to ensure apple.
The company is being forced to give away its up for free. That’s breaking it apart. In order to retain some of the earnings the EU is depriving apple of, a core technology fee is being assessed
Games consoles are a poor comparison because I can buy physical copies from multiple retailers; Nintendo et al are not the sole storefront. An open platform on PC has multiple storefronts from Steam to GOG.
Multiple manufacturers fork Android but consumers still use Google.
Do people here realise that other companies are making changes to comply with DMA too - Apple just has further to go because it's coming from a more restrictive initial position.
It's not personally aimed at Apple - but it will become that if they keep playing silly buggers.
It's not personally aimed at Apple - but it will become that if they keep playing silly buggers.