I hope that the privacy and confidentiality issues are maintained so long as the user does not venture to sideloading. That's kinda how I'd like to keep it right now as generally, Apple seems to be fairly conservative overall when it comes to privacy and confidentiality issues compared to other private for-profit businesses.
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.
iOS 17 to Support App Sideloading to Comply With European Regulations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your example of what an authoritarian government might do is an excellent one.
However, I'd extend that to even supposedly non-authoritarian ones like the US. I can imagine a scenario where under certain administrations, the US government makes a decision that certain US apps can only be obtained via side loading.
Or, scratch that. The possibility of some US states requiring sideloading to use their apps seems even more probable than US federal government requiring it.
[Edit: maybe this post will get removed, but with the issue around pro-choice and women's control over their bodies being now such a hot social/political issue in the US, we can't take the issue of data confidentiality and privacy lightly. Some people can and will be prosecuted as criminals for taking actions to help provide certain services to women.]
Last edited:
Once again, you have every right in the world to stop doing business with Meta at any time you wish.
As things stand, and with Apple likely to throw scary dialogs in users’ faces for non-App Store apps upon installation, Meta would be insane to do so.
No effect on Apple's bottom line as only zealots will side load. The rest of their billions of customers will carry on with the App Store because it is friction free. As for the freeloader App Developers expect to pay for the tools and maybe pay per App installed if you want your app verified. Plenty of people will get burned as malware slips into these Apps (or is the purpose of the App) and Apple will take the heat for it as if it were their problem and their responsibility.
That's another great point. It opens up a universe of private companies skipping the privacy and confidentiality restrictions on the App store.
What the US needs is a federal-wide regulation (that is also applicable at State level) regarding data confidentiality and privacy. The EU has that with GDPR, but if you're not accessing services while in the EU, then none of GDPR applies.
So how do I set the region to EU, asking for a friend?
Security shouldn't be an issue. Apple shouldn't have to review every single app to ensure it's safe. If every apps runs in an isolated sandbox by default, all system calls are virtualized, and the user is able to grant fine grained privileges. macOS already does this somewhat.
Tethering apps that don't snitch to carriers would be nice.
Can't wait to be able to run Firefox's Gecko on iOS with uBlock Origin! No more crappy 1Blocker that doesn't work most of the time and costs $15 a year.
This has the potential to be a new renaissance for iOS apps. May also pave the way for a hybrid OS for iPads that acts like macOS when docked and iOS when undocked.
Security shouldn't be an issue. Apple shouldn't have to review every single app to ensure it's safe. If every apps runs in an isolated sandbox by default, all system calls are virtualized, and the user is able to grant fine grained privileges. macOS already does this somewhat.
Tethering apps that don't snitch to carriers would be nice.
Can't wait to be able to run Firefox's Gecko on iOS with uBlock Origin! No more crappy 1Blocker that doesn't work most of the time and costs $15 a year.
This has the potential to be a new renaissance for iOS apps. May also pave the way for a hybrid OS for iPads that acts like macOS when docked and iOS when undocked.
If it is not in the App Store then it will not be on my list of favorites. For the vast majority of people social media is their only phone use and those are free to download. If you want a popular App it has to be in the store.
Just wait until any regular Joe or Jane goes to get an App and finds out they have to give out their credit card and personal info to a third party. That will stop them. If it is a subscription then you would have to be out of your mind to turn that over to a third-party. We all know how impossible it is to quit subscriptions. It's never a simple click.
Agreed 100%. But will companies make a version to side-load and an App Store version?
If they don't, this only shifts the power from Apple to another company. The consumer still has no choice. Before, it would be only via the app store. Now it will only be via side-loading.
Apple should just stop selling iPhones in the EU.
We all saw what happened when the French’s retirement was meddled with - mass riots.
Imagine what they’d do if they couldn’t FaceTime? Vive la révolution!!
We all saw what happened when the French’s retirement was meddled with - mass riots.
Imagine what they’d do if they couldn’t FaceTime? Vive la révolution!!
Or even something as small as a kid's school requiring them to use a specific app for lessons which is only available via side-loading. There's not even any malicious intent there, but the point is that anyone can be "forced" to side-load an app by any organisation which has even a small amount of power over them and the ability to make their life more difficult if they don't.
Last edited:
The issue isn't Android or sideloading per se. It's Google and their spyware: Chrome, Android, and every Google service all exist to profile you and sell data to the highest bidder, from corporations to governments.
Thankfully, some enthusiasts maintain Android ROMs without all that spyware for those who still like the OS but are concerned about privacy.
Good point! And even if the school has no nefarious intent, this sideloading might open up the phone/tablet to some security issues that OTHER individuals or organizations can exploit (and will exploit). Seems to be not a good thing...
100% disagree. Consumer always has the choice. You have the choice to look elsewhere or don't buy it at all.
So many conspiracy theories here with doomsday scenarios and authoritarian governments and real out-there forecasts of what will happen when all you have to do is look at the Mac side of things where, guess what? You have a choice to buy apps from the App Store OR from the software company direct. It's been that way for years and no one complains about being forced to be tracked or submit to the ways of an authoritarian government.
People need to get a grip. Sideloading may save you some money or get you more features in an app that normally was only available through the App Store. If Meta wants to force you to sideload so they can track you, why would you want anything to do with them in the first place? Newsflash -- You don't NEED Facebook, or Instagram or Twitter. I don't use FB or Twit and my life is just fine. It's YOUR choice.
Whilst I wouldn't normally want something like this, I hoping it'll make it easier for me to install apps not available in my countries App Store! Being an international student from the UK in the US the current process of having to sign out of my primary UK account (which has all my subscriptions on & downloaded music) just to download a single app I need for class isn't fun as I have to redownload all music and videos etc each time which is so frustrating!!
Yes, I am happy they are doing that. But they're gonna track you no matter what you do. iPhone/Mac/iPad, they're tracking you even with VPNs. They may not be able to reliably track you, but with AI and machine learning, Amazon can figure out that an Apple device logged into your account over VPN is logged into your account. It doesn't matter about location then, it just matters what your account is doing.
Same with Facebook, it may say "Logged in from San Francisco" when in reality you're logged in from Saskatchewan. However, eventually you will come off the VPN and it will say "Approx location is right here/"
My company has a security product and for Android there’s a companion-type app, which is something very specific to the main system and cannot do anything else, but it’s a very useful side app to have as it gives some extra capabilities.
The decision to develop for Android, and not for iOS, was taken specifically because of the ability to side-load.
Application stores have fairly broad terms and they’re all in favor of the ecosystem owner (Google and Apple respectively), with very limited right of appeal and no protection whatsoever vs capricious refusal or later de-listing, which can happen, for example, solely for the reason of competing with some product the ecosystem owner has developed or is promoting. So there’s always that chance to spend a ton of money developing a mobile app for iOS and then have it rejected or de-listed by Apple, with no recourse.
In this sense, the App Store is profoundly rigged. Just like it was to skim very sizable percentages of fees for content they have no hand in developing, at all.
Perhaps you could make a case that having the APIs entitles them to a percentage of your application’s sell amount. But when it comes to media, streaming, newspapers etc., they have no case to make, at all. Apple has no logical or moral reason to force, say, Netflix to give up part of their monthly content fee, just because users subscribe in-app. It‘s pure rent seeking.
To add insult to injury, Apple doesn’t allow for apps selling content in-app to have a different price from purchasing the same content outside the app and completely outside the Apple ecosystem. This is again, completely and utterly abusive.
The hammer should fall, and should a lot of major content providers choose to deliver by side-loaded apps instead of App Store, it’s Apple’s unadulterated greed that made it so.
The decision to develop for Android, and not for iOS, was taken specifically because of the ability to side-load.
Application stores have fairly broad terms and they’re all in favor of the ecosystem owner (Google and Apple respectively), with very limited right of appeal and no protection whatsoever vs capricious refusal or later de-listing, which can happen, for example, solely for the reason of competing with some product the ecosystem owner has developed or is promoting. So there’s always that chance to spend a ton of money developing a mobile app for iOS and then have it rejected or de-listed by Apple, with no recourse.
In this sense, the App Store is profoundly rigged. Just like it was to skim very sizable percentages of fees for content they have no hand in developing, at all.
Perhaps you could make a case that having the APIs entitles them to a percentage of your application’s sell amount. But when it comes to media, streaming, newspapers etc., they have no case to make, at all. Apple has no logical or moral reason to force, say, Netflix to give up part of their monthly content fee, just because users subscribe in-app. It‘s pure rent seeking.
To add insult to injury, Apple doesn’t allow for apps selling content in-app to have a different price from purchasing the same content outside the app and completely outside the Apple ecosystem. This is again, completely and utterly abusive.
The hammer should fall, and should a lot of major content providers choose to deliver by side-loaded apps instead of App Store, it’s Apple’s unadulterated greed that made it so.
Why would a school use sideloading for apps that are free in the App Store? Think about it. Cost-wise, it's practically no expense to publish a free app on the App Store vs the school having to setup servers, etc., to distribute apps, etc.
Unlikely scenario.
I’m really excited for companies like Panic to be able to use their own pricing model now instead of bowing to Apple fixed price ladder and subscription scheme. Let the great new apps coming!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/24/remote-school-app-tracking-privacy/ - Much easier for dodgy apps to be dodgy by moving outside the App Store. No servers needed for alternative app stores.
Last edited:
Europeans are not happy with the EU it might not last too long in reality. It has been side loaded into each country, it's the definition of bloatware meets malware. So no surprise it replicates it's ways elsewhere.
Many apps will stay in the App Store but it means Apple has zero control over what they do such as privacy rules because they can just host their app on a website
That article is not about what could happen, but what has already happened, and it happened in exceptional circumstances. So it’s not clear that smashing this particular monopoly is going to make anything worse.
I don’t know why you are bringing this up. Enterprise is clearly not the target demographic for this legislation but public consumers.
What is even the point of your rambling exactly? If people are given devices from their employers the company owns the device, so of course it’s not far fetched to lock it down in provisioning and only allow certain usage. The same reason you probably don’t allow the install of TikTok even if it’s an App Store app.
If I pay for MY own device with MY own money, I get to do what I want with MY device, and YOU will get no control over it.
If a BitTorrent client was available to sideload, I’d do it. And no, not for pirating, I download a lot of live concerts and they’re shared via torrent.