How this rolls out will be interesting.
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
How this rolls out will be interesting.
It's a good thing -- even if your assumptions are right. But they probably are not.
First, if you want the "walled garden" experience, you'll get it. I imagine that will be the default, where sideloading is turned off in Settings. The App Store is already the gold standard, and the overwhelming majority of developers are going to want their apps to be in the App Store. Your experience will be about what it is now -- Apple will make sure of that.
Second, users who want access to apps not approved by Apple will finally have a way to get those apps. So it's unquestionably a win for those customers, even if they are choosing to give up Apple's vetting in the process.
Third, while you're probably correct that many/most developers will charge the same amount either way, some will not. Not having to pay 30% to Apple will be huge for developers and some will choose to compete in a crowded market by lowering prices. That's always what happens in a crowded market when an underlying cost disappears: some will take the money, some will take the competitive advantage.
Fourth, some customers (me among them) would prefer choice as to how I direct that 30%. On the Mac, if a particular developer I want to support is offering an app on the App Store and on its website, I typically choose to buy it through the website because I want the developer to realize more profit from my purchase. This also means I am choosing a different payment mechanism. Other consumers will make a different choice and that's fine.
True. But they can raise other fees for developers if, for example, they want access to betas, tools, app signing, etc. I suspect the overall impact on Apple will be far less than on developers.
Ok, buy a Chrome book then. Whatever fits the need of budget or compute(ability).
I would not hold your breath.
I doubt most developers, except big ones, will see any cost savings while reaching a smaller audience and paying for services Apple includes in its 30 or 15% fee.
Who's checking the third party store? Who(m) job is it to govern anything from that store? Do they have your best interest in mind? Or are they just trying to sell you something at a cheaper rate than Apple would (with the addition of the 15/30% cut?).
It seems as if most consumers to Androids platform. Have already had access to this for sometime. Most (vastly most) don't use it. So why should Apple change for a handful of users that will occasionally bother to install something outside of the AppStore? AND have to deal with the inevitable damage it will do to the brand/product/customer relations. It isn't worth the change.
You could be the target, or the device. Both are possible and both occur. I see more targets to get humans to infect their computers/networks. Then I do see the Nigerian Prince trying to give you his money and needs your bank account information to do it. But that is just luck of the draw.
Hum-kay.
SO? Do you have this same amount of angst towards department and or grocery stores? Say your local auto mechanic. They all mark up the price of the goods and services sold via their stores. However, at least via the App store, the price has actually gone down over time.
Yes. Apple isn't a government, it's a corporation. They get to draft the rules of their business.
As long as they are not breaking any "government" rules. They can do so. Just like Fortnite can charge you "X" amount of dollars/Euro/Yen/etc. for X amount of digital coin.
You play by the rules or you don't. Or suffer the consequences of breaking them outlined by the contract that was signed.
Great, then maybe we should all just break the rules. Everyone else is doing it it.
For the time (meaning current until this EU law takes affect) begin. Apple hasn't broken any laws in this regard. New laws are being implemented that would create a situation where Apple "would" be breaking the law. From what I understand (so far), they are going to comply with the law (which I personally disagree with, the law that is).
No, they don't create such rules or have any ability to enforce it. You can live your life with an Android in your pocket if you wish. No one is stopping you, least of which Apple.
EPIC will pay a settlement to Apple. It's the price of shedding light, I mean breaking the contractual terms and conditions.
I'm taking about the increased risk of third party apps being the vehicles of malware into the iOS/iPadOS/WatchOS platform. With vastly less checks and balances than Apple provides via the AppStore.
Also, because you will have said side loading means. You are subject to even easier ways to get infected by weblink, websites, emails/attachments, SMS links etc. That can have the ability to infect your device. Since it is possible to install software OUTSIDE of the AppStore. Or, possibly via Bluetooth, or NFC, or Wi-Fi networks. Since all of that will be available to anyone to develop for on the iPhone/iPad. More means in which to get to your device.
So, having said that. We should make it easier to get into? At least now you have only 1 known way in. Most other basic (computer means) methods wouldn't work. But, in iOS 17. It could be much easier to get into your device. Without having a nation state finance the operation.
Think about this for a moment. How is Apple going to prevent you (the user) from installing something bad if you really want to install it, without basically NOT allowing you to install it? And will that constitute a breach of the law by saying "we know it's bad so we are protecting you". Not being interpreted as Apple just not complying with the law?
It's more vulnerable "with" side loading. This is like saying you're just as vulnerable with a Firewall blocking 99% of the bad stuff out there, as you are without it. Just plugged into the internet modem.
When you create a device. You can build it however you want. I don't get the right to tell you how to build it. I don't get the right to "make" you build it the way I want it built. I have the right to buy it or not.
I have every right to think you're incorrect in your assessment. Not to mention, you have all those abilities with Android devices. So you're not at all forced to purchase an iPhone and live within Apples walled garden. We both have a choice to pick what works best for our needs/wants. I'm not limited by anything Apple does. As I can choose to leave the platform and go elsewhere.
My opinion is you (and a few others) just want that one thing. Apples walled garden brought down. So you can tinker with an iPhone for 5 minutes, brick it or otherwise get board with it. Then run it stock forever more and not even both with it again. Just my opinion.
If you're really that upset about this whole 30% cut, and walled garden thing. It would have been way easier to switch to Android and have everything you're asking for.
And yet you keep using these devices? What is tying you to this when you can choose something else?
Or just not download from shady places. I don't have any antivirus on my windows machine.
It's called ecosystem and cost. I prefer Siri over anything else. And I like Carplay, what I DO want is the ability to do what I want with my phone without having to resort to changing my entire ecosystem to Google.
So something the least amount of people do on the most popular platform. We should force apple to allow?
And it's not going to be limited as it is on Android. The EU wants FULL ON access, no restrictions. No walls, no boarders (just like the EU! Ha!).
Legit places look shady sometimes. I get very cautious when downloading DDU for example. That just has ads and is a shady “looking” place.
If it bothers you so much then switch. People here act like it’s the end of the world. You want Apple to be like Google. Fundamentally, that’s not going to happen.
Android
It isn't just "side loading". It is side loading via Settings permissions (by App) AND 3rd party app stores - like Galaxy Store, OnePlus Store, etc... Google allows both and currently Apple allows none.
A lot of people on Android use these.
Sure, you want to pay to replace my top of the line phone, the Homepods, my iPad, my Macs, etc? That is why I said ecosystem. You basically responded to my point by the same thing you said before.
Best tablet was the iPad. Currently using an iPad Pro 11.
I used MBP for years both for personal and contract work.
Added an iPhone as it was about the best phone at the time - still dabbled in Nexus.
I use ThinkPad X280 (Win10), X260 (Linux), X13 hybrid (Win11), MBP, IPP 11, iPhone 13PM, OnePlus 10Pro, S23 Ultra, etc...
Like I mentioned, I am a multi OS user. I am not "married" to a specific OEM or OS.
To be quite honest, I have some type of unofficial OCD about using the same platform for everything. It just feels "weird" to have an Android phone and everything else Apple. Sigh.
but to get full usage out of a chromebook, you need google play, and you can't get google play without sideloading on a iphone.
Who do you talk to when a sideloaded app busts CarPlay?
uhh,
you do realize the only difference in iOS and iphones in the U.S. is our charging blocks?
also maybe this is just on my old A02,but there's no virus scanner anywhere
Last edited:
Who’s checking App Store? You may say Apple, but I‘d argue not to the level you hope for. As for the best of your interest? Nah. Apple never had and will never have your best interest in mind. To believe otherwise is just naive.
And why Apple has to vehemently and furiously defend walled garden if android user favours Google play Store over third party store most of the time anyways? Profit and bottom line is going to be the only, or at least the leading reason, regardless of what statement Apple releases to this issue.
I can say no because departmental store and/or grocery store has more things to cover than a bunch of high-density server racks, some server rooms and a flurry of network cables. Ok maybe also engineers working to keep those servers running. And price going down? Apple never reduces prices for the general public for exchange rate differences. Not to mention Apple never even give us a general idea how costly it is to run a datacenter for them.
Unless the said contract is non-binding and is found invalid due to terms breaching the law.
Third party apps have already poses significant risks on their own Without sideloading. I just don’t understand why sideloading somehow shows the increased risks, and automatically inherit the characteristics of less checks and balances than Apple’s counterpart. All sounds like apple propaganda designed to instil fear and hatred into users so they go against Sideloading blindly with no idea exactly what sideloading can be on iOS. SMS? That thing has been compromised to death at this rate. Hardly matters either way. NFC? Bluetooth? Wifi networks? Again, Apple has successfully make you fear sideloading for no reason at all.
Make what easier? And what the hell do you mean “only 1 known way in”? Ever heard about zero day exploits? Sure, “basic” methods might not work today, but I don’t even know what’s your interpretation of “basic”. Besides, the idea of decentralisation has been floating around for years now, fearing megacorp is having way too much power, and App Store model is the exact opposite of that. By supporting App Store, are you supporting monopoly as well?
Oh bro. Apple has done decent jobs preventing you from installing something bad. Not allowing it is just one of many ways that can happen. And, “we know it’s bad so we are protecting you” sounds very much like an overly protective parent trying to shield his/her kids from any perceived danger, whether it is real or not. Idk bro. Breaking the law by doing such is a stretch. But dictating what user can and cannot do is not good either.
Apple propaganda in full swing. They either can’t or won’t prove otherwise.
And I also have every right to do the exact same to you.
At this point I don’t really want to explain the whole switch cost and opportunity cost anymore. Simply put, switching may not be an option for many people, and they want to get more out of their iOS devices.
It can be anything? Decades of accumulated data? Family member overwhelmingly uses iOS devices? Work restrictions? Tight integration with their workflow? Why it is so hard to understand “switching” is not an option for everyone?
I have been using windows and macOS for quite a few years and I just take advantage of what they are good at. Tho, I still use Windows a bit more.Have seen folks having this on both sides of the fence.
the eu model has a sim slot and different frequencies