If so, hopefully another developer comes up with an App Store only competitive app.
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
If so, hopefully another developer comes up with an App Store only competitive app.
At least some of it is tied to the fact that Apple (with iOS) and Google (with Android) have a duopoly in the mobile OS market and restrictions on things like alternative app stores or sideloading can be viewed as anticompetitive behavior and violating antitrust regulations.
According to this site there were "232 million iPhones, 61 million iPads and 26 million Mac and MacBook units were sold in 2022". So iOS devices outnumber MacOS devices by about 11 to 1. Where do you think malware is going to be targeted given these numbers?
I agree with this.
And the assumption is that by default, everything will work as it does today for the majority, not a chance in hell Apple doesn’t have sideloading hidden in some confusingly located warnings and reboots littered settings menu.
I expect some developers will have their apps available in the App Store and outside of the App Store, but I also expect Apple to make it impossible to advertise your app from outside of the App Store while in the App Store.
Maybe they’ll be certain incentives for purchasing outside of the App Store, like 30% cheaper prices, but I don’t think most customers will care or even know.
The only place they’ll be able to advertise something like that would be on their own personal websites, and… Most people aren’t visiting those.
Third Party App Stores apparently wrecked the corporate network with Android devices before I was hired years ago and so they were blocked on principle. That is until Corporate flat out switched to iOS only, so all employees get an iPhone regardless of personal preference. It's either an iPhone or noPhone.
The CTO hated to have to do it as he is a huge OnePlus guy, but we had five breaches in six months, which to this day is the most in our history for one year. Since moving to iOS, our only breaches have been from outside attacks. Windows PCs are all Citrix anyways, and we sadly block any device not in the Apple or Microsoft MDM solution.
We have two Employee Wifi SSIDs and everything, one for Work machines and that password is only in the MDM solution, and a personal wifi for their devices on a separate VLAN (Any smartphone will work on this one). It's really cool I enjoy working with it.
Last edited:
Yes, I'd also add that the sandbox escapes have happened. It would be nice if the sandbox was as secure as it should be, but the fact is that it is not. With a third party side load or third party app store it becomes much easier to change the expected behavior for installs so that someone install it accidentally and with any third party browser or Safari drive by infections become more likely.
One hopes that there is a toggle that says "( ) allow third party app stores" to help decrease the risk here.
see e.g.
iOS Vulnerabilitiesâââ3 Sandbox Escape CVEâs
iOS is the operating system for iPhone, iPad and other Apple mobile devices. Even though it is known for itâs security, researchers haveâ¦
Sideloading? You mean what it's called on Mac: installing.
It will change nothing at all, Android has sideloading and alternative appstore since forever but 99% of users use Google Play Store. It will be the same for iOS, only some nerds will use it, mostly same people who jailbreak plus few more who are curious about it. But globaly all apps will still be availible in the store and nothing will change, another useless EU rule. And funny things all the company who started this witch hunt (Epic, Spotify ...) they would be nobodies today without iPhone, Fortnite popularity came from iPhone players, Spotify got big publicity on the appstore and now they just greedy, "you gave me everything but now I won't pay you anymore". They are no saint (Apple too), but a company who make their products from A to Z, software and hardware should be able to decide whatever they want to do with it, and if users don't like it, don't buy Apple product period.
The concern is that someone like Epic will only allow it via side loading. Or Meta with their tracking etc.
Yeah, that’s the biggest risk, especially for apps that you don’t really want but need for work or school. Some of those can already distribute non-app store apps with enterprise certs, but those require adding devices to an MDM with varying degrees of lockdown.
Data on Android says otherwise:
Vast majority of purchases are on the Play Store, with purchases only high on devices that come with a PreInstalled Default such as Samsung or Amazon, etc.
Vast majority of People will use the default, so if Google Play is the default, that's the one they use. Managing multiple stores is an Advanced User area. 85% of all sales in Android world come from the Default Store at purchase.
So, Apple only stands to lose 6-19% of business in the first year as curiosity inevitably takes hold. But then there will be a huge breach or privacy or virus scare where Apple will be bitched at by its users for allowing malware on their devices and then Apple will just say "You installed an unsupported App Store on your device, this is not an Apple issue, unfortunately, it is a Layer 8 issue."
Agreed.Yes, I'd also add that the sandbox escapes have happened. It would be nice if the sandbox was as secure as it should be, but the fact is that it is not. With a third party side load or third party app store it becomes much easier to change the expected behavior for installs so that someone install it accidentally and with any third party browser or Safari drive by infections become more likely.
One hopes that there is a toggle that says "( ) allow third party app stores" to help decrease the risk here.
see e.g.
iOS Vulnerabilitiesâââ3 Sandbox Escape CVEâs
iOS is the operating system for iPhone, iPad and other Apple mobile devices. Even though it is known for itâs security, researchers haveâ¦medium.com
I think the EU should have focused on the quality of the security reviews of apps in the App Store. They should have made Apple provide guarantees of the security of the apps it curates. Instead, the EU has hobbled the security of iOS by this move IMO.
How many apps were removed from the App Store for "violating" some sort of app store policy? How about apps that had to remove features because or Apple's policies? Arbitrary restrictions aren't an issue if you can sideload an app.
Remember when Apple kicked out Google Maps when Apple Maps was introduced?
Remember when Apple kicked out Google Maps when Apple Maps was introduced?
More than likely the second, app permissions will probably remain about the same.
Immediately thinking how useful a Windows VM would be on an iPad… might make an actual laptop obsolete for me. Might. Probably not. Wouldn’t be bad to have though.
The number of MacOS devices compared to iOS devices and Windows devices is small. Malware is targeted at the most popular platforms. I believe you are mistaking the relative lack of exploits on the Mac for something inherent about the OS, when in fact it is just the case that MacOS is on a very small minority of computing devices.
BTW my workplace requires that I have anti-virus software on my Mac. I am just going to love the opportunity to have anti-virus apps eating away battery life when I am forced to install them on my iPhone when sideloading becomes the norm.
Personally, I'm looking forward to being "vulnerable to malware, scams, data tracking, and other issues" BY CHOICE! Don't side-load if you're scared.
Surely you don't think that all the apps in the Apple App store are honest and safe
the people who are angry here about people talking against side-loading are probably want side-load only because they don't want to pay for apps and sideload cracked versions instead. Seriously lets image u would be the owner of a Store and people want to sell their products over ur store, would u want a commission from them for selling their products in your store?
I highly doubt that the “specialist science and research related apps” you absolutely need will also be the ones loaded with malware etc. I also use specialist applications, but I’d personally trust the reputation cost here, and see zero reason for this type of providers to do anything crazy like that.
It’s nothing to do with being pro-EU or not. I am just pro the idea that on a device that I purchased and legally own I should be allowed to install whatever software I want. It’s fine for Apple to provide this walled, secure garden, I can choose that, but I see no reason for everybody to be forced there. For example I run my iOS devices in restricted mode, and this cuts some capabilities, but it’s worth the trade-off for me, no reason to enforce it on everyone else.
You haven’t made the case, with all due respect.
So many people saying this as if it could never happen. What happens when an authoritarian government decides that their citizens should access government services though their app which is only available by side loading? Which just happens to use some exploits to break out of the sandbox.
Computers in 2008 did not have cameras and microphones which I carried with me everywhere I went, GPS tracking my location, my entire communications history, etc. (Also, my parents being responsible for the security of their systems?! 🤣)
Combine these two and welcome to 1984.
(N.B. links are not direct examples. Of course football isn't a government service, but it demonstrates how they can encourage populations to install such apps without literally forcing them, just make their lives slightly more inconvenient if they don't. And yes Pegasus was a complex, expensive exploit, saved for "high value" targets - other exploits will be uncovered).
How many people on this forum said this would never happen? 😂
Power to the consumer.
Power to the consumer.