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 Delivers Speech Emphasizing Apple's Opposition to Sideloading
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How many people actually read things like that?
When things go south, people will still associate their bad experience with the Apple brand.
Actually, they kinda did. Apple did express how they are not satisfied with the security of macOS (thus they are slowly putting more restrictions on macOS). If you use a current macOS now and the old OS X, you will find the experience of installing 3rd party apps to be quite different, with current macOS putting out a slew of warnings and blocking installs.
Well, you don't get to be the richest company in the world by doing the right thing by consumers!
Actually, it’s extremely easy on Android. All you need is to host the APK on a website. When user downloads it, the OS will simply ask if you want the app (let’s say the Chome browser) to install app from unknown source, and it’s just a tap away. Done.
What's really frustrating about this quadrupling down to protect the App Store racket ... is that it wasn't even planned.
They backed into this scammy little revenue monopoly and are simply reluctant to have to work harder and actually compete for and earn the revenue.
I agree with Jeff:
They backed into this scammy little revenue monopoly and are simply reluctant to have to work harder and actually compete for and earn the revenue.
I agree with Jeff:
Sideloading is hardly a hassle. In fact, it’s easier as one can just get an APK from a website right away. At least that’s how easy it is on Android. THe only prompt the system will ask the user is to allow the downloading app (eg. The browser) to install app from unknown sources.
Ah yeah, I haven’t even seen the video but just by the thumbnail I can see that it’s about wanting to make some RAW memory modules (and not actual SSDs) work like a full NVMe stick. Swap the modules even without going through the clearing, pairing, etc or whatever was needed.
People like to roll on disinformation for some reason. Good catch.
Regarding the article: oh man, I guess the PlayStation, Nintendo, Microsoft, etc stores are next! Right?
Whether one considers "installing software not from the Apple Monopoly Store" a hassle or not isn't even really the point.
The device owner should have the choice to install whatever software they want on their iPhones and iPads.
The device owner should have the choice to install whatever software they want on their iPhones and iPads.
Exactly. The choice is already there. ios walled garden actually is a different choice. People are simply confused that they think having more of the same somehow equals to choice. It only shows the lack of knowledge and understanding most people have about tech and choice, despite their pretense.
Thank you for bringing a little reality to the discussion.
And if a user chooses to side load an app it’ll be their choice!
If it stops Apple from making money, they are against it and use their financial might to rectify the problem, no matter the cost to anyone involved.
Everything else takes a back seat to making money, no matter what Tim might say.
Everything else takes a back seat to making money, no matter what Tim might say.
There is no difference, but Tim and some of the Apple fanboys here would have you believe that world will end of side loading is allowed. Newsflash: the world is already ending, and it has nothing to do with side loading.
Apple sells your data already.
From their TOS/real privacy agreement/policy....
"Apple may share personal data with service providers who act on our behalf, our partners, or others at your direction."
"We may collect, use, transfer, and disclose non-personal information for any purpose."
"Apple's advertising platform may use your information to serve ads that are more relevant to you".
Apple gave the CCP the encryption keys to their icloud data centers in China. Apple is just as scammy as the rest of them. Their privacy stance is complete BS. They love money first and foremost, just like all other for profit companies.
Tim will back any cause or action so long as the $ is right. He's so transparent that it is embarassing. Side loading would be just fine and he knows it.
So Cook is being is being dishonest and misleading by voicing his opposition that he doesn’t agree with it? Ok, got it.
You are spot on..
As we know, Tim will bend and twist and get into any shape necessary....to keep making the money..
Inside Tim Cook’s Secret $275 Billion Deal with Chinese Authorities
Apple’s iPhone recently became the top-selling smartphone in China, its second-biggest market after the U.S., for the first time in six years. But the company owes much of that success to CEO Tim Cook, who laid the foundation years ago by secretly signing an agreement, estimated to be worth more ...
www.theinformation.com
This!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You are spot on..
As we know, Tim will bend and twist and get into any shape necessary....to keep making the money..
Inside Tim Cook’s Secret $275 Billion Deal with Chinese Authorities
Apple’s iPhone recently became the top-selling smartphone in China, its second-biggest market after the U.S., for the first time in six years. But the company owes much of that success to CEO Tim Cook, who laid the foundation years ago by secretly signing an agreement, estimated to be worth more ...
You may like Apple products for whatever reason, ease of use, looks, features, cult worship, social status symbol.....but do NOT like them for the Privacy BS. It is pure marketing BS.
Last edited:
The analogy works well to illustrate a particular point. There’s no such thing as a perfect analogy because every analogy breaks down at some point, but what it illustrates is that it doesn’t make business sense for vendors to be able to sell their products on another company’s platform on the vendor’s own terms. Walmart built up their stores and huge customer base. A vendor cannot expect to cash in on that customer base as if they are entitled to it. If they want to sell to Walmart’s customers, it should be on Walmart’s terms. So buying an iPhone is like having a Walmart membership, and allowing alternate app stores or sideloading would be like allowing vendors to have a section of Walmart’s store to themselves where Walmart has no jurisdiction… in their own store.
That’s all that analogy is really good for in my view. The analogy doesn’t really work as it pertains to the issues you bring up—consoles/games and subscriptions—I think we all agree. But I think it’s because it’s an improper use or extension of the analogy.
The discrepancy is Walmart still gets to sell each game (as well as the expensive console) and make a cut off each sale. And I don’t believe they sell subscriptions because they just sell each magazine, and again make a cut off each sale. They don’t need to force people to buy ONLY from them. On the other hand, if Apple doesn’t get a cut of platform game sales and subscriptions in the App Store, then developers could give away their base app for free and just make all their money off later sales/subscriptions. They would have complete access to Apple’s customer base without Apple seeing a penny. Again, this doesn’t make business sense.
As a pro-capitalist, I am squarely on Apple's side here. And if I were them, I would go straight-up Steve Jobs and tell the EU that either they comply with Apple's right to sell the product they want to sell, or their citizens will go without Apple products while the rest of the world enjoys them.
When did Steve Jobs tell a government (or in this case nearly an entire continent of governments) that "they'll do it his way or their citizens won't get Apple products!"
I was speaking more to how he approached business. Remember, this is a guy who would shoot out angry emails to customers, telling them that if they don't like the way they were doing things, to buy something else. I can't imagine Steve Jobs taking this one sitting down. If he were alive right now and healthy, he'd be going full on atomic. And I seriously doubt he'd be worried about share-holders as well.
I see.
Personally, I'd refrain from invoking Steve on this one. He was a very different person than Tim.
It's quite possible Steve would have seen the situation differently and recognized better and more creative ways to go about this....especially by now.
Apple isn't going to win this, with this particular strategy -- and "pulling out of Europe" isn't a viable business move.
It's also quite likely this App Store situation wouldn't have gotten to this point if he'd been around. Remember, this was never "the plan" for the App Store at all. Those internal emails from around a decade ago showed them nearly going a different direction with it on the monetization part (they should have).