4 ms·

Till they allow users to side load any changes are just platitudes.

by anfilt 6y ago

valuearb 6y ago
If iOS is ever forced to allow side-loading, it becomes far less attractive to its core market.
- augustt 6y ago
  Its core market does not even know what side-loading refers to.
- jjcon 6y ago
  You can already sideload on iOS (with no jailbreak) - it is admittedly janky though. I sideload a YouTube Vanced - like app on all my devices
  - judge2020 6y ago
    To clarify, side-loaded apps are only signed with a certificate valid for 7 days if you're on a regular, non-developer Apple account. If you pay $99/yr for the developer account, that is increased to 1 year. There are workarounds being worked on for this - one being AltStore [1] (does not allow arbitrary IPAs yet). You can also sideload on Windows/Linux with Cydia Impactor[0] - on Mac you can use either impactor or xcode/CLI tools to sign IPAs. 0: http://www.cydiaimpactor.com/ http://www.cydiaimpactor.com/ 1: https://altstore.io/ https://altstore.io/
    - valuearb 6y ago
      You can also use the enterprise program to distribute up to 10,000 copies duectly (might actually be more now).
    - tech234a 6y ago
      A few minor corrections: AltStore does allow sideloading arbitrary IPAs, even on the non-Patreon version, and IIRC Cydia Impactor is currently broken for free accounts.
    - jjcon 6y ago
      AltStore isn’t really just a workaround at this point and yes you can install any random ipa - you can even add new sources to install from
  - anfilt 6y ago
    You basically need to build the program yourself and it only works for 7 days. Also good luck loading anything like an alternative OS.
    - jjcon 6y ago
      Just use AltStore - automatically refreshes your apps so they never expire and you can install an ipa just like an Android apk (and again no jailbreak required)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- cheeze 6y ago
  Uhh... what? How? My mother doesn't care that I can install a 3rd party app on Android, why would my grandma on iOS?
- Rotten194 6y ago
  You don't have to sideload if you don't want to. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
  - valuearb 6y ago
    A mass of insecure side-loads damages platform security. 99.9% of users have no clue how their phone works, they won’t know how their iPhone got hacked, and they will blame Apple. It will reduce a big differentiator between iPhone and Android costing sales. For developers bad publicity from these events will make their customers more gun shy about buying and installing apps.
    - anfilt 6y ago
      If that was case people would quit buying apple devices because people who jail break their device downloaded malware... However, that is not the case. If anything those jail breaks lead to an increase of users.
      - valuearb 6y ago
        Jail breaking is so difficult that it’s always been a tiny percent of the installed base, esp since iOS 7. It’s night and day between it and what would happen if other app stores were allowed to install unvetted Apps. Having a significant percentage of your installed base with malware is bad for them, bad for Apple, and bad for other devs. Apple could enable side loading and alternate app stores in exchange for a revenue share right now without costing them any profits. They don’t because they truly believe the benefits of the walled garden are hugely important to their customers. Who should I believe? The company that spends all their time trying to understand their customer needs, or a bunch of developers frustrated with the revenue share percentage?
        rpdillon 6y ago
        > It’s night and day between it and what would happen if other app stores were allowed to install unvetted Apps. I don't see it, and I'm more skeptical because this statement treats speculation as fact. Anecdotally, I'm a potential (and once!) Apple customer that will never consider using an iPhone or iPad solely because Apple has created and enforced rules that elevate their judgment over mine when it comes to what software I am allowed to install on a device I purchased. That is just completely unacceptable to me. The argument that restricting what I can do with my device somehow has value to their other customers with a similar model of device seems far-fetched. I suspect it has value to Apple because they want the 30% cut, not because they think customers would leave if they offered it. I agree with you that Apple disallows other stores because they truly believe in their walled garden. But I believe in giving customers the ability to choose for themselves, knowing that some customers will make bad decisions, but also knowing some customers will do amazing stuff because they were given the freedom to do so. Perhaps I'm just not a customer that Apple cares about serving. It's a shame, because it leaves me stuck with Android and Google's ever-invasive Google Play Services.

Till they allow users to side load any changes are just platitudes.

by anfilt 6y ago

Till they allow users to side load any changes are just platitudes.

valuearb 6y ago

If iOS is ever forced to allow side-loading, it becomes far less attractive to its core market.

augustt 6y ago
Its core market does not even know what side-loading refers to.
jjcon 6y ago
You can already sideload on iOS (with no jailbreak) - it is admittedly janky though. I sideload a YouTube Vanced - like app on all my devices
- judge2020 6y ago
  To clarify, side-loaded apps are only signed with a certificate valid for 7 days if you're on a regular, non-developer Apple account. If you pay $99/yr for the developer account, that is increased to 1 year. There are workarounds being worked on for this - one being AltStore [1] (does not allow arbitrary IPAs yet). You can also sideload on Windows/Linux with Cydia Impactor[0] - on Mac you can use either impactor or xcode/CLI tools to sign IPAs. 0: http://www.cydiaimpactor.com/ http://www.cydiaimpactor.com/ 1: https://altstore.io/ https://altstore.io/
  - valuearb 6y ago
    You can also use the enterprise program to distribute up to 10,000 copies duectly (might actually be more now).
  - tech234a 6y ago
    A few minor corrections: AltStore does allow sideloading arbitrary IPAs, even on the non-Patreon version, and IIRC Cydia Impactor is currently broken for free accounts.
  - jjcon 6y ago
    AltStore isn’t really just a workaround at this point and yes you can install any random ipa - you can even add new sources to install from
- anfilt 6y ago
  You basically need to build the program yourself and it only works for 7 days. Also good luck loading anything like an alternative OS.
  - jjcon 6y ago
    Just use AltStore - automatically refreshes your apps so they never expire and you can install an ipa just like an Android apk (and again no jailbreak required)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
cheeze 6y ago
Uhh... what? How? My mother doesn't care that I can install a 3rd party app on Android, why would my grandma on iOS?
Rotten194 6y ago
You don't have to sideload if you don't want to. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
- valuearb 6y ago
  A mass of insecure side-loads damages platform security. 99.9% of users have no clue how their phone works, they won’t know how their iPhone got hacked, and they will blame Apple. It will reduce a big differentiator between iPhone and Android costing sales. For developers bad publicity from these events will make their customers more gun shy about buying and installing apps.
  - anfilt 6y ago
    If that was case people would quit buying apple devices because people who jail break their device downloaded malware... However, that is not the case. If anything those jail breaks lead to an increase of users.
    - valuearb 6y ago
      Jail breaking is so difficult that it’s always been a tiny percent of the installed base, esp since iOS 7. It’s night and day between it and what would happen if other app stores were allowed to install unvetted Apps. Having a significant percentage of your installed base with malware is bad for them, bad for Apple, and bad for other devs. Apple could enable side loading and alternate app stores in exchange for a revenue share right now without costing them any profits. They don’t because they truly believe the benefits of the walled garden are hugely important to their customers. Who should I believe? The company that spends all their time trying to understand their customer needs, or a bunch of developers frustrated with the revenue share percentage?
      - rpdillon 6y ago
        > It’s night and day between it and what would happen if other app stores were allowed to install unvetted Apps. I don't see it, and I'm more skeptical because this statement treats speculation as fact. Anecdotally, I'm a potential (and once!) Apple customer that will never consider using an iPhone or iPad solely because Apple has created and enforced rules that elevate their judgment over mine when it comes to what software I am allowed to install on a device I purchased. That is just completely unacceptable to me. The argument that restricting what I can do with my device somehow has value to their other customers with a similar model of device seems far-fetched. I suspect it has value to Apple because they want the 30% cut, not because they think customers would leave if they offered it. I agree with you that Apple disallows other stores because they truly believe in their walled garden. But I believe in giving customers the ability to choose for themselves, knowing that some customers will make bad decisions, but also knowing some customers will do amazing stuff because they were given the freedom to do so. Perhaps I'm just not a customer that Apple cares about serving. It's a shame, because it leaves me stuck with Android and Google's ever-invasive Google Play Services.