17 ms·

I can sideload on any device you mentioned that isn't an apple device. All Apple need to do is allow sideloading, just like everyone else does. Anyone and eve

I can sideload on any device you mentioned that isn't an apple device. All Apple need to do is allow sideloading, just like everyone else does. Anyone and everyone can continue to use the app store all they want, but there must be a way around (sideloading) if apple want to avoid the threat of laws like this. Stop being a blind fan for a few minutes and think. No one is suggesting that the app store go away. No one is saying that apple must give away access to the app store for free. All anyone with a valid complaint wants is a single viable way to load apps and accept payment without going through the app store. THAT'S IT. THAT'S LITERALLY THE ENTIRE ASK. It's not a lot to ask for given that literally every other consumer device you mentioned allows exactly that and has from the beginning. Apple fans act like it's impossible to provide this or unreasonable to ask for it. Everyone else recognizes that this is a valid thing to allow your customers to do. Apple says "nah, screw the customer" and the apple fans just go "oh apple, you're so wise and sexy" and I simply don't get the lust some seem to have for that company.

myrandomcomment 6y ago
Why does Apple have to allow this? Because you want it? You do not have to build in the Apple ecosystem. Android has 85% market share. Write for that if it makes you happy. If you want access to that other 15% of the market well then you have to play in their rules. If people where not happy with that then they would not be successful. The lack of side loading has not hurt Apple because most people just do not give a damn. Allowing side loading would NOT suddenly open a huge market because the average person that buys Apple would not use it. On the other hand requiring Apple to create a method to do this imposes on Apple all the development, testing and security issue that would be created by this “feature”, not to mention the public bad will of some dumb user that follows some random webpage and gets pawned and then blames Apple for allowing it. It is not magically free. It has a cost to Apple that they have to right to say no to. People have a choice of what phones they buy with 85% of the market being Android. I am sick of everyone complaining about this. You have a choice to of where to build and play. Just because you are a developer that does not want to pay Apple what the market will bare does not give you the right to tell them how to run their business. The average Apple customer does not feel they are being screwed by Apple because they do not support side loading. If they did they would not buy the product. I am willing to bet the % of the install base or really people that side load on Android is insignificant vs the daily user base. Oh I am not a blind fan. I am someone that has been in all the roles from support to development to product management. I have done this long enough that I think about the cost (money, man hours) for the simple thing that everyone seems to think is obvious until they pull it apart and understand the real details involved.
- naikrovek 6y ago
  It's not about Apple versus Android. It's about letting software vendors and phone handset owners escape the apple tax, if they want to. It is apples stranglehold over the handsets that individual people own that is the problem. You have to pay to buy the phone, then you aren't even free to do what you want with it. If you don't understand in your bones why that is bad, there is absolutely nothing anyone can say to change your mind. So, why are you taking time to be a part of a discussion when you have no intention of listening to the other side? I don't understand internet people... The only thing people who complain about this want, is just a tiny bit of freedom to develop and install apps on their phone without the app store IF AND ONLY IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT SPECIFICALLY. I really don't understand why apple or apple fans are against this. It hurts no one and it gives a tiny bit of freedom to that tiny number of people who want this additional freedom. If anything, this would increase iphone market share.
  - myrandomcomment 6y ago
    You are the one not understanding. I understand that you feel allowing people to load their own software is important. You ignore the fact that allowing side loading is a feature that has to be developed, tested and supported. It forces the company to spend money and resources at the direction of a government body to add a product feature where no moral, health, safety or environmental hazard exists in not doing so. There is however a huge moral hazard in allowing the government to legislative a products feature set because they like it. You can choose to vote your view buy not buying Apple because of this. If enough people agree with you and it hurts Apples market share then they as a company can choose to add the feature. The government does not have the right to mandate side loading as a feature anymore then they have the right to tell you what color your background screen must be. I understand that you feel Apple should support the installation of 3rd party software because you feel it’s the right way to do things. The point is your feeling about this has no impact on what you can legally force a company to do and it is that simple. You just do not agree because it is something you want. You are welcome to start a public campaign to change Apples mind. You are welcome to achieve enough wealth that you can take a board seat and force change. What you should not be allowed to do is pass some stupid law tell me or anyone what features to build in my product when there is no associated hazard in not doing so.

myrandomcomment 6y ago

Why does Apple have to allow this? Because you want it? You do not have to build in the Apple ecosystem. Android has 85% market share. Write for that if it makes you happy. If you want access to that other 15% of the market well then you have to play in their rules. If people where not happy with that then they would not be successful. The lack of side loading has not hurt Apple because most people just do not give a damn. Allowing side loading would NOT suddenly open a huge market because the average person that buys Apple would not use it. On the other hand requiring Apple to create a method to do this imposes on Apple all the development, testing and security issue that would be created by this “feature”, not to mention the public bad will of some dumb user that follows some random webpage and gets pawned and then blames Apple for allowing it. It is not magically free. It has a cost to Apple that they have to right to say no to. People have a choice of what phones they buy with 85% of the market being Android. I am sick of everyone complaining about this. You have a choice to of where to build and play. Just because you are a developer that does not want to pay Apple what the market will bare does not give you the right to tell them how to run their business. The average Apple customer does not feel they are being screwed by Apple because they do not support side loading. If they did they would not buy the product. I am willing to bet the % of the install base or really people that side load on Android is insignificant vs the daily user base. Oh I am not a blind fan. I am someone that has been in all the roles from support to development to product management. I have done this long enough that I think about the cost (money, man hours) for the simple thing that everyone seems to think is obvious until they pull it apart and understand the real details involved.

naikrovek 6y ago
It's not about Apple versus Android. It's about letting software vendors and phone handset owners escape the apple tax, if they want to. It is apples stranglehold over the handsets that individual people own that is the problem. You have to pay to buy the phone, then you aren't even free to do what you want with it. If you don't understand in your bones why that is bad, there is absolutely nothing anyone can say to change your mind. So, why are you taking time to be a part of a discussion when you have no intention of listening to the other side? I don't understand internet people... The only thing people who complain about this want, is just a tiny bit of freedom to develop and install apps on their phone without the app store IF AND ONLY IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT SPECIFICALLY. I really don't understand why apple or apple fans are against this. It hurts no one and it gives a tiny bit of freedom to that tiny number of people who want this additional freedom. If anything, this would increase iphone market share.
- myrandomcomment 6y ago
  You are the one not understanding. I understand that you feel allowing people to load their own software is important. You ignore the fact that allowing side loading is a feature that has to be developed, tested and supported. It forces the company to spend money and resources at the direction of a government body to add a product feature where no moral, health, safety or environmental hazard exists in not doing so. There is however a huge moral hazard in allowing the government to legislative a products feature set because they like it. You can choose to vote your view buy not buying Apple because of this. If enough people agree with you and it hurts Apples market share then they as a company can choose to add the feature. The government does not have the right to mandate side loading as a feature anymore then they have the right to tell you what color your background screen must be. I understand that you feel Apple should support the installation of 3rd party software because you feel it’s the right way to do things. The point is your feeling about this has no impact on what you can legally force a company to do and it is that simple. You just do not agree because it is something you want. You are welcome to start a public campaign to change Apples mind. You are welcome to achieve enough wealth that you can take a board seat and force change. What you should not be allowed to do is pass some stupid law tell me or anyone what features to build in my product when there is no associated hazard in not doing so.