4 ms·

>If you do that, guess what Fortnite would do right now. Guess what Facebook would do to get around Apple’s privacy restrictions right now. Guess what a ex-boyf

by tw04 5y ago

>If you do that, guess what Fortnite would do right now. Guess what Facebook would do to get around Apple’s privacy restrictions right now. Guess what a ex-boyfriend would do right now to install a blocked spying app. I guess I don't get your point, if a user wants to sideload fortnite or facebook, good for them? If an ex-boyfriend has your phone and your password you've probably got bigger issues than whether or not he can click a button to sideload an app. >I do get the Apple Store one more, but as history has shown, people literally go to the Apple store to get iCloud theft locks removed by impersonating the owner and faking receipts. I still don't follow your point, what on earth does that have to do with someone being allowed to use their phone how they want? You think someone is going to steal your phone, go to an Apple store and pretend to be you to have sideload enabled, then return the phone to you? I'm not saying it would be impossible for that to happen, but I would say: why would ANYONE go to that trouble? If this is another "well ex-boyfriend" issue you're talking about 1/10th of 1% of all users in existence. I don't think that should be the demographic with which we base all of the decisions on what an iphone can and can't do...

gjsman-1000 5y ago
I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily force users to sideload so that they could use it. Smaller companies would not have the power to force users to sideload, so they would have to follow Apple rules while tech giants would not. At this point, for better or worse, what started as sideloading has destroyed the App Store. Lastly, as for why anyone would go for the trouble, are you really sure that some government agency wouldn’t force users to sideload an app someday? If it had to go through Apple approval, there would be a much bigger legal fight than if they could just force people to sideload it. There are other reasons than just ex-boyfriends, I’m just trying to come up with some examples.
- tw04 5y ago
  >I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Become "pawns" how? You're again saying that a user being allowed to load things on to their phone is Apple's responsibility. Literally nobody has said it would be Apple's responsibility and we've got a case in point: google. When you sideload an app, you're on your own. >Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily force users to sideload so that they could use it. Smaller companies would not have the power to force users to sideload, so they would have to follow Apple rules while tech giants would not. Again, not Apple's problem. If a user is warned that enabling side loading exposes them to tracking, and the user decides to do it anyway, that's their prerogative. >At this point, for better or worse, what started as sideloading has destroyed the App Store. Destroyed what app store? Google allows sideloading, I think most people would describe their app store as thriving, not "destroyed" >Lastly, as for why anyone would go for the trouble, are you really sure that some government agency wouldn’t force users to sideload an app someday? If it had to go through Apple approval, there would be a much bigger legal fight than if they could just force people to sideload it. There are other reasons than just ex-boyfriends, I’m just trying to come up with some examples. They already force users to load apps directly, sideloading isn't necessary.
  - gjsman-1000 5y ago
    Right now, every developer will tell you that Apple is significantly more strict with what is allowed on the App Store than the Google Play store is. Not perfect, but more strict. This has caused tech giants like Facebook considerable hurt. For example, the fact that they have to have those embarrassing privacy labels on their app in the App Store. Or that they have to present that prompt asking for permission to use the advertising identifier. Right now, even though this hurts tech Giants, this benefits users. Google draws less than 1/10th of the data from an iPhone user as they do an Android user. If sideloading was enabled, this check on their privacy rules would no longer exist because they could force users to sideload, which means they would immediately do so, and users would lose the benefits that Apple‘s restrictions give them. If users want to sideload, They should buy an android where this check does not exist, and they can be on the less restrictive Google play store where it doesn’t matter. If they want Apple to constrain the power of apps to spy on them, they buy an iPhone. Even though you might vehemently disagree with Apple, I respect the right of users to choose whether they want a restricted but more private experience, or less restricted but less private experience.
squeaky-clean 5y ago
I think their point is the users would not get the choice to "want" to sideload. Fornite, Facebook, etc would pull themselves from the App Store and be sideload-only. Forcing users to choose between the security of their device, or their favorite games and social media apps.
- frosted-flakes 5y ago
  Epic tried that on Android. It didn't work so well, so now they're back on the App store.
dnh44 5y ago
>I guess I don't get your point, if a user wants to sideload fortnite or facebook, good for them? This will result in a few "must have" apps being side-loaded to start, and finish with people having to reinstall their phone operating systems every 6 months; to the detriment of the vast majority of users. Do you not remember what the computers of regular people were like in the late 90's and early 2000's? I remember pretty much everyone non-technical having at least a mild malware infestation and at least one extra toolbar in their browser. I'm quite happy that the free market created a solution that is more secure.
- novok 5y ago
  You could do this with android phones for +10 years, android is ~+%80 of the smartphone market and this does not happen in practice.

by tw04 5y ago

gjsman-1000 5y ago

I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily force users to sideload so that they could use it. Smaller companies would not have the power to force users to sideload, so they would have to follow Apple rules while tech giants would not. At this point, for better or worse, what started as sideloading has destroyed the App Store. Lastly, as for why anyone would go for the trouble, are you really sure that some government agency wouldn’t force users to sideload an app someday? If it had to go through Apple approval, there would be a much bigger legal fight than if they could just force people to sideload it. There are other reasons than just ex-boyfriends, I’m just trying to come up with some examples.

tw04 5y ago
>I’m saying that if you add that choice, it isn’t that technical users have more freedom and that’s bad. It’s that Apple users become pawns in a chess game against other tech Giants, who don’t want to follow Apple‘s rules whether it be for privacy, IAP, or other reasons. Become "pawns" how? You're again saying that a user being allowed to load things on to their phone is Apple's responsibility. Literally nobody has said it would be Apple's responsibility and we've got a case in point: google. When you sideload an app, you're on your own. >Like I said with Facebook. If there was a private API that Apple doesn’t allow them to use that would make tracking users easier, they would happily force users to sideload so that they could use it. Smaller companies would not have the power to force users to sideload, so they would have to follow Apple rules while tech giants would not. Again, not Apple's problem. If a user is warned that enabling side loading exposes them to tracking, and the user decides to do it anyway, that's their prerogative. >At this point, for better or worse, what started as sideloading has destroyed the App Store. Destroyed what app store? Google allows sideloading, I think most people would describe their app store as thriving, not "destroyed" >Lastly, as for why anyone would go for the trouble, are you really sure that some government agency wouldn’t force users to sideload an app someday? If it had to go through Apple approval, there would be a much bigger legal fight than if they could just force people to sideload it. There are other reasons than just ex-boyfriends, I’m just trying to come up with some examples. They already force users to load apps directly, sideloading isn't necessary.
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  Right now, every developer will tell you that Apple is significantly more strict with what is allowed on the App Store than the Google Play store is. Not perfect, but more strict. This has caused tech giants like Facebook considerable hurt. For example, the fact that they have to have those embarrassing privacy labels on their app in the App Store. Or that they have to present that prompt asking for permission to use the advertising identifier. Right now, even though this hurts tech Giants, this benefits users. Google draws less than 1/10th of the data from an iPhone user as they do an Android user. If sideloading was enabled, this check on their privacy rules would no longer exist because they could force users to sideload, which means they would immediately do so, and users would lose the benefits that Apple‘s restrictions give them. If users want to sideload, They should buy an android where this check does not exist, and they can be on the less restrictive Google play store where it doesn’t matter. If they want Apple to constrain the power of apps to spy on them, they buy an iPhone. Even though you might vehemently disagree with Apple, I respect the right of users to choose whether they want a restricted but more private experience, or less restricted but less private experience.

squeaky-clean 5y ago

I think their point is the users would not get the choice to "want" to sideload. Fornite, Facebook, etc would pull themselves from the App Store and be sideload-only. Forcing users to choose between the security of their device, or their favorite games and social media apps.

frosted-flakes 5y ago
Epic tried that on Android. It didn't work so well, so now they're back on the App store.

dnh44 5y ago

>I guess I don't get your point, if a user wants to sideload fortnite or facebook, good for them? This will result in a few "must have" apps being side-loaded to start, and finish with people having to reinstall their phone operating systems every 6 months; to the detriment of the vast majority of users. Do you not remember what the computers of regular people were like in the late 90's and early 2000's? I remember pretty much everyone non-technical having at least a mild malware infestation and at least one extra toolbar in their browser. I'm quite happy that the free market created a solution that is more secure.

novok 5y ago
You could do this with android phones for +10 years, android is ~+%80 of the smartphone market and this does not happen in practice.