5 ms·

Apple's argument is basically, "It'll be chaos!!!" But... We don't have to wonder what it would be like. There's been mass use of platforms that allow "side l

by jmull 5y ago

Apple's argument is basically, "It'll be chaos!!!" But... We don't have to wonder what it would be like. There's been mass use of platforms that allow "side loading" (AKA, just regular installing) and "third-party app stores" (AKA, just regular buying software) for decades. No, it hasn't always been pretty. Yet it just hasn't been that bad either, and the benefits have proven to be very substantial. There are incredible amounts of great software available that doesn't fit in to Apple's idea of what ought to be allowed. And it's not like you can download with confidence from the Apple App Store either. They play a cat-and-mouse game with malware constantly and there's been plenty of collateral damage. I think there's no question third-party app stores, or just direct side-loading would lead to a lot of new great software, without a ton more risk. I think the weakness of this argument document show that.

gumby 5y ago
> We don't have to wonder what it would be like. There's been mass use of platforms that allow "side loading" Apple is a significant vendor of such platforms. They have an A/B experiment running on the Mac. I prefer to buy directly to send more money to the developer, but I suspect most people prefer the (confusing) store. In other words: what chaos?
- musicale 5y ago
  > They have an A/B experiment running on the Mac Kind of, in terms of sideloading restrictions; not at all in terms of software library, business model, and incentives. Most (70%+) of Apple's iOS App Store revenue is from games (largely in-app purchases since mobile games tend to be "free to play.") In fact Apple's profits from iOS gaming are larger than the gaming profits of Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Activision combined. You can ask any poor Mac gamer about the state of the Mac game business... it isn't great, and it certainly isn't Apple's bread and butter like iOS gaming. From the perspective of Apple's business and profits, the iPhone is largely a walled-garden game system, much closer to the PlayStation, Switch or Xbox than to the Mac. Apple isn't wrong about potential security and privacy threats, but the threats to Apple's business and profits are most likely the driving issue.
zitterbewegung 5y ago
I think that there is great software that is available on separate app stores as third parties but to be honest your perspective is truly the issue . The primary purpose of sideloading apps is to get the app downloaded and play it for free. This in turn creates a security problem when you allow for anyone to side load apps. We can see this in Windows and macOS where people who have full access to a computer generally get malware onto their computers. What macOS and even Windows is moving torward is a containerized system for programs to run. This is going to be the best solution eventually. This is at the cost of performance (especially Windows which sees a 30 percent drop in gaming performance ). I think to allow external app stores would be a vetting service and also Apple would have to create a sandbox for the apps and also possibly some analysis to make sure that the side loaded apps aren’t just someone’s else’s stolen video game. Unfortunately until some kind of law is done Apple has no incentive to actually allow this to occur.
- somebehemoth 5y ago
  > The primary purpose of sideloading apps is to get the app downloaded and play it for free. I don't believe this is true. This is demonstrated by open source software on many platforms installed directly by end users without a curated store. Maybe you mean people only side load apps on iOS for piracy purposes? I'm interested in learning more about this assertion.
chuckee 5y ago
> No, it hasn't always been pretty. This also applies to Apple's app store/lockdown: https://nypost.com/2021/09/17/apple-google-block-kremlin-critic-alexei-navalnys-app/ https://nypost.com/2021/09/17/apple-google-block-kremlin-cri... https://www.wired.com/story/apple-china-censorship/ https://www.wired.com/story/apple-china-censorship/ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-privacy-censorship.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-pr... https://9to5mac.com/2019/10/10/protest-app/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/10/10/protest-app/ One may object that it's government's fault, not Apple's, as they're the ones pressuring for this kind of censorship. But it is Apple that made these chains for their own benefit, knowingly exposing their users to this risk.
yuters 5y ago
The main argument for the decision against sideloading (which they allow on macOS) is on p.6, where the idea is that your iPhone contains more sensitive and personal informations than your computer. The "fate of the PC" thing is funny because one might think that they're just throwing a jab at themselves, but they've campaigned very effectively for their customers to think that the Mac is not in the same category.
- mthoms 5y ago
  I noticed that too. I found it very distasteful and grossly misleading. It says: When iPhone was developed, PCs were the world’s primary computing tools, and they were riddled with viruses. Okay, but Macs managed to buck that trend because of your superior engineering, right Apple? Right? Hello? I mean... that's what you've been telling us for decades, Apple. Oh, you meant PCs not Macs in the above quote? That's a bit disingenuous isn't it? It's (ahem) Apples to Oranges isn't it? Are you selling oranges or apples? Note: I'm a fan of Apple's products but am getting tired of their sleight-of-word bullsh*t. This outright deceiving behaviour is disgusting.
bootlooped 5y ago
This viewpoint is popular here, I think we all see that, but I find it to almost always come from the point of view of a technically competent power user who can 1) make use of the expanded capability and 2) have the knowledge and instincts to protect themselves in the face of reduced or no guardrails. That is not the profile of the average iPhone user. For the layperson (90+% of iPhone users) I find the argument unconvincing. They don't understand how to protect themselves. And what software is it that they would substantially benefit from if only it were not for a manufacturer-controlled app store monopoly? Don't we all have memories of looking at a relatives computer and finding half a dozen browser toolbars and some mysterious impossible-to-uninstall programs running on startup?
- eptcyka 5y ago
  Why can't they make side-loading work the same way loading custom ROMs used to work on Android - very impractical setup phase, but allows for ultimate freedom to those who need it? You just need to have the setup be impractical enough for the layperson so that those who don't understand how to protect themselves don't stumble into a situation where they have to. Don't create a false dichotomy here. Also, most of people I know of don't side-load apps onto their Android devices, and it's still a shitshow security wise. Don't conflate side-loading with bad security. I find it ridiculous that to run a bit of iOS code I have to spend hours chasing down someone with access to authorize my signing keys. It's a fruit company laptop using a fruit company IDE and a fruit company mobile device, yet I still have to jump through all of these hoops to run my own code on devices that I own?
  - zzyzxd 5y ago
    Back in the days when iOS jailbreaking was popular, there were people who would take 10 bucks to jailbreak my grandma's iPad for her.
  - massysett 5y ago
    The instant some hugely popular app (Fortnite?) needs to be installed this way, the app maker will make videos or tutorials on how to jump through the hoops. This will normalize the practice so that people also do it for a “fart app” that is really something more nefarious. Next thing you know, we’re right back to how Windows was, with a bunch of browser toolbars and now the need to sideload an antivirus app, which itself will drown the phone in glitches. No thanks.
smoldesu 5y ago
I think the crux of this issue is that social engineering will always be a problem on a truly free platform. No matter what mitigations Apple puts in place, nothing stops me from just sending an iMessage to a few hundred people pretending to be the government, asking them to send me their SSN. Nothing stops me from emailing them a Google Form where they punch in their credit card info, and nothing stops me from making memes about how you can charge your iPhone in the microwave. That last echelon can never be conquered, so why play for table scraps in the first place? Simply put: control. The incredibly public lawsuits Apple has found themselves in have only demonstrated how they fight tooth-and-nail to hide the most nascent of details. They fully intend to control their narrative from top to bottom, and it blows me away when I see politicians entertain this security theater.

by jmull 5y ago

gumby 5y ago

> We don't have to wonder what it would be like. There's been mass use of platforms that allow "side loading" Apple is a significant vendor of such platforms. They have an A/B experiment running on the Mac. I prefer to buy directly to send more money to the developer, but I suspect most people prefer the (confusing) store. In other words: what chaos?

musicale 5y ago
> They have an A/B experiment running on the Mac Kind of, in terms of sideloading restrictions; not at all in terms of software library, business model, and incentives. Most (70%+) of Apple's iOS App Store revenue is from games (largely in-app purchases since mobile games tend to be "free to play.") In fact Apple's profits from iOS gaming are larger than the gaming profits of Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Activision combined. You can ask any poor Mac gamer about the state of the Mac game business... it isn't great, and it certainly isn't Apple's bread and butter like iOS gaming. From the perspective of Apple's business and profits, the iPhone is largely a walled-garden game system, much closer to the PlayStation, Switch or Xbox than to the Mac. Apple isn't wrong about potential security and privacy threats, but the threats to Apple's business and profits are most likely the driving issue.

zitterbewegung 5y ago

I think that there is great software that is available on separate app stores as third parties but to be honest your perspective is truly the issue . The primary purpose of sideloading apps is to get the app downloaded and play it for free. This in turn creates a security problem when you allow for anyone to side load apps. We can see this in Windows and macOS where people who have full access to a computer generally get malware onto their computers. What macOS and even Windows is moving torward is a containerized system for programs to run. This is going to be the best solution eventually. This is at the cost of performance (especially Windows which sees a 30 percent drop in gaming performance ). I think to allow external app stores would be a vetting service and also Apple would have to create a sandbox for the apps and also possibly some analysis to make sure that the side loaded apps aren’t just someone’s else’s stolen video game. Unfortunately until some kind of law is done Apple has no incentive to actually allow this to occur.

somebehemoth 5y ago
> The primary purpose of sideloading apps is to get the app downloaded and play it for free. I don't believe this is true. This is demonstrated by open source software on many platforms installed directly by end users without a curated store. Maybe you mean people only side load apps on iOS for piracy purposes? I'm interested in learning more about this assertion.

chuckee 5y ago

> No, it hasn't always been pretty. This also applies to Apple's app store/lockdown: https://nypost.com/2021/09/17/apple-google-block-kremlin-critic-alexei-navalnys-app/ https://nypost.com/2021/09/17/apple-google-block-kremlin-cri... https://www.wired.com/story/apple-china-censorship/ https://www.wired.com/story/apple-china-censorship/ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-privacy-censorship.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-pr... https://9to5mac.com/2019/10/10/protest-app/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/10/10/protest-app/ One may object that it's government's fault, not Apple's, as they're the ones pressuring for this kind of censorship. But it is Apple that made these chains for their own benefit, knowingly exposing their users to this risk.

yuters 5y ago

The main argument for the decision against sideloading (which they allow on macOS) is on p.6, where the idea is that your iPhone contains more sensitive and personal informations than your computer. The "fate of the PC" thing is funny because one might think that they're just throwing a jab at themselves, but they've campaigned very effectively for their customers to think that the Mac is not in the same category.

mthoms 5y ago
I noticed that too. I found it very distasteful and grossly misleading. It says: When iPhone was developed, PCs were the world’s primary computing tools, and they were riddled with viruses. Okay, but Macs managed to buck that trend because of your superior engineering, right Apple? Right? Hello? I mean... that's what you've been telling us for decades, Apple. Oh, you meant PCs not Macs in the above quote? That's a bit disingenuous isn't it? It's (ahem) Apples to Oranges isn't it? Are you selling oranges or apples? Note: I'm a fan of Apple's products but am getting tired of their sleight-of-word bullsh*t. This outright deceiving behaviour is disgusting.

bootlooped 5y ago

This viewpoint is popular here, I think we all see that, but I find it to almost always come from the point of view of a technically competent power user who can 1) make use of the expanded capability and 2) have the knowledge and instincts to protect themselves in the face of reduced or no guardrails. That is not the profile of the average iPhone user. For the layperson (90+% of iPhone users) I find the argument unconvincing. They don't understand how to protect themselves. And what software is it that they would substantially benefit from if only it were not for a manufacturer-controlled app store monopoly? Don't we all have memories of looking at a relatives computer and finding half a dozen browser toolbars and some mysterious impossible-to-uninstall programs running on startup?

eptcyka 5y ago
Why can't they make side-loading work the same way loading custom ROMs used to work on Android - very impractical setup phase, but allows for ultimate freedom to those who need it? You just need to have the setup be impractical enough for the layperson so that those who don't understand how to protect themselves don't stumble into a situation where they have to. Don't create a false dichotomy here. Also, most of people I know of don't side-load apps onto their Android devices, and it's still a shitshow security wise. Don't conflate side-loading with bad security. I find it ridiculous that to run a bit of iOS code I have to spend hours chasing down someone with access to authorize my signing keys. It's a fruit company laptop using a fruit company IDE and a fruit company mobile device, yet I still have to jump through all of these hoops to run my own code on devices that I own?
- zzyzxd 5y ago
  Back in the days when iOS jailbreaking was popular, there were people who would take 10 bucks to jailbreak my grandma's iPad for her.
- massysett 5y ago
  The instant some hugely popular app (Fortnite?) needs to be installed this way, the app maker will make videos or tutorials on how to jump through the hoops. This will normalize the practice so that people also do it for a “fart app” that is really something more nefarious. Next thing you know, we’re right back to how Windows was, with a bunch of browser toolbars and now the need to sideload an antivirus app, which itself will drown the phone in glitches. No thanks.

smoldesu 5y ago

I think the crux of this issue is that social engineering will always be a problem on a truly free platform. No matter what mitigations Apple puts in place, nothing stops me from just sending an iMessage to a few hundred people pretending to be the government, asking them to send me their SSN. Nothing stops me from emailing them a Google Form where they punch in their credit card info, and nothing stops me from making memes about how you can charge your iPhone in the microwave. That last echelon can never be conquered, so why play for table scraps in the first place? Simply put: control. The incredibly public lawsuits Apple has found themselves in have only demonstrated how they fight tooth-and-nail to hide the most nascent of details. They fully intend to control their narrative from top to bottom, and it blows me away when I see politicians entertain this security theater.