3 ms·

More people could claim that, but so long as Apple was doing it in good faith- as in, the opposite of what they did in the Netherlands to saltily, passive-aggre

More people could claim that, but so long as Apple was doing it in good faith- as in, the opposite of what they did in the Netherlands to saltily, passive-aggressively flout Dutch regulation re: the App Store (0), the regulators will recognize that. Most people do not bother to root their Android phones, and it's perfectly possible to pirate iOS apps on non-jailbroken phones, so that point is also moot. The people who are technically savvy enough to pirate apps are already doing so whether sideloading is made possible or not. Finally, you discount Apple's mastery of UX patterns and their capability of design. By simply changing non-Messages texts to green, they created an entire dichotomy between messages from iOS devices, and non-iOS. Do you really think they wouldn't be capable of doing something similar towards official App Store-originated and non-official apps? Simply a subtle color tint, a badge, some off-looking font, and they can get users to look askance at sideloaded apps with caution. If Apple had to make sideloading possible, you can bet they can make it a secure and curated experience, as they do with the rest of their walled garden. (0) https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489595417117483010 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489595417117483010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30334683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30334683

acdha 4y ago
> Most people do not bother to root their Android phones, and it's perfectly possible to pirate iOS apps on non-jailbroken phones, so that point is also moot. The people who are technically savvy enough to pirate apps are already doing so whether sideloading is made possible or not. Your second sentence contradicts the first: the difference is not whether it’s theoretically possible but whether it’s easy and thus widespread. That’s the important distinction and it deserves more careful thought when you’re talking about devices large percentages of the population trust heavily. > By simply changing non-Messages texts to green, they created an entire dichotomy between messages from iOS devices, and non-iOS. Similarly, this deserves more careful thought: is the difference the color or the fact that one which isn’t controlled by the phone companies is faster, more capable, more secure and cost less for years? Again, I’m not saying that Apple is perfect but it’s not as simple as people like to portray it, either. Multiple of the topics here are market failures where governments were deterred from stepping in. What Apple has done is not purely benevolent but it’s also satisfying a lot of users - they didn’t go from niche to one of the most important tech companies because they weren’t doing what people liked (and, no, it’s not “just” marketing or design).
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  > the difference is not whether it’s theoretically possible but whether it’s easy and thus widespread. That’s the important distinction and it deserves more careful thought when you’re talking about devices large percentages of the population trust heavily. Apple can allow sideloading without making it easy. This whole discussion is about whether or not Apple can craft a user experience that carefully balances between permitting users to use a powerful and potentially insecure ability, and carefully warning them against it, warning off those who are not savvy. I believe they can. > Similarly, this deserves more careful thought: is the difference the color or the fact that one which isn’t controlled by the phone companies is faster, more capable, more secure and cost less for years? I believe it's self-evident. The appearance of the different UI itself, which clashes against Apple's otherwise uniform design scheme, presents its own inherent psychological friction. Certainly, non-Messages apps come with certain poorer performances in Messages. The way group chats get broken up. The inability to respond to Messages. None of that has anything to do with phones being faster, more capable, or more secure. The difference in of itself is created by the users drawing the distinction in their own minds. Similarly, I believe if Apple was to curate the sideloading experience, the majority of iPhone users can simply be guided away from that. And it will remain safely the province of developers and power users. Apple is simply too good at crafting user experiences to not be able to do that.

acdha 4y ago

> Most people do not bother to root their Android phones, and it's perfectly possible to pirate iOS apps on non-jailbroken phones, so that point is also moot. The people who are technically savvy enough to pirate apps are already doing so whether sideloading is made possible or not. Your second sentence contradicts the first: the difference is not whether it’s theoretically possible but whether it’s easy and thus widespread. That’s the important distinction and it deserves more careful thought when you’re talking about devices large percentages of the population trust heavily. > By simply changing non-Messages texts to green, they created an entire dichotomy between messages from iOS devices, and non-iOS. Similarly, this deserves more careful thought: is the difference the color or the fact that one which isn’t controlled by the phone companies is faster, more capable, more secure and cost less for years? Again, I’m not saying that Apple is perfect but it’s not as simple as people like to portray it, either. Multiple of the topics here are market failures where governments were deterred from stepping in. What Apple has done is not purely benevolent but it’s also satisfying a lot of users - they didn’t go from niche to one of the most important tech companies because they weren’t doing what people liked (and, no, it’s not “just” marketing or design).

Apocryphon 4y ago
> the difference is not whether it’s theoretically possible but whether it’s easy and thus widespread. That’s the important distinction and it deserves more careful thought when you’re talking about devices large percentages of the population trust heavily. Apple can allow sideloading without making it easy. This whole discussion is about whether or not Apple can craft a user experience that carefully balances between permitting users to use a powerful and potentially insecure ability, and carefully warning them against it, warning off those who are not savvy. I believe they can. > Similarly, this deserves more careful thought: is the difference the color or the fact that one which isn’t controlled by the phone companies is faster, more capable, more secure and cost less for years? I believe it's self-evident. The appearance of the different UI itself, which clashes against Apple's otherwise uniform design scheme, presents its own inherent psychological friction. Certainly, non-Messages apps come with certain poorer performances in Messages. The way group chats get broken up. The inability to respond to Messages. None of that has anything to do with phones being faster, more capable, or more secure. The difference in of itself is created by the users drawing the distinction in their own minds. Similarly, I believe if Apple was to curate the sideloading experience, the majority of iPhone users can simply be guided away from that. And it will remain safely the province of developers and power users. Apple is simply too good at crafting user experiences to not be able to do that.