6 ms·

The big question is: will there be some kind of "program" the user and/or developer needs to get into to be able to sideload/distribute independent apps? The i

The big question is: will there be some kind of "program" the user and/or developer needs to get into to be able to sideload/distribute independent apps? The ideal status quo would be one where developers can make native apps, and users download and run them, without entering into a contractual relationship with Apple period. (Beyond the iOS EULA, which stands on legally shaky ground)

kroltan 4y ago
Speaking of which, if you don't like that kind of thing, never use a Xiaomi phone. It requires registering for a Xiaomi account to "unlock" the bootloader and install alternative operating systems (such as one without most of the spyware - why does the calculator app or the pdf viewer need a privacy policy?) This account registration is baked into the phone while the bootloader is unlocked, and you have to factory-reset the phone and lock it back up to be able to dissociate the account from the phone.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  That's a side effect of anti-theft measures. Samsung is the same, you can't unlock them any more without signing in into both Samsung and Google accounts which allows the two companies to detect if the device was registered as stolen. And for what it's worth, Samsung is the worst of the bunch anyway as rooting it permanently bricks the TEE via an e-fuse.
  - kroltan 4y ago
    I guess having an account enables that deterrance, but I don't see how it is related to unlocking the bootloader if there was not an account bound beforehand. If signing into an account can be preserved despite the "unlocked" bootloader, there has to be some sort of hypervisor/"secure chip" type deal denying access to the part of the device the account info is stored, no? Otherwise one could erase the account info and pass the device as untainted anyways. So, if that information is secured against alternative operating systems, then there is no harm in allowing them by default or upon local user authorization. In other words, if it was strictly for theft deterrence then surely you would need an account to be able to factory reset the device at all, even with the bootloader locked?
    - mschuster91 4y ago
      > If signing into an account can be preserved despite the "unlocked" bootloader, there has to be some sort of hypervisor/"secure chip" type deal denying access to the part of the device the account info is stored, no? Otherwise one could erase the account info and pass the device as untainted anyways. All Android devices have some sort of TEE these days, otherwise they wouldn't get Netflix and a bunch of other apps people will demand to work.
      - kroltan 4y ago
        Yeah, I'm not denying the existence or need for a TEE, I just mean that either the TEE is secured against custom OSs and therefore signing in beforehand is unnecessary, or the sign-in information could be erased by a custom OS. So requiring a login to unlock the bootloader doesn't really disincentivise any theft in either case, as I understand it.
voisin 4y ago
> The ideal status quo I disagree. Allow side loading of apps that still meet a threshold for safety, privacy, etc (determined through a program like you refer to), but eliminate the App Store cut of sales.
- blokey 4y ago
  Who does the checking and verification that the apps are compliant with the “threshold for safety, privacy, etc”? Apple do this now, using the Apps that pay the 30% on digital purchases to fund everyone. If they no longer make a fee from those to cover every app (including all the free ones), who pays to validate the apps?
  - candiodari 4y ago
    And what about the plenty of policies Apple has that I don't agree with and they've declared not their problem? * their developer policies (as in my own apps, think business apps, playing around, ... and no the little play education app is not enough) * file synchronization apps (syncing books, development/source code, apps, photos and music on my webserver, ios, android, and laptops through syncthing) * emulation (in both directions). Both emulating other systems on the iPhone and emulating the iPhone/ios elsewhere (strange how they have always allowed and even facilitated this for macos, but on either iphone or ipad ...) * their policy about 30% cut on anything sold through apps. Sorry, but that's just going too far * their charging policies (meaning what their devices allow for charging and how fast. And frankly 90% of the problem I have with their policy on charging is how complicated it is. If they merely instituted a rule "if it's apple equipment, it just works as fast as possible", that'd already be a big improvement) At this point I'm very inclined to say, not getting the 30% cut and still having to check ... is Apple's problem, not mine. How about we treat it the way apple treats their customers' problems? At this point I don't care about whatever problems being reasonable presents for Apple.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Points 1 and 2 don’t really make sense (ie doesn’t really make a point at all). What exactly are you saying? > their policy about 30% cut on anything sold through apps. Sorry, but that's just going too far Only things digital items. 80% of all App Store revenue comes from in app purchases of loot boxes and pay to win games (according to the Epic trial). > their charging policies (meaning what their devices allow for charging and how fast What does this even mean.
alden5 4y ago
Im fairly certain it will be just like macos, sure you can make apps people can download, but if you don't want your users to face scary popups when starting up your app for the first time you gotta cough up $99/year for a developer subscription

kroltan 4y ago

Speaking of which, if you don't like that kind of thing, never use a Xiaomi phone. It requires registering for a Xiaomi account to "unlock" the bootloader and install alternative operating systems (such as one without most of the spyware - why does the calculator app or the pdf viewer need a privacy policy?) This account registration is baked into the phone while the bootloader is unlocked, and you have to factory-reset the phone and lock it back up to be able to dissociate the account from the phone.

mschuster91 4y ago
That's a side effect of anti-theft measures. Samsung is the same, you can't unlock them any more without signing in into both Samsung and Google accounts which allows the two companies to detect if the device was registered as stolen. And for what it's worth, Samsung is the worst of the bunch anyway as rooting it permanently bricks the TEE via an e-fuse.
- kroltan 4y ago
  I guess having an account enables that deterrance, but I don't see how it is related to unlocking the bootloader if there was not an account bound beforehand. If signing into an account can be preserved despite the "unlocked" bootloader, there has to be some sort of hypervisor/"secure chip" type deal denying access to the part of the device the account info is stored, no? Otherwise one could erase the account info and pass the device as untainted anyways. So, if that information is secured against alternative operating systems, then there is no harm in allowing them by default or upon local user authorization. In other words, if it was strictly for theft deterrence then surely you would need an account to be able to factory reset the device at all, even with the bootloader locked?
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    > If signing into an account can be preserved despite the "unlocked" bootloader, there has to be some sort of hypervisor/"secure chip" type deal denying access to the part of the device the account info is stored, no? Otherwise one could erase the account info and pass the device as untainted anyways. All Android devices have some sort of TEE these days, otherwise they wouldn't get Netflix and a bunch of other apps people will demand to work.
    - kroltan 4y ago
      Yeah, I'm not denying the existence or need for a TEE, I just mean that either the TEE is secured against custom OSs and therefore signing in beforehand is unnecessary, or the sign-in information could be erased by a custom OS. So requiring a login to unlock the bootloader doesn't really disincentivise any theft in either case, as I understand it.

voisin 4y ago

> The ideal status quo I disagree. Allow side loading of apps that still meet a threshold for safety, privacy, etc (determined through a program like you refer to), but eliminate the App Store cut of sales.

blokey 4y ago
Who does the checking and verification that the apps are compliant with the “threshold for safety, privacy, etc”? Apple do this now, using the Apps that pay the 30% on digital purchases to fund everyone. If they no longer make a fee from those to cover every app (including all the free ones), who pays to validate the apps?
- candiodari 4y ago
  And what about the plenty of policies Apple has that I don't agree with and they've declared not their problem? * their developer policies (as in my own apps, think business apps, playing around, ... and no the little play education app is not enough) * file synchronization apps (syncing books, development/source code, apps, photos and music on my webserver, ios, android, and laptops through syncthing) * emulation (in both directions). Both emulating other systems on the iPhone and emulating the iPhone/ios elsewhere (strange how they have always allowed and even facilitated this for macos, but on either iphone or ipad ...) * their policy about 30% cut on anything sold through apps. Sorry, but that's just going too far * their charging policies (meaning what their devices allow for charging and how fast. And frankly 90% of the problem I have with their policy on charging is how complicated it is. If they merely instituted a rule "if it's apple equipment, it just works as fast as possible", that'd already be a big improvement) At this point I'm very inclined to say, not getting the 30% cut and still having to check ... is Apple's problem, not mine. How about we treat it the way apple treats their customers' problems? At this point I don't care about whatever problems being reasonable presents for Apple.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Points 1 and 2 don’t really make sense (ie doesn’t really make a point at all). What exactly are you saying? > their policy about 30% cut on anything sold through apps. Sorry, but that's just going too far Only things digital items. 80% of all App Store revenue comes from in app purchases of loot boxes and pay to win games (according to the Epic trial). > their charging policies (meaning what their devices allow for charging and how fast What does this even mean.

alden5 4y ago

Im fairly certain it will be just like macos, sure you can make apps people can download, but if you don't want your users to face scary popups when starting up your app for the first time you gotta cough up $99/year for a developer subscription