4 ms·

This is what i find most interesting about this whole debate. Read the comments on the article itself, it is just full of "i dont want to do this".. so great,

This is what i find most interesting about this whole debate. Read the comments on the article itself, it is just full of "i dont want to do this".. so great, don't sideload apps (no one is forcing them to), but why are they so keen on preventing others from doing it as well?

JohnMakin 3y ago
> Read the comments on the article itself, it is just full of "i dont want to do this".. so great, don't sideload apps (no one is forcing them to), but why are they so keen on preventing others from doing it as well? because it's going to make unscrupulous companies like google/fb/etc all force you to go through their app clients to install their sideloaded apps, without any of the scrutiny and control the apple store has provided historically. that's not really a world I want to live in. While yes, I can just uninstall those apps, some are nearly intrinsic to a mobile experience, like the youtube app.
- planede 3y ago
  Similarly how they do it on Android?
  - yamtaddle 3y ago
    1) Android doesn't restrict spying as much as Apple does, 2) Android is far, far less lucrative per-user than iOS. Maybe sideloading on iOS will work out like Android has. Maybe not.
- rtpg 3y ago
  Shouldn’t most of the protections come at the OS layer? Weird tracking nonsense isn’t stopped by App Store policy alone (far from it!)
  - JohnMakin 3y ago
    Apple can and has threatened to pull apps from the store for unscrupulous behavior. Absolutely no one is claiming that the app store itself provides protection. It's the fact that Apple can decide who gets to publish on a device that over a billion people use. I'm also not really sure how OS level protections would prevent an app from sending out data it shouldn't. Apple is acting as a regulator here because no one else is.
yamtaddle 3y ago
Apple's leverage has given it de-facto regulatory power that it has, to a considerable extent, used in my favor. It might be that nothing changes if sideloading is made much easier, or other browser engines allowed, or whatever. But, that's not guaranteed. Since I like the current situation—at least, better than the alternative of having no one push back on things like spyware-loving megacorps—I'm not in favor of risking changes to it. My ideal situation would be that a lot of what Apple prevents on their platform were illegal everywhere so it'd hardly matter, but the US, at least, does not seem to be heading that direction anytime soon. So, that's why. It risks changing the current situation such that I would find it worse, overall, and I'd prefer not to risk that.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  I like the phrase “de-facto regulatory power.” Not only is it the case that we don’t have to deal with annoying stuff like “enable the facebook store to download our app,” that is, poorly behaving apps in non-official stores. It also takes away one of bluffs that Facebook and friends could make. They don’t even have the ability to say “Apple, make your rules more permissive or I’ll open up a Facebook store.” They don’t even get to negotiate. It is great. If alternative app stores were allowed, I’d probably download a GNU iOS store. But that’s about it, and it just isn’t worth it.
- stale2002 3y ago
  > Apple's leverage has given it de-facto regulatory power Indeed. This is called "being an monopoly" and "using anti-competitive practices to control a market, in violation of anti monopoly laws". Yes, anti competitive practices work. Yes, being a monopoly works. And yes, it has produced some good things like Apple's focus on privacy. But it has also produced other very not good things, like the 30% Apple tax. But, it is at least comforting that people are now saying the quiet part out loud, which is "yep, Apple had anti competitive market power the whole time, I just like monopolies".
  - yamtaddle 3y ago
    > But, it is at least comforting that people are now saying the white part out loud, which is "yep, Apple had anti competive power the whole time, I just like monopolies". It's... been the entire argument, the whole time, for the "please don't change it" side. I'm not even aware of another angle on it. It's never been "quiet". > I just like monopolies I like my life being better than it might otherwise be. In this case, yes, that means I'd rather this monopoly stick around at least a while longer. I'm entirely not a fan of black-and-white positions on most issues. Monopolies generally suck. In this case, however, one particular monopoly seems to be giving me significant benefits I might not otherwise have. Now, if I could trade Apple's monopoly for a harsh crackdown on monopolies across the whole economy, that'd be easily worth it—yes, please. Just to "liberate" iOS devices, though? Nah, I'd rather they leave it alone.
DHPersonal 3y ago
It's probably a misguided fear based on how bad things are even with the App Store, but I'm worried about each company moving its software to its own sites and requiring a more complicated, frustrating, or more privacy-invasive process to use the software over the requirements set by the App Store.
m3kw9 3y ago
You will be forced to if say an app you depend on goes outside

JohnMakin 3y ago

> Read the comments on the article itself, it is just full of "i dont want to do this".. so great, don't sideload apps (no one is forcing them to), but why are they so keen on preventing others from doing it as well? because it's going to make unscrupulous companies like google/fb/etc all force you to go through their app clients to install their sideloaded apps, without any of the scrutiny and control the apple store has provided historically. that's not really a world I want to live in. While yes, I can just uninstall those apps, some are nearly intrinsic to a mobile experience, like the youtube app.

planede 3y ago
Similarly how they do it on Android?
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  1) Android doesn't restrict spying as much as Apple does, 2) Android is far, far less lucrative per-user than iOS. Maybe sideloading on iOS will work out like Android has. Maybe not.
rtpg 3y ago
Shouldn’t most of the protections come at the OS layer? Weird tracking nonsense isn’t stopped by App Store policy alone (far from it!)
- JohnMakin 3y ago
  Apple can and has threatened to pull apps from the store for unscrupulous behavior. Absolutely no one is claiming that the app store itself provides protection. It's the fact that Apple can decide who gets to publish on a device that over a billion people use. I'm also not really sure how OS level protections would prevent an app from sending out data it shouldn't. Apple is acting as a regulator here because no one else is.

yamtaddle 3y ago

Apple's leverage has given it de-facto regulatory power that it has, to a considerable extent, used in my favor. It might be that nothing changes if sideloading is made much easier, or other browser engines allowed, or whatever. But, that's not guaranteed. Since I like the current situation—at least, better than the alternative of having no one push back on things like spyware-loving megacorps—I'm not in favor of risking changes to it. My ideal situation would be that a lot of what Apple prevents on their platform were illegal everywhere so it'd hardly matter, but the US, at least, does not seem to be heading that direction anytime soon. So, that's why. It risks changing the current situation such that I would find it worse, overall, and I'd prefer not to risk that.

bee_rider 3y ago
I like the phrase “de-facto regulatory power.” Not only is it the case that we don’t have to deal with annoying stuff like “enable the facebook store to download our app,” that is, poorly behaving apps in non-official stores. It also takes away one of bluffs that Facebook and friends could make. They don’t even have the ability to say “Apple, make your rules more permissive or I’ll open up a Facebook store.” They don’t even get to negotiate. It is great. If alternative app stores were allowed, I’d probably download a GNU iOS store. But that’s about it, and it just isn’t worth it.
stale2002 3y ago
> Apple's leverage has given it de-facto regulatory power Indeed. This is called "being an monopoly" and "using anti-competitive practices to control a market, in violation of anti monopoly laws". Yes, anti competitive practices work. Yes, being a monopoly works. And yes, it has produced some good things like Apple's focus on privacy. But it has also produced other very not good things, like the 30% Apple tax. But, it is at least comforting that people are now saying the quiet part out loud, which is "yep, Apple had anti competitive market power the whole time, I just like monopolies".
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  > But, it is at least comforting that people are now saying the white part out loud, which is "yep, Apple had anti competive power the whole time, I just like monopolies". It's... been the entire argument, the whole time, for the "please don't change it" side. I'm not even aware of another angle on it. It's never been "quiet". > I just like monopolies I like my life being better than it might otherwise be. In this case, yes, that means I'd rather this monopoly stick around at least a while longer. I'm entirely not a fan of black-and-white positions on most issues. Monopolies generally suck. In this case, however, one particular monopoly seems to be giving me significant benefits I might not otherwise have. Now, if I could trade Apple's monopoly for a harsh crackdown on monopolies across the whole economy, that'd be easily worth it—yes, please. Just to "liberate" iOS devices, though? Nah, I'd rather they leave it alone.

DHPersonal 3y ago

It's probably a misguided fear based on how bad things are even with the App Store, but I'm worried about each company moving its software to its own sites and requiring a more complicated, frustrating, or more privacy-invasive process to use the software over the requirements set by the App Store.

m3kw9 3y ago

You will be forced to if say an app you depend on goes outside