6 ms·

Whenever an article demands more freedom and more user rights on Apple platforms, it irritates me to see an enormous amount of participants arguing against it,

Whenever an article demands more freedom and more user rights on Apple platforms, it irritates me to see an enormous amount of participants arguing against it, defending Apple‘s practices. I am wondering if these are consumers who do not want freedom, or an army of paid people who scan forums to defend Apple‘s practices.

user432678 3y ago
I personally would like to have side loading on Apple devices, but also I have four different game stores on my PC because some games are not available on the others. And hate it so much.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Serious game store competition has improved Steam a lot. Epic Games may be a shit company, but they keep Valve on their toes and we're all better for it. GOG is also ahead in many ways, like how their launcher integrates with every other launcher so you only really need to open GOG if you want to play games. Shitty stores that only offer their maker's products (uPlay, Origin, Battle.net) don't need to compete, so their experience is usually crap. Most of those have vanished these days, though.
- thefounder 3y ago
  I personally hate the stores and the games that require you to "login" or even worse subscription based games.
chilie 3y ago
I help maintain the phones/computers for several non-technical and/or elderly family members. Their computers are a mess. No matter what pro-active measures I take, every time I get involved, they have a bunch of nonsense installed doing who-knows-what. Random apps, most of which are running all the time, slogging down the system. The younger folks have different game-stores, or other similar things, all running in the background. The computers are slower than mud. Their phones are all fine. They may download crap, but I know it is almost impossible for it to mess things up outside of that individual app. I'm not saying this to completely defend Apple - I honestly don't know which side of the App Store/sideloading debate I fall on. I'm just pointing out that there are huge benefits, particularly for the general population of non-techincal users, to Apple remaining as a gatekeeper (albeit obviously a quite imperfect one).
- permo-w 3y ago
  I think the best option really is for side-loading to be possible, but just not easy. this is how it work on Amazon Fire TV sticks. you have to go into settings, flick a switch buried a few layers deep, then download an unobvious app from the store, after which you can download whatever app you like from the internet, but only within that app. everyone wins. at least until Amazon decide this is losing them money, anyway
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Yeah! Whenever I visit my parents their Android phones are always full of adware and toolbars, their background is a gambling ad, and their bluetooth speaker insults the cat! Except that's not what happens. My mom gets spammy magazine article notifications which I offered to help her get rid of, but she actually wants them for some reason.
- frankreyes 3y ago
  I think my partner's phone is full of malware but now I'm too afraid to look xd
- impissedoff1 3y ago
  Tons of malware infested apps get through both app stores. https://www.pcmag.com/news/study-reveals-googles-play-store-is-main-distributor-of-malicious-apps https://www.pcmag.com/news/study-reveals-googles-play-store-... https://www.zdnet.com/article/over-half-a-million-users-been-infected-with-joker-malware-after-downloading-this-android-app-from-google-play/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/over-half-a-million-users-been... https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/more-malware-infested-apps-found-google-play-store https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/more-malware-infe... https://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/malicious-apps-millions-downloads-apple-google-app-stores https://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/malicious-apps-... https://lifehacker.com/great-now-the-apple-app-store-has-malware-too-1849386738 https://lifehacker.com/great-now-the-apple-app-store-has-mal... Etc..there were some studies posted about this too
  - lockhouse 3y ago
    You’re being disingenuous here. Of course malware slips through the review process, but it definitely catches more than it misses. Additionally, it serves as a deterrent to malware authors to seek softer attack surfaces.
bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
It is people whose unpaid side gig is their parents’ tech support, seeing their job about to get a lot harder.
martimarkov 3y ago
No, I defend it because I actually do not want that. I prefer the Apple experience. I control all my subscriptions from a single place, I only get stuff from the App Store and if I get tricked to buy an app that is not working I can request a refund and I’ve never had issues getting my money back. I also haven’t had a single issue with anyone from my family getting scammed or their details being stolen after switching the to Apple. Before it was a constant “accidental” subscriptions and random installed apps. What actually annoys me are the developers wanting everything for “free”. Look you customer chose to buy an iPhone. Accept it. You don’t like that you have to Apple? Tell your customer to use a web browser. But I feel there is almost no respect from developers to what the users have chosen and why.
- thefounder 3y ago
  >> You don’t like that you have to Apple? Tell your customer to use a web browser. It's not working like that with companies with values of trillions that own half of the market.
- ur-whale 3y ago
  >I prefer the Apple experience. Yup, different people place the freedom vs security cursor at different spots. You're clearly a "I'd rather live in a golden cage than use my brain" type, and that is fine, more power to you. No everyone is like you, thank god.
  - martimarkov 3y ago
    No, I value my time and my brain. It takes me X wasted minutes to talk to a support person to remove my subscription. That’s not really a good use of my brain, is it now? If you want the freedom - there are platforms out there. Use those. There is no reason to impose your views on the rest of us. I prefer this level of security vs freedom. When I need the freedom I pickup my Android phone. The important point here is I have a choice. Ppl get scammed by phone calls & text messages… it’s an entire industry designed and operating to bypass this brain of yours. And now we are introducing another vector to make it easier. That is my problem with side-loading. The fact that it increases the attack surface for everyone even though not everyone wants it.
synetic 3y ago
I would be happy to pay more for an app by using the Apple store than using a side loaded version. I like being able to cancel subscriptions without having to email or call someone.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  Two things: 1: Apple allowing third party stores means that those who only pick the third party store would lose you as a customer. That is how competition should work. You should have that choice. That is it working correctly. 2: In the US, at least, that is nearly at it's end. In California, it is illegal for a company to not allow you to cancel the same way you signed up.
  - synetic 3y ago
    Let’s flip it around a bit. Apple not allowing developers to make side loaded apps means that those who don’t like this situation don’t have to develop mobile apps. It just means those developers lose mobile customers. That’s how competition works. Having a single app store that enforced policies brings consumers peace of mind. I don’t think it’s worthwhile to change that. What will happen is that bad actors will end up having an easier time engaging in shenanigans.
Toutouxc 3y ago
> consumers who do not want freedom, or an army of paid people who scan forums to defend Apple‘s practices. And that's an exhaustive list? Like, in your mind, do there not exist other kinds of people who'd want their iPhone to stay exactly like it is?
Simulacra 3y ago
I think a lot of people opposing side loading, at least here on HN, are involved in app development, etc. They don't want side loading because they've had to buy into the Apple ecosystem and now they're stuck with it. Sideloading means competitors won't have to go through the same crap that they did. Sort of like the debate around student debt, health care, etc. "I had to do it, now so do you. "
isykt 3y ago
I’m going to speak in terms of the iPhone because that is the device to which your comment refers, but the following could easily apply to any smart phone: A person’s iPhone is extremely personal. They spend hours using it. It is practically an extension of their body. Many people sleep next to them. Many people develop a form of arthritis in their thumbs, downward curving necks, eye strain using them. Most people are never more than a few feet from their iPhone, and that’s usually because the device has to be sometimes connected to a wall in order to continue functioning. Is it any wonder, then, that some people have trepidations about forced changes to how that device functions? Is it a mystery the some people are concerned about how that will impact the development of the device going forward? Whether you agree with their concerns or not — as I take it you don’t — I think it’s perfectly reasonable that a large contingent of users are skeptical of an outside governing body forcing the maker of a device they depend on to make substantial changes to its operating model. You call it more user freedom, but more freedom to do what, exactly? What’s your pitch for those who are hesitant?
- EscapeFromNY 3y ago
  > You call it more user freedom, but more freedom to do what, exactly? What’s your pitch for those who are hesitant? Nothing will change for you if you don't want it to change. This is only an option for people who want additional functionality. Nobody is forcing freedom or change on you by adding one more hard-to-find option buried in a menu somewhere for people who really want it.
  - isykt 3y ago
    > This is only an option for people who want additional functionality. The common concern is that critical software that users depend on will only be released in a way that circumvents the safety mechanisms that Apple employs to prevent the execution of malicious code. Is that fear unfounded? Even setting aside the malicious code concern, many users don’t want to have to track several different app stores to find functional software. What prevents this from becoming the case?
    - 3y ago
dang 3y ago
It's against the site guidelines to insinuate astroturfing or shillage like this - if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, we'd appreciate it. The reason is that the overwhelming majority of such perceptions turn out not to have any evidence behind them, and meanwhile it's one of the things that internet commenters do that most degrades discussion. I wrote a much longer explanation about this recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35932851 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35932851. There are lots of other past explanations at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... if anyone wants more.
- submeta 3y ago
  You are right. I took a gut feeling as a reason for speculation. That was not correct. I apologize.

user432678 3y ago

I personally would like to have side loading on Apple devices, but also I have four different game stores on my PC because some games are not available on the others. And hate it so much.

jeroenhd 3y ago
Serious game store competition has improved Steam a lot. Epic Games may be a shit company, but they keep Valve on their toes and we're all better for it. GOG is also ahead in many ways, like how their launcher integrates with every other launcher so you only really need to open GOG if you want to play games. Shitty stores that only offer their maker's products (uPlay, Origin, Battle.net) don't need to compete, so their experience is usually crap. Most of those have vanished these days, though.
thefounder 3y ago
I personally hate the stores and the games that require you to "login" or even worse subscription based games.

chilie 3y ago

I help maintain the phones/computers for several non-technical and/or elderly family members. Their computers are a mess. No matter what pro-active measures I take, every time I get involved, they have a bunch of nonsense installed doing who-knows-what. Random apps, most of which are running all the time, slogging down the system. The younger folks have different game-stores, or other similar things, all running in the background. The computers are slower than mud. Their phones are all fine. They may download crap, but I know it is almost impossible for it to mess things up outside of that individual app. I'm not saying this to completely defend Apple - I honestly don't know which side of the App Store/sideloading debate I fall on. I'm just pointing out that there are huge benefits, particularly for the general population of non-techincal users, to Apple remaining as a gatekeeper (albeit obviously a quite imperfect one).

permo-w 3y ago
I think the best option really is for side-loading to be possible, but just not easy. this is how it work on Amazon Fire TV sticks. you have to go into settings, flick a switch buried a few layers deep, then download an unobvious app from the store, after which you can download whatever app you like from the internet, but only within that app. everyone wins. at least until Amazon decide this is losing them money, anyway
jeroenhd 3y ago
Yeah! Whenever I visit my parents their Android phones are always full of adware and toolbars, their background is a gambling ad, and their bluetooth speaker insults the cat! Except that's not what happens. My mom gets spammy magazine article notifications which I offered to help her get rid of, but she actually wants them for some reason.
frankreyes 3y ago
I think my partner's phone is full of malware but now I'm too afraid to look xd
impissedoff1 3y ago
Tons of malware infested apps get through both app stores. https://www.pcmag.com/news/study-reveals-googles-play-store-is-main-distributor-of-malicious-apps https://www.pcmag.com/news/study-reveals-googles-play-store-... https://www.zdnet.com/article/over-half-a-million-users-been-infected-with-joker-malware-after-downloading-this-android-app-from-google-play/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/over-half-a-million-users-been... https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/more-malware-infested-apps-found-google-play-store https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/more-malware-infe... https://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/malicious-apps-millions-downloads-apple-google-app-stores https://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/malicious-apps-... https://lifehacker.com/great-now-the-apple-app-store-has-malware-too-1849386738 https://lifehacker.com/great-now-the-apple-app-store-has-mal... Etc..there were some studies posted about this too
- lockhouse 3y ago
  You’re being disingenuous here. Of course malware slips through the review process, but it definitely catches more than it misses. Additionally, it serves as a deterrent to malware authors to seek softer attack surfaces.

bobbylarrybobby 3y ago

It is people whose unpaid side gig is their parents’ tech support, seeing their job about to get a lot harder.

martimarkov 3y ago

No, I defend it because I actually do not want that. I prefer the Apple experience. I control all my subscriptions from a single place, I only get stuff from the App Store and if I get tricked to buy an app that is not working I can request a refund and I’ve never had issues getting my money back. I also haven’t had a single issue with anyone from my family getting scammed or their details being stolen after switching the to Apple. Before it was a constant “accidental” subscriptions and random installed apps. What actually annoys me are the developers wanting everything for “free”. Look you customer chose to buy an iPhone. Accept it. You don’t like that you have to Apple? Tell your customer to use a web browser. But I feel there is almost no respect from developers to what the users have chosen and why.

thefounder 3y ago
>> You don’t like that you have to Apple? Tell your customer to use a web browser. It's not working like that with companies with values of trillions that own half of the market.
ur-whale 3y ago
>I prefer the Apple experience. Yup, different people place the freedom vs security cursor at different spots. You're clearly a "I'd rather live in a golden cage than use my brain" type, and that is fine, more power to you. No everyone is like you, thank god.
- martimarkov 3y ago
  No, I value my time and my brain. It takes me X wasted minutes to talk to a support person to remove my subscription. That’s not really a good use of my brain, is it now? If you want the freedom - there are platforms out there. Use those. There is no reason to impose your views on the rest of us. I prefer this level of security vs freedom. When I need the freedom I pickup my Android phone. The important point here is I have a choice. Ppl get scammed by phone calls & text messages… it’s an entire industry designed and operating to bypass this brain of yours. And now we are introducing another vector to make it easier. That is my problem with side-loading. The fact that it increases the attack surface for everyone even though not everyone wants it.

synetic 3y ago

I would be happy to pay more for an app by using the Apple store than using a side loaded version. I like being able to cancel subscriptions without having to email or call someone.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
Two things: 1: Apple allowing third party stores means that those who only pick the third party store would lose you as a customer. That is how competition should work. You should have that choice. That is it working correctly. 2: In the US, at least, that is nearly at it's end. In California, it is illegal for a company to not allow you to cancel the same way you signed up.
- synetic 3y ago
  Let’s flip it around a bit. Apple not allowing developers to make side loaded apps means that those who don’t like this situation don’t have to develop mobile apps. It just means those developers lose mobile customers. That’s how competition works. Having a single app store that enforced policies brings consumers peace of mind. I don’t think it’s worthwhile to change that. What will happen is that bad actors will end up having an easier time engaging in shenanigans.

Toutouxc 3y ago

> consumers who do not want freedom, or an army of paid people who scan forums to defend Apple‘s practices. And that's an exhaustive list? Like, in your mind, do there not exist other kinds of people who'd want their iPhone to stay exactly like it is?

Simulacra 3y ago

I think a lot of people opposing side loading, at least here on HN, are involved in app development, etc. They don't want side loading because they've had to buy into the Apple ecosystem and now they're stuck with it. Sideloading means competitors won't have to go through the same crap that they did. Sort of like the debate around student debt, health care, etc. "I had to do it, now so do you. "

isykt 3y ago

I’m going to speak in terms of the iPhone because that is the device to which your comment refers, but the following could easily apply to any smart phone: A person’s iPhone is extremely personal. They spend hours using it. It is practically an extension of their body. Many people sleep next to them. Many people develop a form of arthritis in their thumbs, downward curving necks, eye strain using them. Most people are never more than a few feet from their iPhone, and that’s usually because the device has to be sometimes connected to a wall in order to continue functioning. Is it any wonder, then, that some people have trepidations about forced changes to how that device functions? Is it a mystery the some people are concerned about how that will impact the development of the device going forward? Whether you agree with their concerns or not — as I take it you don’t — I think it’s perfectly reasonable that a large contingent of users are skeptical of an outside governing body forcing the maker of a device they depend on to make substantial changes to its operating model. You call it more user freedom, but more freedom to do what, exactly? What’s your pitch for those who are hesitant?

EscapeFromNY 3y ago
> You call it more user freedom, but more freedom to do what, exactly? What’s your pitch for those who are hesitant? Nothing will change for you if you don't want it to change. This is only an option for people who want additional functionality. Nobody is forcing freedom or change on you by adding one more hard-to-find option buried in a menu somewhere for people who really want it.
- isykt 3y ago
  > This is only an option for people who want additional functionality. The common concern is that critical software that users depend on will only be released in a way that circumvents the safety mechanisms that Apple employs to prevent the execution of malicious code. Is that fear unfounded? Even setting aside the malicious code concern, many users don’t want to have to track several different app stores to find functional software. What prevents this from becoming the case?
  - 3y ago

dang 3y ago

It's against the site guidelines to insinuate astroturfing or shillage like this - if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, we'd appreciate it. The reason is that the overwhelming majority of such perceptions turn out not to have any evidence behind them, and meanwhile it's one of the things that internet commenters do that most degrades discussion. I wrote a much longer explanation about this recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35932851 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35932851. There are lots of other past explanations at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... if anyone wants more.

submeta 3y ago
You are right. I took a gut feeling as a reason for speculation. That was not correct. I apologize.