2 ms·

I'm rather indifferent on the matter, but this doesn't quite hold true. It's possible (likely?) that a someone big - one who ordinary folk would go through the

I'm rather indifferent on the matter, but this doesn't quite hold true. It's possible (likely?) that a someone big - one who ordinary folk would go through the jumps for - would only publish their app via side loading (or alt app store) and use this to bypass some of the policy restrictions wrt privacy on the App Store. This then becomes a slippery slope and would act as a platform to allow other apps through. The tough part of "just don't side load" is when we have a somewhat contemptious relationship with some of the services you use, and they only offer their apps via alt methods. Worth noting that Epic Games couldn't get this to work for Fortnite (for a period they only offered Fortnite via a sideloaded apk), and I don't believe Facebook as tried this. There's also the finer details - if alt browse engines are allowed, will non-web browser apps start bundling and shipping their own browser engines (similar to the electron situation on desktop)?

easton 3y ago
The only thing about this argument I don’t quite agree with is that can’t apple just continue to sandbox apps to heck and back even if they are sideloaded? Like, currently apps can’t get a unique identifier for a user without the user allowing tracking, I don’t see why that has to change because sideloading is a thing. Unless there’s an implicit “and also the apps need to be able to get root/super entitlements without user consent” in the law. The App Store was only ever a first line of defense against icky behavior.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  Yes, security should always be implemented by technical means by the platform. Those hoping that alt-app stores means a complete free for all will be disappointed. But many things just cannot be restricted just by technical means, and instead relies on policy, and the threat of Apple kicking you off the platform, to enforce restrictions. A trivial example is the review prompts. It's policy that you must use the standard iOS APIs to trigger (which limits the frequency it's shown to the user). An app technically could implement their own UI (and im sure some still slip through), and there's no real way to prevent this, but being against the rules carries risks.

easton 3y ago

The only thing about this argument I don’t quite agree with is that can’t apple just continue to sandbox apps to heck and back even if they are sideloaded? Like, currently apps can’t get a unique identifier for a user without the user allowing tracking, I don’t see why that has to change because sideloading is a thing. Unless there’s an implicit “and also the apps need to be able to get root/super entitlements without user consent” in the law. The App Store was only ever a first line of defense against icky behavior.

madeofpalk 3y ago
Yes, security should always be implemented by technical means by the platform. Those hoping that alt-app stores means a complete free for all will be disappointed. But many things just cannot be restricted just by technical means, and instead relies on policy, and the threat of Apple kicking you off the platform, to enforce restrictions. A trivial example is the review prompts. It's policy that you must use the standard iOS APIs to trigger (which limits the frequency it's shown to the user). An app technically could implement their own UI (and im sure some still slip through), and there's no real way to prevent this, but being against the rules carries risks.