3 ms·
I've argued extensively before that allowing sideloading and even third party app stores would not be nearly a threat to security and quality user experience as
by Apocryphon 3y ago
I've argued extensively before that allowing sideloading and even third party app stores would not be nearly a threat to security and quality user experience as it's been hyped. Instead, I'll repeat a suggestion of a potential model of Apple getting behind sideloading itself, rather than being dragged screaming and kicking into openness:
> Really, Apple could have headed off regulators at the pass if they had embraced the semi-opening of their platform themselves. Allow third party app stores but on their own terms, providing SDKs and APIs for creating your own iOS App Store with security checks baked in and mandating privacy protections built in. Sort of like a software services equivalent to Apple Authorized Service Providers and Apple Authorized Resellers.
They would have then controlled this debate, and there would have been less room for the Epics of the world to complain about the platform being locked down. Not to mention users would benefit from greater choice. Imagine boutique third party app stores springing up devoted to specific interests and niches such as F-Droid, promising better curation or quality.
Companies who refuse to use the AppStoreKit that Apple so beneficently provided would then be seen as malefactors seeking to subject their users to lack of privacy and security, rather than Apple trying to uphold their 30% cut and restrictive behavior.
Instead, Apple tried to control everything and not only did they expose themselves to regulation like this, they deal with customers annoyed at scammy apps on their own App Store, and third party devs crying foul at inconsistent policing.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978588 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978588
Maybe this is sort of happening now, if Apple is providing an app distribution framework. They're embracing managed openness. Lifting some side gates in the walled garden.
- bradknowles 3y agoApple has had an Enterprise private App Store solution for years. How is this any different?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Apocryphon 3y agoIf you’re asking about OP, that’s what it says > By analyzing the new API, we’ve learned that it has an extension endpoint declared in the system, which means that other apps can create extensions of this type. Digging even further, we found a new, unused entitlement that will give third-party apps permission to install other apps. In other words, this would allow developers to create their own app stores. > The API has basic controls for downloading, installing, and even updating apps from external sources. It can also check whether an app is compatible with a specific device or iOS version, which the App Store already does. Again, this could easily be used to modernize MDM solutions, but here’s another thing. > We also found references to a region lock in this API, which suggests that Apple could restrict it to specific countries. This wouldn’t make sense for MDM solutions, but it does make sense for enabling sideloading in particular countries only when required by authorities – such as in the European Union. If you’re asking about my proposal, an MDM solution is certainly a far cry from Apple endorsing and selectively approving third party app stores as a means to essentially outsource the duties of running the App Store to other parties while taking a cut through different means.