Apple urges lawmakers to reject bill that would force it to allow side-loading

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    anyone think this is a coincidence now that apple has introduced privacy and ad-blocking measures into iOS that block Google and Facebook from exploiting customer data?  I sure don't.
    maximara
  • Reply 22 of 34
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,054member
    gatorguy said:
    Apple has no legal obligation to allow any third party apps on their platforms. Let alone third party app stores.
    Not unless this bill were to pass, then it's legal obligation.
    That said, I don't see a chance in Hades that the bill passes.
    At no point did I say that Congress couldn't force Apple to allow third party app stores on iOS if Apple wanted to maintain its own third party app store. My point has always been that Apple can decide to stop selling any apps on iOS and not even Congress can stop that.

    I don't think Congress could legally require Ford to sell hydrogen powered wheelchairs, or require Walmart to sell machine guns, or require drug companies to sell drugs for lethal injections (some US States have actually tried this one, and failed.) These companies don't want to be in these lines of business. Congress also can't tell you that you must earn your living being a hairdresser - that would be unconstitutional, I'm pretty sure. It's the same thing.

    In all the years I've promoted this position, I don't recall anyone ever agreeing with me that Congress's power is limited, and it can't force people or companies to sell products or services if they don't want to be in that line of business. I guess most people think the government is all powerful.
  • Reply 23 of 34
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,054member
    smiffy31 said:
    mjtomlin said:

    Yep. Already knew those options… not the same thing as creating a full app and sending it to someone for them to use freely without restrictions. Both TestFlight and distributing Xcode projects have limitations and hurdles.
    There is the newly announced https://developer.apple.com/support/unlisted-app-distribution/ that allows apps to be distributed to anyone in any number through the app store.
    The unlisted feature is new, but doesn't change any of the requirements that developers must follow when creating those apps. So I don't consider that to be another method of software distribution. It's just unlisted, that's all.
  • Reply 24 of 34
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,006member
    mjtomlin said:
    lkrupp said:
    Only the malcontents that infest tech blogs like AppleInsider would side-load, and they would deserve whatever they get. This is purely a case of the tail trying to wag the dog, a bunch of losers who want to force Apple to do something it doesn’t want to do when they could easily move to Android and side-load away to their heart's content as well as tweet settings till the cows come home. But no, they insist Apple be forced to be just like Android and hide behind the ‘choice’ false flag.

    That’s a little harsh, don’t you think? As a programming hobbyist, there are things I write that I would like to be able to give to a few other people, but not “publish” on the App Store. There are more than just nefarious reasons for wanting something like side-loading. 
    You do realize that simply paying for an iPhone doesn't grant you the ability to do anything you want to do with it. Read all the legal documents you accept when you pay for the iPhone. You don't read them, join the group but that doesn't mean you're not bound by them. At this point, Apple's legal purchase terms do NOT allow you to put any software on the iPhone that isn't created using Xcode and delivered via the Apple App Store. Just because some companies, like Epic, don't like this doesn't mean there are special rules for them. Apple kicked them off once and are legally allowed to kick anyone off who violates the terms of the legal agreements. This is the same as for any other company. Just because you want to do something doesn't mean you are allowed to. I can't go into any grocery store, grab a few items and walk out the door without paying for them, that's considered theft. Can you see a grocery store being forced by Congress to let people not pay (steal) for grocery items? There are a few stores that offer space for (usually) handmade items where they might not charge you for the space to sell them and they don't collect any money but there are very few of them. Stores, like Apple, is in the business of selling things, including software created by others, they're not in the business of regularly hosting items (hardware) created by others and not charging you for them. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 34
    gatorguy said:
    Apple has no legal obligation to allow any third party apps on their platforms. Let alone third party app stores.
    Not unless this bill were to pass, then it's legal obligation.

    That said, I don't see a chance in Hades that the bill passes.
    Neither do I as at the State level it has been a spectacular failure If it was this bipartisan support thing it would not have

    1). Failed in North Dakota 36-11, when it came out that the supporters, Coalition for App Fairness which Apple would later claim was little more than a front for Epic-Spotify-Tile which is why the Ninth Circuit denied their brief

    2) Arizona's House Bill 2005 would have not just disappeared right before to a scheduled vote that could have sent it straight to the governor’s desk to be signed into law. - "It seems committed members weren’t sure the bill could stand the trial of votes." ie we didn't want a repeat of the North Dakota fiasco.

    3) Minnesota House Bill HF 1184, New York Senate Bill S4822, and Illinois SB2311 would have actually gotten a vote as they have been around since Feb 2021.  Going to committee doesn't count was 90% of bills don't get pass that point and "die".

    4) Some 71% of Congresspeople in a survey would not  use iPhones and 98% would not use iPads and they would have not give "security" as their biggest reason.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 34
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,054member
    rob53 said:
    mjtomlin said:
    lkrupp said:
    Only the malcontents that infest tech blogs like AppleInsider would side-load, and they would deserve whatever they get. This is purely a case of the tail trying to wag the dog, a bunch of losers who want to force Apple to do something it doesn’t want to do when they could easily move to Android and side-load away to their heart's content as well as tweet settings till the cows come home. But no, they insist Apple be forced to be just like Android and hide behind the ‘choice’ false flag.

    That’s a little harsh, don’t you think? As a programming hobbyist, there are things I write that I would like to be able to give to a few other people, but not “publish” on the App Store. There are more than just nefarious reasons for wanting something like side-loading. 
    You do realize that simply paying for an iPhone doesn't grant you the ability to do anything you want to do with it. Read all the legal documents you accept when you pay for the iPhone.  
    I think we're on the same side, but the license agreement you speak of is not for the iPhone, it's for iOS. The agreement isn't applied "when you pay for your iPhone," it's when you install iOS. You can do anything you want with your iPhone (just not with iOS.) If you can figure out a way to install Android, Apple can't stop you, because you didn't sign a license agreement when you bought your iPhone. Apple also doesn't care if you install Windows on your Mac.
    edited February 3
  • Reply 27 of 34
    Apple need to open up their platform, ... Apple could see a new renaissance if they open their doors to more content. 
    The question isn't whether Apple should do this or that, the question is whether Apple should be FORCED to do those things. Don't you think Apple should have the same freedoms as someone who opens up a lemonade stand and sells only one brand of lemonade? Intelligence should never be mandated by law.

    Frankly, you all might be right that Apple might win more business if they did those things you want. I don't know. But I do know that I believe in freedom and Apple should be allowed to make the wrong business choices. Can you tell me why Apple should be denied freedom?
    I get what you're saying, but how do you feel about $10/gal for gas or milk, cause THAT'S what we'd have with "freedom". I believe in personal freedoms, but sometimes, when corporations control a commodity, that freedom needs to be regulated. Personally, I believe mobile devices have become a commodity in our daily lives. And there's a  duopoly of mobile app stores (Apple/Google). They're different than the need for gas and milk, and therefore should be regulated as well.
  • Reply 28 of 34
    This shouldn’t even be an issue worth discussing.

    Once upon a time people knew that liberty was worth dying for. We’re so spoiled now that we’re wanting more and more government control over ‘bad terrible things’. These past two years have revealed that under the fear and threat of a virus the vast majority of people can fight off, we will accept invasions of liberty that two years ago 99.9% of people would have soundly rejected as un-American and even conspiracy theorist (such as people back in spring-2020 predicting there would be invasive vaccine mandates and who were dismissed as foolish).

    So we see Apple with their own product and ecosystem they’ve worked hard to develop, but a spoiled population wants what they want and is fine with the government wielding power over Apple’s liberty so they can get what they want, even when they could just switch to a quality competitor. They want zero sacrifice for themselves. They want others to bend to their own wishes, and are fine sacrificing liberty to get that. Ironically…
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 34
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,083member
    benz917 said:
    Side loading is an awful idea. People already deal with spam calls, phishing emails, Trojans. Companies deal with ransomware attacks and phishing schemes every day and the number only increases. Bad actors from overseas and on-shore are looking for easy money and access to vital information on our country and competition, let’s not make it worse by opening yet another door stupidly.

    instead our government should focus on closing some of the existing holes and making it something we don’t need to worry about. Work with other countries on cybercrime laws and enforce them harshly.


    Agree agree agree, and this bill speaks to a corrupt political process where influence peddling is subverting the political process. 

    Americans don’t care about App store side-loading, They want something done about spam, phishing emails, malware, database breeches, privacy and legal actions about these real and pressing issues.

    It was eye-opening to spend a weekend with my father before his recent death and my stepmother.  Their telephone and cell phones were getting multiple scam calls DAILY, literally a handful or two every day.  For the elderly especially and really all of us this is a much more pressing issue.  I am also sure that they were getting phishing emails at a similar rate.

    And if you want to go after corporate America for these issues go after the corporations that let databases of personal information get hacked and divulged to the criminals that feed the whole process over again.

    And yet the response from our politicians is to advance a bill that worsens these problems?  

    Do you want to have someone sideload an app that scans their contact list that includes YOUR name and your personal information?

    So it puts all of us at risk.  And of course Apple will be blamed for this by our forum trolls.
    edited February 3 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 34
    I wonder if my iPhone got hacked because I side loaded an app whether a class action against the supporters of side loading is warranted. Someone will eventually try.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 34
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,013member
    mjtomlin said:
    lkrupp said:
    Only the malcontents that infest tech blogs like AppleInsider would side-load, and they would deserve whatever they get. This is purely a case of the tail trying to wag the dog, a bunch of losers who want to force Apple to do something it doesn’t want to do when they could easily move to Android and side-load away to their heart's content as well as tweet settings till the cows come home. But no, they insist Apple be forced to be just like Android and hide behind the ‘choice’ false flag.

    That’s a little harsh, don’t you think? As a programming hobbyist, there are things I write that I would like to be able to give to a few other people, but not “publish” on the App Store. There are more than just nefarious reasons for wanting something like side-loading. 
    Then switch to Android and do your thing, be happy.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 34
    mjtomlin said:
    Agree with both comments above…
    I also think Apple could start lowering their fees, especially for subscription services. 
    Thanks, but don't you agree that Apple's $0 charge for free apps needs to be subsidized by the charge for the bigger companies?
    Free apps are not free. Apple gets $99+ a year for developer accounts.
    williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 33 of 34
    I wonder if my iPhone got hacked because I side loaded an app whether a class action against the supporters of side loading is warranted. Someone will eventually try.
    That's like suing McDonald's for making you fat.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 34 of 34
    Apple has no legal obligation to allow any third party apps on their platforms. Let alone third party app stores.
    It's kind of good business to allow third party apps though. My iPad would be a paper weight without the suite of office applications and custom applications I need for work.

    Not to mention all the games people like to play. We need to stop acting as if Apple products are great by themselves and devs are just along for the ride. Everyone has something to bring to the table.
    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.