That hasn't happened with the official Google Play Store, and there's a multitude of 3rd party stores to choose from.
Of course it has, and to say other wise is complete nonsense. Android users around the world out number iPhone users 5 to 1 but the Google plays store does only half the revenue of Apple’s App Store. The only reason for this gigantic disparity is that people are buying their apps for android devices from other places.
That hasn't happened with the official Google Play Store, and there's a multitude of 3rd party stores to choose from.
Of course it has, and to say other wise is complete nonsense. Android users around the world out number iPhone users 5 to 1 but the Google plays store does only half the revenue of Apple’s App Store. The only reason for this gigantic disparity is that people are buying their apps for android devices from other places.
Not having a Google Play Store in China kind of distorts things a bit.
Just because I will never allow sideloading on my iPhone doesn't mean that my iPhone won't be subjected to malware from people who now have malware on theirs sending their malware to my iPhone through email and messages.
If that is your line of thinking, then there's nothing to stop people with jailbroken phones and people using commercial hacking tools from doing exactly the same now. In fact, alternative app stores have strict controls that jailbroken phones don't. Apple Mail and Message are no less sandboxed in iOS 17.4 than they are in previous versions - maybe more so, as security generally gets better with each iOS release. There have already been many documented instances of certain individuals (politicians, journalists) being targeted by so-called "state sponsored actors" using commercially available zero-day exploits in current and previous versions of iOS.
Plus Apple aren't allowing sideloading as such - they're allowing alternative app stores. People won't be able to download just any app from anywhere. It will have to be from an Apple approved App Marketplace and the stakes for creating one aren't insignificant, nor will using an alternative app marketplace be mandatory.
They say ignorance is bliss but seeing as Apple is waving this particular 'user concern' flag it would be nice to know how many actually wrote to them.
Not that anything they wrote was even remotely relevant.
No one is forcing people to use anything they don't want.
I even have huge reservations about the term 'sideloading' as we aren't talking about apps downloaded and installed without any control. We are talking about apps that have been through a store approval process and notarized by Apple (at least under the current proposals).
What is perhaps more worrying is that Apple is actually parading these ignorant claims around as if they represent something.
Alternative app stores can easily be safer than Apple's App Store. There are zero technical limitations to pulling that off. The question is how far external stores will go with regards to vetting and security, not the security protections themselves.
Maybe the EU should fire back with a selection of emails from consumers who complain about Apple not opening up to competition.
First of all it IS side loading because it is being installed sans-AppStore from ANY source in the same way you can download and install on the Mac.
Second, while security IS possible on alternative app stores, they WON’T because the whole point of sideloading is to remove barriers to install.
The great thing about this is that this is only in the EU and the world will get to see how much of a cesspit side loading will be and not go for it elsewhere.
They say ignorance is bliss but seeing as Apple is waving this particular 'user concern' flag it would be nice to know how many actually wrote to them.
Not that anything they wrote was even remotely relevant.
No one is forcing people to use anything they don't want.
I even have huge reservations about the term 'sideloading' as we aren't talking about apps downloaded and installed without any control. We are talking about apps that have been through a store approval process and notarized by Apple (at least under the current proposals).
What is perhaps more worrying is that Apple is actually parading these ignorant claims around as if they represent something.
Alternative app stores can easily be safer than Apple's App Store. There are zero technical limitations to pulling that off. The question is how far external stores will go with regards to vetting and security, not the security protections themselves.
Maybe the EU should fire back with a selection of emails from consumers who complain about Apple not opening up to competition.
First of all it IS side loading because it is being installed sans-AppStore from ANY source in the same way you can download and install on the Mac.
Second, while security IS possible on alternative app stores, they WON’T because the whole point of sideloading is to remove barriers to install.
The great thing about this is that this is only in the EU and the world will get to see how much of a cesspit side loading will be and not go for it elsewhere.
Sadly the EU residents are the Guinea pigs.
That doesn't fit my definition of sideloading.
Sideloading forme is picking up an app from any unofficial source and whacking it onto the system.
That’s different to getting an app from a recognised store with developer checks and controls in place and being subjected to effectively the same kind of checks as those carried out by Apple. If notarisation is involved then that's a technical plus.
That hasn't happened with the official Google Play Store, and there's a multitude of 3rd party stores to choose from.
Of course it has, and to say other wise is complete nonsense. Android users around the world out number iPhone users 5 to 1 but the Google plays store does only half the revenue of Apple’s App Store. The only reason for this gigantic disparity is that people are buying their apps for android devices from other places.
That quote was referring to app developers pulling there offerings from Google Play in order to avoid sharing any income with Google. It is not common. As for your explanation for why the AppStore makes so much more money (which may have been in jest) China is the biggest reason for the disparity of income, Google Play vs Apple's AppStore. Only one of those two is willing to make the required compromises to be in the world's second-largest market.
I don’t live in the EU, but I feel like if they allow siloing some developers like Netflix will make it even more cumbersome to use their app. I would prefer them just not be on iPhone rather than sideling. The real reason why these companies want to Seidel is because they only care about profit without doing anything of substance to improve the product that they already have. Spotify and Netflix will never do anything in favor of an Apple user. It took them forever to support the HomePod and recently Netflix took away support for AirPlay. I use Apple because they are one of the few companies that have at least done something of substance when it comes to letting me have control over my privacy online. It’s still not perfect, but it is better than the competition. While still providing a phenomenal product. Allowing side loading will allow These big companies skirt things like privacy labels on the App Store and put back a little bit of spyware that they use to track you from up to up. The biggest reason why I do not use android is because these apps can do almost anything they want and for a lot of people they don’t care and that is totally fine but for me, I choose Apple for privacy.
That’s what EU wants to see, make a second Android for people so that others company could make more. But the price is user’s security which politicians don’t give a shit.
I fail to see why this is an issue for some. If you’re concerned about other AppStores and side loading apps, then the simple solution is to carry on doing what you’re doing with your phone and don’t download from anywhere else expect the AppStore. It’s really simple. If someone else’s security or device gets compromised then that’s their problem and not yours. Nothing for you to be concerned about. And just to confirm, I’m not in favour of alt app stores or sideloading either.
It's easy to understand the issue: the EU doesn't require app developers to provide a version of their app in the App Store. That means that some apps previously available through the App Store could become exclusively available on 3rd party stores. So users could be faced with a choice of downloading from 3rd party app stores or simply not using the app anymore.
This is exactly correct, and it’s why forcing Apple to allow side-loading reduces consumer choice. The primary reasons for developers to want to go outside of the App Store are to get a free ride on iOS, and to evade App Store requirements for user privacy, security, and transparent, ethical financial transactions. Big, must-have apps will use that route, as will many developers of apps that support third-party devices, such as automated IOT devices.
Presently, if these developers want access to iPhone users, they have to abide by Apple’s heightened privacy and security rules. Many would rather not do that, so they can sell automated pet feeders (or whatever) that gather data and otherwise spy on you.
Forcing iOS open to be more like Android means consumers will lose the choice of a device that maintains that bulwark against unscrupulous app developers.
I fail to see why this is an issue for some. If you’re concerned about other AppStores and side loading apps, then the simple solution is to carry on doing what you’re doing with your phone and don’t download from anywhere else expect the AppStore. It’s really simple. If someone else’s security or device gets compromised then that’s their problem and not yours. Nothing for you to be concerned about. And just to confirm, I’m not in favour of alt app stores or sideloading either.
It's easy to understand the issue: the EU doesn't require app developers to provide a version of their app in the App Store. That means that some apps previously available through the App Store could become exclusively available on 3rd party stores. So users could be faced with a choice of downloading from 3rd party app stores or simply not using the app anymore.
This is exactly correct, and it’s why forcing Apple to allow side-loading reduces consumer choice. The primary reasons for developers to want to go outside of the App Store are to get a free ride on iOS, and to evade App Store requirements for user privacy, security, and transparent, ethical financial transactions. Big, must-have apps will use that route, as will many developers of apps that support third-party devices, such as automated IOT devices.
Presently, if these developers want access to iPhone users, they have to abide by Apple’s heightened privacy and security rules. Many would rather not do that, so they can sell automated pet feeders (or whatever) that gather data and otherwise spy on you.
Forcing iOS open to be more like Android means consumers will lose the choice of a device that maintains that bulwark against unscrupulous app developers.
If developers pull out of the App Store they will have their reasons but ask yourself this: why would they do it for financial reasons?
If users (who have the choice) don't follow the app to its new home, the developers will lose out. The solution is simple. Leave their apps on the app store at the price they want. In addition to that, put them on as many external app stores as they want at prices they want. Doesn't that make sense.
Who will decide the outcome? Consumers.
And if they choose to not use the App Store, it will mean the claims of security and privacy meaning so much for users weren't as important as some like to suggest. Even in that case Apple can deal with it by reducing the financial burden on the developer and/or the consumer. That would be competition.
There is a certain amount of schadenfreude anticipation going on here. While Apple certainly would not wish harm to come to anyone's phone, Apple users who were most vocal against side loading would likely take some pleasure in seeing side loaded EU phones melt.. not that they would LOL. Myself, I am happy not to have regulators here trying to give me more store choices as I am fine using the App Store. Full disclosure, I have 2 newer Android phones collecting dust here (given to me), but can't be bothered selling them. I prefer iPhone and iOS, even though the Android phones offer more user choices, and might have technical superiority in some areas. My prediction is that this will end up like Y2K where little happened as there was enough attention, that safety planning actually happened. Apple will do what it can to protect iPhone users, even the side loaders, as why wouldn't they? They are still important Apple customers after all. But if their phones cause them serious security issues ... and they whine about it ... well, I might crack a small schadenfreude smile.
I fail to see why this is an issue for some. If you’re concerned about other AppStores and side loading apps, then the simple solution is to carry on doing what you’re doing with your phone and don’t download from anywhere else expect the AppStore. It’s really simple. If someone else’s security or device gets compromised then that’s their problem and not yours. Nothing for you to be concerned about. And just to confirm, I’m not in favour of alt app stores or sideloading either.
It's easy to understand the issue: the EU doesn't require app developers to provide a version of their app in the App Store. That means that some apps previously available through the App Store could become exclusively available on 3rd party stores. So users could be faced with a choice of downloading from 3rd party app stores or simply not using the app anymore.
This is exactly correct, and it’s why forcing Apple to allow side-loading reduces consumer choice. The primary reasons for developers to want to go outside of the App Store are to get a free ride on iOS, and to evade App Store requirements for user privacy, security, and transparent, ethical financial transactions. Big, must-have apps will use that route, as will many developers of apps that support third-party devices, such as automated IOT devices.
Presently, if these developers want access to iPhone users, they have to abide by Apple’s heightened privacy and security rules. Many would rather not do that, so they can sell automated pet feeders (or whatever) that gather data and otherwise spy on you.
Forcing iOS open to be more like Android means consumers will lose the choice of a device that maintains that bulwark against unscrupulous app developers.
If developers pull out of the App Store they will have their reasons but ask yourself this: why would they do it for financial reasons?
If users (who have the choice) don't follow the app to its new home, the developers will lose out. The solution is simple. Leave their apps on the app store at the price they want. In addition to that, put them on as many external app stores as they want at prices they want. Doesn't that make sense.
Who will decide the outcome? Consumers.
And if they choose to not use the App Store, it will mean the claims of security and privacy meaning so much for users weren't as important as some like to suggest. Even in that case Apple can deal with it by reducing the financial burden on the developer and/or the consumer. That would be competition.
Developers like Meta, Google and Epic are big enough to leave the Apple App Store and set up their own, and their business models are built on practices discouraged or prohibited by Apple, so they’re highly motivated to evade Apple's rules while maintaining access to iOS and its customers. Scraping and selling user data is how they generate revenue, so that’s the answer to your question of “why would they do it for financial reasons.”
Currently iPhone users have access to many of these companies’ apps (ok, not Epic, because they refuse to abide by Apple’s standards at all, or even legal standards for that matter), which are restrained by Apple from the worst abuses. That will likely change once the EU rule is applied. So European consumers will lose the choice of using those apps without giving away privacy and security.
Will consumers have the choice to simply not use those companies’ apps under the new terms? Sure, but they’ll have lost the option to use those apps under more favorable terms. So the new rule sacrifices consumer choice in favor of more exploitative developers.
Comments
Plus Apple aren't allowing sideloading as such - they're allowing alternative app stores. People won't be able to download just any app from anywhere. It will have to be from an Apple approved App Marketplace and the stakes for creating one aren't insignificant, nor will using an alternative app marketplace be mandatory.
Second, while security IS possible on alternative app stores, they WON’T because the whole point of sideloading is to remove barriers to install.
The great thing about this is that this is only in the EU and the world will get to see how much of a cesspit side loading will be and not go for it elsewhere.
Sadly the EU residents are the Guinea pigs.
Sideloading for me is picking up an app from any unofficial source and whacking it onto the system.
That’s different to getting an app from a recognised store with developer checks and controls in place and being subjected to effectively the same kind of checks as those carried out by Apple. If notarisation is involved then that's a technical plus.
It's a matter of opinion.
As for your explanation for why the AppStore makes so much more money (which may have been in jest) China is the biggest reason for the disparity of income, Google Play vs Apple's AppStore. Only one of those two is willing to make the required compromises to be in the world's second-largest market.
If users (who have the choice) don't follow the app to its new home, the developers will lose out. The solution is simple. Leave their apps on the app store at the price they want. In addition to that, put them on as many external app stores as they want at prices they want. Doesn't that make sense.
Who will decide the outcome? Consumers.
And if they choose to not use the App Store, it will mean the claims of security and privacy meaning so much for users weren't as important as some like to suggest. Even in that case Apple can deal with it by reducing the financial burden on the developer and/or the consumer. That would be competition.