Android has had this from day one(?) and it has never been an issue.

Except the velvet lined iron fist called Google Play Services which gatekeeps the apps from having nice things or not.

Android lets you easily side-load apps. You are not required to get your apps from Google.

As an example, I tend to look for apps on f-droid before google play.

Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction? Locked down is good for you, you don't want freedom, we know better. On hacker forum.

Seriously, basically any other topic we can discuss like adults here but when it comes to Apple and their restrictions/bad behavior it feels like the most upvoted posts are paid ones (not stating they are, but it certainly would look like that on more generic forums)

> Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction?

Because the only mobile OS provider which allows blinding tracking frameworks with a single click is Apple currently, and every software vendor will want its telemetry and ads for their "monies".

The application model evolved from "pay this to get that" to "train this AI implicitly which we gonna use against you, and ah, we also sell your every aspect of you" to see cute cat GIFs.

Some of us are seriously against this and Android doesn't provide that. Maybe it's because Google is an advertisement company which provides nice looking (free-ish) utilities which also acts as nice data funnels (incl. Android).

True, but Google's own implementation of Android in the Pixel does allow you to re sign the bootloader so you can install your own OS and securely boot to it. And "Android" isn't all the same. It's a broad and shared ecosystem.

However, doing this and using a custom ROM will flat out disable SIM services menu and related functionality, which I need for my embedded e-Signature in my SIM card.

Also, we have a gatekeeper called Google Play Services. In other words, even if you have a custom ROM, you need that all-encompassing framework to have nice things.

Clients may differ, but the cloud platform and the connector which enables all these "Android" things is closed source, and controlled by Google.

Or you could have the open source microG and miss out only on Google Pay (and some bank apps that wanna validate SafetyNet for some reason). If you disable FCM / push notification support, your phone won't even need to interact with Google servers at all.

How do I install that microG thing in a Huawei Mate 50? Oh wait, I can't.

Tough luck! That said, Huawei phones don't siphon your information to Google (of course they leak it to Huawei instead :-)

---

If you want to install microG super easy and are still choosing your next phone, get one supported by LineageOS: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

Then instead of the official LineageOS build, get one from here with microG preinstalled: https://download.lineage.microg.org/

For low budget folks, a lot of Xiaomi phones are supported. You'll have to sign up for their account and wait for a few days, but otherwise the process is pretty straightforward. E. g. this is for my current phone: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/ginkgo/install

If you mean browsing web, the freedom I talk about allows you on Android to install Firefox and ublock origin (and other plugins), which is more privacy friendly solution in-the-box than Apple will ever allow to be installed on any Apple device. If you mean apps installed its your choice what you put on your device.

Lets not forget the stuff you (and most of us) so loathe is direction Apple is actively heading for few years via their own ad-space. Truly surreal discussion.

You can install Firefox on an iPhone

Firefox on iOS is just browser chrome on top of Safari's browser engine because Apple bans all other browser and JavaScript engines on iOS.

Then make it a contact that can be opened by removing a screw behind a "non reversible loss of warranty" sticker so that only users who know what they're doing would be motivated to proceed.

ChromeOS devices (used to? still?) have/had something like this, albeit no warranty was voided— the device just wiped on transition between “trusted” and “untrusted”. That Apple won’t allow such a thing speaks to their motivations behind the walled garden.

>>removing a screw behind a "non reversible loss of warranty" sticker

Well that would be in violation of existing US Federal Law

I'm not familiar with those laws, do you mean the protection screw or the loss of warranty? I think many devices implement the latter in their EULAs, in case of tampering, use of non original parts etc, and the former as a protection is commonly used for example in some Chromebox PCs models to prevent flashing other operating systems. I think many tinkerers, including myself, would be more than happy to surrender any warranty, support, etc, if that was the only price to pay to be able to install what we want on our devices.

Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ban such stickers as the manufacture has to prove a modification directly led to the failure before denying a warrany claim. the FTC sent out in 2018[1][2] a letter to several manufacturers, including Apple I believe, that deployed such stickers on their products

The common example I give is that if you replace the radio in your car, and then the water pump fails the manufacturer of the car can not refuse the warranty because you change the care

Similarly, if in this instance you remove the sticker to turn on Dev Mode and then the Screen fails it would be incumbent on Apple to prove some software or something you did directly cause the screen failure before voiding the warranty claim, they can not simply relay on a sticker

[1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ftc-warranty-sticker... [2] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2018/04/...

We don't have to guess. Android app store is clear example that gives power users choice, while at the same time being able to hold onto most of the users.

The Google play store is heavily censored and moderated and most users don’t know about side loading.

Are you trying to argue that it would be different if Apple allowed side loading? (Not the current 7 day crap)

Do you expect most users would know about side loading in Apple's case?

A sibling argument is saying that if side-loading were opt in, major apps would move to require it from users.

This has never happened on Android.

Epic's enormously popular game Fortnite was removed from the Google Play store in 2020 for violating their in-app purchase policies, so they publish it in their own sideloaded app store.[0]

[0] https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/fortnite-removed-from-g...

> This has never happened on Android.

>When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title directly from their website, an effort made to avoid the substantial revenue cuts that Google takes from in-app purchases of Play Store downloads. At the time, the move was understandable for Epic, which was sitting on the hottest free-to-play game of the year that was pulling in substantial revenues from in-app purchases.

Google proceeded to try to scare users away from sideloading Epic's app, and Epic sued.

>“Google puts software downloadable outside of Google Play at a disadvantage, through technical and business measures such as scary, repetitive security pop-ups for downloaded and updated software, restrictive manufacturer and carrier agreements and dealings, Google public relations characterizing third party software sources as malware, and new efforts such as Google Play Protect to outright block software obtained outside the Google Play store,” an Epic Games spokesperson said in a statement. “Because of this, we’ve launched Fortnite for Android on the Google Play Store.”

https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/21/epic-games-launches-fortni...

>> A sibling argument is saying that if side-loading were opt in, major apps would move to require it from users.

>> This has never happened on Android.

> When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title directly from their website...

Though that's the exception that proves the rule. Besides Fortnite, who else has pushed users into side-loading? It's not at all common, which weighs strongly against the scare-mongering that it would somehow cause their platform security to collapse if Apple allowed it.

It also seems like it would be the case if your app is big enough to get people to side-load it, it's probably also big enough to get some security/privacy of its own to keep its practices in check.

>Besides Fortnite, who else has pushed users into side-loading?

Amazon did the same with its app store (one they tried to push when they first released their tablet)

We know from discovery in the various Google antitrust cases that Google has used their control of Android to place barriers against others who attempted to offer their own app store.

>The lawsuit is effectively claiming that this openness is a facade, because while customers technically have the choice of where to get their apps from, Google’s business practices have prevented a viable app store competitor from emerging.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/8/22568111/google-play-andro...

>Google has struck at least 24 deals with big app developers to stop them from competing with its Play Store, including an agreement to pay Activision Blizzard Inc about $360 million over three years

https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-agreed-pay-360-mln...

>Epic reached an agreement with OnePlus to preload Epic Games on the company’s smartphones. As part of the agreement, Epic says it developed a version of Fortnite specifically for OnePlus devices to take advantage of the OnePlus phones’ high-refresh-rate screens...

Google demanded OnePlus not implement the agreement outside of India, where the company allowed OnePlus to move forward with the deal.

OnePlus reportedly informed Epic that Google was “concerned that the Epic Games app would have the ability to potentially install and update multiple games with a silent install bypassing the Google Play Store.”

https://mobilesyrup.com/2020/08/14/epic-google-oneplus-prelo...

WeChat won’t start on Android if you didn’t give access to your contact list, this is not the case on iPhone as Apple wouldn’t allow that crippled user experience. Android already allows shenanigans so the incentives for more stores aren’t that big. I had Samsung store on my last Android phone also.

For me, it's not about companies right but individuals rights. If I paid money for a device and if I am willing to let go of warranty and updates, I should be free to do whatever I wish with it. I don't think this statement should be as controversial as people make it to be.

You're free to jailbreak

No I am not, unless someone finds a bug in their code. In contrast, android allows rooting for someone willing to forgo their warranty.

Facebook claims to have lost $10 billion due to a single iOS prompt giving users the option of blocking tracking. If side-loading were allowed on iOS, Facebook would have 10 billion reasons to push users to side-load their app, a pressure that doesn't exist at all on Android, which is tracking-happy.

Since Google lets most apps do what they want in most ways, there's not much motivation for bypassing the App Store--unless you're greedy like Epic. Since Apple restricts apps more with each passing year, the motivation is much higher, in addition to the identical 30% fees.