This point keeps being made in these threads on here, and the response I’ve seen made, which I agree with, is that this clearly isn’t the case when you look at Android. Sideloading already exists and it is far from a common way to distribute applications.
From a business perspective, it really doesn’t make sense to force users to pull from outside the App Store, because you’re basically going to destroy your business. Most users are not all that technical and the moment you require them to fool around with apks or whatever other format, you’re going to lose a huge percentage of them.
The problem with using Android as a counterexample is that Apple iOS is more restrictive (e.g. privacy settings) than Android.
E.g. Facebook admitted they lost billions in revenue because of the Apple iOS ad tracking permissions change. That might be an example of Facebook forcing users to "sideload" Facebook+Whatsapp+Instagram to get around the privacy restrictions. In contrast, the Android platform didn't financially hurt them like that so there's less incentive to ask Android users to sideload Facebook apps.
So even a mega giant like Facebook has to follow Apple's rules because there is no sideloading to bypass them. A somewhat analogous situation in 2019 happened when Facebook violated Apple's app store policy and spied on teenagers by abusing their Apple developer account: https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+revokes+facebook+certi...
>Most users are not all that technical and the moment you require them to fool around with apks
I think some conversations about "sideloading" are muddy because casual conversation around it mentally includes alternative app stores rather than end users literally downloading raw ".app" bundle files
Apple can clearly make the OS secure/privacy friendly if they want to. The only layer of security that you may lose is the dubious “review” process, which clearly doesn’t do anything considering the amount of scam apps on the store.
Your sentences above are a prime example of a technology mindset being so familiar with the underlying technology that it actually handicaps the analysis of how people might use the tech in ways you don't expect.
The way the sideloaded app gets around the os-level restriction is that they would force users to give permission to the ad-tracking. Otherwise, the sideloaded app has crippled functionality.
That scenario can't happen on Apple's offical App Store because their policies don't allow apps to have crippled functionality when users opt-out of ad tracking.
The theme is that the side-loaded apps can exercise way more freedom with clever psychological dark patterns that bypasses os-level settings.
E.g. see related example from Twitter: https://www.techgoing.com/twitter-ads-may-track-users-in-vio...
There is a simple solution for Apple: disable ad tracking on iOS. The DMA doesn't require gatekeepers permit ad tracking. It only requires gatekeepers provide the same functionality they provide themselves. Apple is still perfectly able to provide a safe and secure OS under the legislation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/11/technology/bad-digital-ad...
But from first principles it's been clear that code auditing wasn't going to be sustainable long term. The real answer is for Apple to beef up their sandboxing to prevent things like cross app tracking, coercing permissions from users, etc.
This is what the Libre Android distributions (eg GrapheneOS, CalyxOS) have been (slowly) converging on.
Why not? It seemed to be going fine. As the number of apps increases, so does get money the App Store receives. I don't see anything inherently unsustainable in it at all.
Obviously, things like phone book access can be solved for sideloaded apps just as well as for App Store ones – just like Android has been doing for many years.
I originally thought I would never load a different App Store but now I might. If an App Store came out that was highly curated (ie no casino games, no subscription scams, no advertising against competitors), that listed exactly what the in-app purchases are before buying, and removed developers who get a lot of complaints in the store, I would be interested. Apple hasn’t been a good steward of the App Store.
I'm fine with it. Apple has been intentionally hindering WebKit development for years to hobble web apps and maintain their App Store dominance. They'll finally be forced to compete again.
Couldn't have said it better. The only things I could see myself sideloading are indeed the Kindle app (I like being able to single-click buy books without having to switch to Safari), a full browser, and possibly some retro computer, calculator, and console emulators.
All of these are (or at least have been, before I switched) been possible on Android via official apps from the Play Store.
Bingo. Chiefly worried about Facebook and my folks. As well as compliance deciding everyones' personal phones need antivirus spyware.
That said, I think Apple has the playbook with SIP on Macs: make it scary to disable and clearly in power user territory.
> corporate compliance
I've never enrolled any of my personal devices in any sort of corporate network, and I never will. Just say no.
If you actually try saying no, you'll find that it's actually easy.
And you become the pain-in-the-ass of every friend group and professional circle. No one likes dealing with annoying people like this.
No u.
Oh? So are you saying that monopoly power is a real thing, and that a company like Apple can extract a 30% monopoly fee, because of this network effect?
The problem with this argument is that Apple fans on one hand have been smugly commenting for a decade, "go but an Android" or "just don't publish on the iPhone" .
And now, they are turning around and suddenly discovering what market power is.
If Apple had merely reduced their 30% fee to 5% from the beginning, we wouldn't be in the situation.
But thems the breaks. Now every Apple fans will have to hear the same exact argument, that they used against others, for a decade, thrown back in their face.
I had problems with that only once. I guess it depends on people you are around with. But most people have different groups of friends on different apps already so it's usually no big deal.
They claimed that they expected Apple's rule changes a while back to cost them $10 billion dollars in 2022 alone.
Things may work out as the have with Android sideloading, but they may not. Incentives definitely differ between the two. It's also not clear to me that if sideloading is forced via regulation, it'll look like it does on Android—both operating systems may be forced to make it easier than it currently is on Android.
And, to be honest, who is Apple to dictate what Facebook's users can and cannot pay their Facebook subscription with? If people are fine with Facebook's cyber stalking, let them install the stupid app. You can still use the web version from Safari with all of the ad blocking addons you can find. Apple isn't the government and they don't have power of attorney, so I know what basis they have to say what apps you can and cannot sideload onto your phone.
Even still, I doubt Facebook will leave the app store because of this. They may provide some kind of "Facebook Plus" that you need to sideload, but the app store has too many eyes on it because it comes preinstalled.
The nightmare scenario, for the "please don't change it" side, is that one of a handful of big players does this but also uses it to push an entire alternative store. Facebook and Epic are the most likely to try. Maybe Google, outside chance Microsoft tries. I doubt any would bother to just push sideloading an app, without using it to make a play to become the second of an app store duopoly on the platform. Basically the same strategy Steam used to gain market share—"here's our new game that everyone wants... oh, by the way, to use it you have to install our store".
I mean, Epic's been burning stacks of Benjamins for at least a couple years giving away tons of games (most of it not even cheap shovelware!) to buy marketshare for desktop app store—it's not implausible they'd give away a lot of free games or other software to get iOS users to install their store, to make a play for the #2 (or #1!) app store position on the platform. And Facebook could probably get people to install theirs by just adding some visual bling to users' posts when they use the version from Facebook's store—might not even have to give them actual extra features to make it happen.
Maybe none of that happens, sure, but it might. If these changes brought by regulations end up making sideloading easier than it currently is on Android, on both platforms, I'd say it's a certainty that something like that'll go down, at least on iOS (more money to be made there; store's more restrictive) and maybe on Android, too.
I can see Epic starting a mobile game store. And, honestly, I don't see a problem with that. Apple is using Apple Arcade as one of their many "stay with us and you get all of this stuff" services, so why not? Perhaps Microsoft will join the fight and take Game Pass to mobile phones. May the best app store win.
Apple clearly has the upper hand no matter how this plays out. They'll actually have to compete, which means they may need to fix the review situation and loosen some of their policies to allow for things users want rather than make their users comply with what they want. They can stick to their "no video game streaming, no emulators, no links to your website" policy if they want to, but that'll only work as long as their users agree with them.
Given that iphone owners are more wealthy I expect this to happen much more often when sideloading is allowed on iphones since there's more money to be made. It's gonna get bad imo.
Certainly, Play Store doesn't feel as restrictive as the App Store, so that's probably a factor. But I doubt popular apps will drop Apple's store, because it will significantly reduce the number of people willing and able to install their apps.
No, at most you'll pay more for the same app your coworker sideloaded. The price for apple protection, +30% on everything.
Most people didn't extract pictures from their phone before apple cloud (or w/e their service is called) appeared. I know because i was the tech support for my family for those 5 years. How would they sideload?
Android has always supported sideloading, yet in almost 10 years of using Android, I've never had to sideload any commercial app.
Anecdotally, Amazon has tried to push their app store for a while by incentivizing installs with free games and the like, but none of these weren't also available on the official Play Store. Nowadays, it's all free-to-play anyway, but that's a different topic.
And then suddenly I lose all the protections afforded to me by the Apple Store, such as easy cancellations of subscriptions, easy refunds of apps that don't work, a layer of protection against malware, and so forth. It also just makes my phone that much harder to use, as finding and installing apps becomes that much harder.
If everybody gets sideloading, that absolutely will impact me directly, and negatively. Does that make sense?