I just want first class PWAs.
iOS 16.4 added a bunch of PWA-focused features. What gaps do you feel still exist?
More low-level camera access would be a nice improvement. Also, the ability to work with raw video data for trimming/editing.
iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
201–210 of 587 posts
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are doing no such thing. You don't have to use side loaded apps. If a company decides to only distribute from side loading, you can just not use their app. This is effectively what you are forcing on people who would prefer side loading, so it shouldn't be a problem for you.
I want a locked down phone. So does every old person in my life. I'll literally pay extra for a locked-down phone. If you want to side load, buy a phone that allows it, don't force Apple to make one.
You, and the old people in your life, can simply stick to downloading from the official store. This change doesn't suddenly force you to live your life in a way that you're uncomfortable with.
If applications suddenly drop out of the App Store (horrendously unlikely) and force you to install them via sideloading, don't do it. It's entirely your prerogative.
Plus, I imagine Apple is going to make it quite involved to actually sideload anything. I think the old people in your life (incidentally, I know a lot more tech savvy older people than younger people, but that's neither here nor there) are safe from the nefarious clutches of added freedom.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of this affects you whatsoever. Just don't use a sideloaded apps. I don't see why this would bother you in any way. Personally if Apple finally allows me to install whatever I want on my phones then I may return to their phones. Until then, I will use Android since I can download and install any .apk I want on my device.
> None of this affects you whatsoever. Just don't use a sideloaded apps. I don't see why this would bother you in any way. That's unfortunately wrong. Say you use WhatsApp to keep in touch with your friends. Say Facebook pulls WhatsApp from the app store and makes it only available via side-loading. What do you do? You have to decide between trying to move everyone you know off of WhatsApp, or you side-load.
> Say Facebook pulls WhatsApp from the app store and makes it only available via side-loading.
Say a meteorite hits the Earth and we all die.
In a completely hypothetical scenario there are much worse things that can happen than Facebook voluntarily pulling WhatsApp from the App store, forcing their users to side-load it, gaining nothing on the permissions side of the bargain while at the same time losing a majority of their users or, even more probably, having users stuck on the last version they could install from the store and never update again.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apps you trust is a really poor security mechanism for the general public. The Apple App Store is a dumpster fire, but there is a perfectly reasonable argument for locking down a device you’re handing to family members who aren’t security conscious.
> perfectly reasonable argument for locking down a device you’re handing to family members who aren’t security conscious Then enable a more limited App Store mode as an opt-in feature.
> Then enable a more limited App Store mode as an opt-in feature.
As on macOS (with SIP, etc.) it'll be the opposite: Users will need to opt-in to this new less-secure mode, as they do the ultra-secure Lockdown Mode.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#205If Apple do implement this, I hope they can ensure 3rd party apps live in a sandbox or otherwise need to be given explicit permissions. One big argument I've seen against side-loading on iOS is people like the confidence of knowing that an app has to play by iOS's rules, so if we can bring this to the world of side-loading then this could be a win-win for "both camps".
Interesting point. I also hope that Apple will allow sideloads into these permission-less sandboxes.
Imagine two classes of sandbox: offline with loads of permissions, online with no permissions. Offline apps will obviously have to be paid for upfront. Online apps will have a subscription model.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#206I'm dreading this. I want privacy hostile companies like Facebook to have to comply with the app store rules and respect system settings relating to privacy. As a user, I'm thrilled when Apple wields its big stick to stop big tech companies from overreaching. Before there was a bit of a compromise, I could use evil apps with some peace of mind that they wouldn't do something egregious. Now I suspect evil apps just wo…
I'm the opposite, as looking at android, where do we see this? All big players are still in the play store, because the average user of those services doesn't want to be bothered going to a website, clicking scary looking buttons to enable third party installs, then manually update their own installed apps. Basically the risk would be someone like TikTok dropping out of the store, but I find that unlikely. Maybe at t…
> I'm the opposite, as looking at android, where do we see this?
Where do we see Android devices with apps like Facebook preinstalled, unremovable and granted root permissions? All over the ecosystem.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#207I'm dreading this. I want privacy hostile companies like Facebook to have to comply with the app store rules and respect system settings relating to privacy. As a user, I'm thrilled when Apple wields its big stick to stop big tech companies from overreaching. Before there was a bit of a compromise, I could use evil apps with some peace of mind that they wouldn't do something egregious. Now I suspect evil apps just wo…
I understand your concern and share some of them. However the solution to overreaching unaccountable private cooperations cannot be to hand all the power to another private unaccountable company. Apple is venturing into advertising and that'll tempt them to weaken privacy protections sooner or later. Additionally their app store rules went far beyond enforcing security and privacy. They gave themselves an advantage a…
> Apple is venturing into advertising
It's not the advertising part that is problematic. It's the part where you relentlessly spy on everyone to make selling ads more profitable.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm the opposite, as looking at android, where do we see this? All big players are still in the play store, because the average user of those services doesn't want to be bothered going to a website, clicking scary looking buttons to enable third party installs, then manually update their own installed apps. Basically the risk would be someone like TikTok dropping out of the store, but I find that unlikely. Maybe at t…
> I'm the opposite, as looking at android, where do we see this? Where do we see Android devices with apps like Facebook preinstalled, unremovable and granted root permissions? All over the ecosystem.
Only Apple sells iPhones, so I wouldn’t worry about preinstalled 3rd party apps with root permissions like we see on Android phones.
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#209> Historically, Apple execs including Tim Cook and Craig Federighi have staunchly opposed sideloading citing privacy and security reasons. Which is funny to me, because after flipping through the App Store for an email client, I found, on this heavily curated storefront, a single digit number of apps I would trust with my email credentials. Android, with it's option to "sideload" F-Droid, gives me dramatically more o…
Apps you trust is a really poor security mechanism for the general public. The Apple App Store is a dumpster fire, but there is a perfectly reasonable argument for locking down a device you’re handing to family members who aren’t security conscious.
[deleted]
Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone
#210Having the power to choose side load is a net benefit. For those that have any sort of fear, they simply just get apps from the official store. Could and will people be taking advantage of by side loaded apps? The obvious answer is yes, it's a risk that allows for responsibility and freedom.
What happens when the apps which used to be available on the app store get taken down and made sideload-only, like what Epic did with Fortnite on Android?
The same thing that happened before: you either chose to install it and side-load it or you don't. Side-loading is something that only a very marginal minority of people do. I don't understand the fearmongering.
Anyway when you sideload an app on an Android phone, the APK is scanned to check if it's secure to install.
Permission wise, nothing changes.
Policy wise, it means no Apple tax and maybe some publisher will be able to cut prices, to the users' benefit.