Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

techradar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#881

Post by dwaite »

jrockway wrote: post #154
neximo64 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be quite undesirable to distribute apps through a means where economies of scale are not available for example if there is no US market

I don't think things will be a problem. Distributing software is fairly easy; for most apps, uploading the app binary to their website as though it's an image file or video will be sufficient. And, then you get 30% more money for your business. It will be quite popular just for the cost savings. (Distributing software is not always easy, as game companies that have 100GB game downloads on launch day will tell you. Bu…

> And, then you get 30% more money for your business. It will be quite popular just for the cost savings.

You are speaking of licensing agreements to get access to the Apple SDKs, not to distribution. These are different things. Side loading on its own does not mean an end to contractual agreements to give Apple a revenue cut.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#882

Post by doubtfulcan »

kaba0 wrote: post #85
edandersen wrote: post #76

I wonder if they considered an "iPhone Europe Edition" - USB-C, side loading, physical SIM cards. Sounds like a good phone!

What’s good about physical SIMs? I do like apple for daring to improve the status quo there, so I want my European Edition with only e-simsz

It allows for pseudonymous internet access on devices and does not tie you to any carrier for any length of time

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#883

Post by dd36 »

snehk wrote: post #860
spartanatreyu wrote: post #838

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardly. Apple made their app store incredibly restrictive and took a massive cut of any profits that anyone was making. Not just app sales, any profits. (This happened to hey.com, they wanted a cut of the subscription that users were getting outside of their app). Sometimes apple would just outright steal developer's apps by making their own version, then blocking the original developers by claiming that they were ma…

Am I the only one who loves the way Apple handles subscriptions and the fact that they manage them and make the rules? I don't know a single other store or offering where getting rid of a subscription is easy. Not one. Netflix, Amazon, every newspaper, it's all complete crap. With Apple you have all subscriptions in one place and there's exactly one way to cancel the subscription and it takes five seconds. It's amazi…

Banks are starting to do that but it doesn’t cost 30%.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#884

Post by sofixa »

AdamN wrote: post #869
roguas wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me example of a thing that would prove it. EU has tons of regulation on cars(most of manufacturers are EU based) - ask any car manufacturer how easy it is to get a car sold in EU(not saying that tons of regulation is good or that difficulty of producing is good, but it is an example that goes well against your argument).

There is an argument that companies in mature sectors (like automobiles) advocate for increased regulation as a moat to keep competitors out since building a mechanism to comply is extremely expensive for new entrants.

That would be a shallow argument. Manufacturing cars, at scale, is a very complex problem that even manufacturers that have jumped over the "moat" in getting a vehicle approved by regulators like Tesla struggle a lot with. Also, car safety and pollution regulations are extremely important given the prevalence of cars so it's not like it's useless regulations just for the sake of it.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#885

Post by dwaite »

jrockway wrote: post #800
neximo64 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue about distribution is never the technical aspect you are describing, it's about getting people to visit that website/app store in the first place. If it were that aspect aspect companies like T-Mobile, Equinix, Vodafone, Orange would dominate it. Even after the the app store is available in Europe, these companies have no chance of success. That is what it looks like will be very undesirable because it will…

I'm not sure if the App Store is the amazing marketing tool that it's sold as. There are millions of apps, nobody is going to find yours. The biggest problem with Apple's revenue model is that they want the 30% for people that aren't really benefiting from the App Store. Spotify built their brand without Apple, and if you want their app, you just click the link they email you.

Spotify both acquires new customers because of their iPhone app and directly _through_ their app via in-app purchases. That is the value that Apple intended to charge them for, and Spotify has continued to begrudgingly think that value is worth the headaches.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#886

Post by dwaite »

voytec wrote: post #739
s3p wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Applications still require payments in form of contact lists What? It seems like you were trying to make a coherent argument but a list of contacts is in no way comparable to a paid subscription. Microsoft doesn't allow you to buy O365 with your contacts, do they?

No, but some apps require this to unlock functionality. I consider it a form of payment, just like apps sucking up data from one's phone being a form of non-financial payment for an app disguised as "free".

I would report such apps. It is firmly in the App Store guidelines that optional permissions (such as permission to track, geolocation, sharing contact lists) cannot result in a program without functionality or in a penalty for users.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#887

Post by sofixa »

dwaite wrote: post #881
jrockway wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think things will be a problem. Distributing software is fairly easy; for most apps, uploading the app binary to their website as though it's an image file or video will be sufficient. And, then you get 30% more money for your business. It will be quite popular just for the cost savings. (Distributing software is not always easy, as game companies that have 100GB game downloads on launch day will tell you. Bu…

> And, then you get 30% more money for your business. It will be quite popular just for the cost savings. You are speaking of licensing agreements to get access to the Apple SDKs, not to distribution. These are different things. Side loading on its own does not mean an end to contractual agreements to give Apple a revenue cut.

> You are speaking of licensing agreements to get access to the Apple SDKs, not to distribution. These are different things. Side loading on its own does not mean an end to contractual agreements to give Apple a revenue cut.

Isn't that what developers pay for to get access to?

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#888

Post by sofixa »

smcleod wrote: post #622
heavyset_go wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's ban of all browsers but Safari turned out to be the main barrier preventing progressive web apps from being viable, deepening the duopoly power of themselves and Google, because Apple refuses to implement basic browser standards that are necessary for PWAs. And then when they do implement similar browser standards, they don't follow any web standards, they instead make their own proprietary bespoke web standa…

I'd hate to see PWAs take hold - browser based apps are never as good on any platform. Give me native apps any day.

> Give me native apps any day.

Heavens no. I do not want to be forced to install an app for every single little thing - it's wasteful, detrimental to my security and privacy. Small examples from a recent trip: in Andalusia, there's a bunch of cities with very interesting old buildings (cathedrals, castles remaining from the Muslim era converted by the Spanish monarchs later on, etc.). Each and every one has a different app for their audio guide, map, etc. to help you navigate and understand them. It's just stupid, it's a one time thing and it could easily be served by a website; instead you have to download a 30-40 MB app for each one, and then remember to delete it afterwards.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#889

Post by zarzavat »

bluecalm wrote: post #864
wkat4242 wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well.. Germany did lobby very hard to not completely forbid ICE sales by 2035. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-05/germany-a... This was Germany the government, not the car companies. We're not perfect here in the EU either. But indeed the interests do seem more balanced than in the US in general.

Also regulation to automatically limit speed of cars - the biggest low hanging fruit when it comes to safety and quality of life in cities keeps getting delayed and crippled because of car manufacturers want to sell fast cars.

Is it just car manufacturers who are not keen on the idea? I for one don’t want a computer that has zero situational awareness, interfering with the controls when I’m driving and responsible for the vehicle.

The ability of computers to control the vehicle should be proportional to their perceptive abilities. No output without input.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#890

Post by dwaite »

heavyset_go wrote: post #452
PlutoIsAPlanet wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And you cannot use a third party browser, since they forbid that (all are Safari based) I think this has turned out to be the current barrier in preventing Google from completing taking over the web standards space.

Apple's ban of all browsers but Safari turned out to be the main barrier preventing progressive web apps from being viable, deepening the duopoly power of themselves and Google, because Apple refuses to implement basic browser standards that are necessary for PWAs. And then when they do implement similar browser standards, they don't follow any web standards, they instead make their own proprietary bespoke web standa…

> Apple's ban of all browsers but Safari turned out to be the main barrier preventing progressive web apps from being viable, deepening the duopoly power of themselves and Google, because Apple refuses to implement basic browser standards that are necessary for PWAs.

I don't know if this is substantially true. When I hear of PWA features that people complain about, they are almost always things that Google Chrome as its own app with its own web engine can't add to the underlying OS, such as:

- robust background processing

- background push notifications

- new video codecs (on a power-constrained device)

- system-wide protocol handlers

- web bluetooth/webUSB/webNFC

- adding their own new synthetic "app" representing the PWA to the Home Screen.

Many of the things people talk about with PWAs are not anything close to a web "standard" or even a recommendation - Google implemented them, because they were pressured internally to make a web-based programming environment for Chromebooks.

> [1] https://developer.apple.com/notifications/safari-push-notifi...

Both macOS and iOS have honest-to-goodness push notification support now.

Post reply on HN