iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone • Hacker News Board

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#581

Post by throw10920 » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 7:55 PM UTC

TexanFeller wrote: post #10

I'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…

What? The most meaningful privacy controls are enforced at the OS layer as technical controls. The thing that prevents Facebook from accessing all your contacts is the design of iOS, not the App Store.

Allowing sideloading of apps does nothing to weaken the technical features meant to enable privacy and security that are already in place.

In fact, you shouldn't have been relying on the App Store in the first place, as malware/spyware can and does slip through their very human and very fallible approval process.

This talking point is so common in every thread about sideloading Apple devices that I can't determine whether it's propaganda or ignorance.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#582

Post by dexterdog » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 6:33 PM UTC

HeckFeck wrote: post #563

dexterdog wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get a pixel and put graphene on it.

Graphene is actually great, I'll admit that. Though it does come at the cost of avoiding any mainstream apps. I suppose that depends where you are in life and who your main contacts are.

The only app I can't use is wallet because there is no NFC for cards in graphene.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#583

Post by wahnfrieden » Sun, Apr 23, 2023, 1:25 PM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #28

wahnfrieden wrote: post #5

EU only. Not in the land of the free.

This assumes facts not in evidence. The change is being forced by EU law, but it would take more effort to geo-fence it than to make the change globally. Not to mention the fact that it would be effort in the direction of a PR loss. No, the more Apple way to spin this is as a positive for everyone. As if they had the idea the entire time and just now figured out how to make it work.

Hey lol

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#584

Post by TheHappyOddish » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:27 AM UTC

ianlevesque wrote: post #577

squeaky-clean wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mom got tricked into installing an "emoji pack" that would make her phone give her constant notifications for a gambling website. She doesn't know she sideloaded an app, but that's what happened.

On Android you have to download the app, open it, navigate a dialog with no Next or OK buttons (it requires you to toggle on a permission switch for the application you are using out of a list of applications) and then go back and try again, then click install. If you are doing all of that, you are very determined to install that malware. I don't think protecting against that is worth denying everyone else the freedo…

I'm going to assume you're coming from a place of ignorance here.

A significant portion of people (often > 50) will absolutely follow this process if guided maliciously. Many people are incapable of grokking a warning message, as using a misunderstood device already sets their anxiety high.

I'm not saying Apples method is necessarily the right method, but stating that these people aren't worth protecting - or at least not worth protecting at the cost of opening up a device you bought knowing it was closed and had alternatives for - comes across as callous as best.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#585

Post by TheHappyOddish » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:30 AM UTC

standardUser wrote: post #228

askafriend wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re giving away your age with this comment. Of course it has caused chaos on desktop platforms, especially Windows in the early 2000s, late 90s. Since that era, it’s slowly dug itself out of that hole.

I was there. It was not chaos.

I was there. It was.

It's almost like your lived experience isn't reflective of broader society :o.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#586

Post by TheHappyOddish » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:33 AM UTC

r053bud wrote: post #250

rickdeckard wrote: post #154

So many "Not good. I want [company I trust] to be free to regulate [company I don't trust]" comments here. Even more odd, its sometimes followed by the even stranger argument "If [company I trust] is legally forced to stop restricting its competitors and has to allow me to choose, I may be lured into choosing [company I don't trust]". Sorry, but all this is closer to religion than common sense.

It’s Apple Stockholm syndrome at it’s finest. But you are apt in your religion comparison. Anything the good lord Jobs, or his prophet Cook says or does is law

What an arrogent statement. You should read it over and think about how you interact with others.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#587

Post by TheHappyOddish » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:35 AM UTC

lykahb wrote: post #401

I find the term sideloading problematic. It carries the bias that the "correct" way is to install apps from the centralized app store. The term conveys that this is an alternative and undesirable thing to do. The concern of malware is legitimate, but having a centralized approved store is a weak barrier anyway. The iOS has a solid system of permissions and sandboxing that should take care of that. A more drastic chan…

> It carries the bias that the "correct" way is to install apps from the centralized app store. The term conveys that this is an alternative and undesirable thing to do.

But... It is. This is a designed for purpose device, chosen to be used freely and this the "correct" way to install. Who defines the "correct" way if not the OS developers?