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

761–770 of 1001 posts

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

#761

Post by solarkraft »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #519
chronogram wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think kitchens should have knives. I want my parents to be able to eat, but with knives in the kitchen they occasionally cut their fingers and I don't want to have to deal with that. You could make it optional but before you know it they'll get knives anyway. Besides, most people eat processed food and don't want to make meals from scratch so this is only a problem for a handful of people. (yes yes this is sa…

My parents want to cook dinner with knives. They have no interest in side loading custom applications though.

My parents want to install applications of their choosing on their devices, but have no interest in knife-cooked dinner.

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

#762

Post by solarkraft »

phatfish wrote: post #462
amelius wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cookie popups can be very annoying and confusing and they didn't do anything about that.

Recently I've noticed more sites providing a visible "Deny All" button, rather than the dark pattern of going through and unchecking 5, 10, 50 tracking cookies individually, or having to dig out a button hidden somewhere. I assume this was how it was intended to function, but the kind people that run internet websites intentionally made it more difficult.

Indeed, the bigger players were, I think, specifically contacted.

Lots of smaller players still do it, though, so maybe this is not the most effective enforcement style.

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

#763

Post by sunshinerag »

leoh wrote: post #727

Superior functionality exclusively in the EU — USB-C, side-loading — is a good thing. It will remind US folks that the law is a powerful mechanism for making simple, non-controversial changes that improve everyone’s quality of life; but which corporations would otherwise refuse to accept. BTW — LAAS (lobbying-as-a-service) should probably exist.

Superior Functionality? That is subjective POV.

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

#764

Post by locustous »

chalst wrote: post #743
locustous wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it's always because that the UX is terrible that makes them not viable not anything Apple has done. Obvious counter points. Lots of people use websites. Which have an identical UX experience to PWAs. A significant percentage of the app store is web view based apps that are near equivalents to PWAs. Been that way for years. If people love native so much, why do sites like Reddit and LinkedIn heavily push mobile…

> If people love native so much, why do sites like Reddit and LinkedIn heavily push mobile web users to the app? Because that's how sites can avoid the privacy features that are inherent to browsers. What proportion of visitors to the LinkedIn site use the app? I'm guessing it's pretty small.

I don't like installing apps I don't have to. I agree that the browser sandbox is superior.

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

#765

Post by hamilyon2 »

Is something like early days mobile app development gold rush likely to happen? There is likely an enormous market for unofficial clients, foss games, game engines, emulators, and of course torrenting of all kinds.

Will European iPhone sales skyrocket? Will you be able to change region if you move to Europe?

So many interesting questions.

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

#767

Post by commoner »

SXX wrote: post #485
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…

For years Google been stamping "standards" one after another even though other browser vendors were against many of them and they end up being Chrome-only. No matter what Apple itself does Safari being major non-Chromium browser helps Firefox a lot just by existing and having huge marketshare.

> No matter what Apple itself does Safari being major non-Chromium browser helps Firefox a lot just by existing and having huge marketshare.

That is incorrect because Apple has prevented and still prevents Firefox from properly implementing Gecko on iOS. Apple also restricts Firefox and browsers other than Safari from implementing full WebExtensions. Even though Firefox and browsers other than Safari are required to use WebKit on iOS, they are not allowed to access many of WebKit's iOS-integrated features including content blockers and Safari extensions.

All of these Apple-imposed handicaps make Firefox a much less competitive browser on iOS than it could be, and in no way helps Firefox because users generally prefer to use the same browser across their devices. The EU's upcoming browser choice legislation will prohibit Apple's anticompetitive restrictions to put Firefox on a more level playing field with Safari on iOS.

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

#768

Post by ok_dad »

mig39 wrote: post #757
DannyBee wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, that magic new port that dose something we can't do, but nobody can pinpoint what it is or why we need it. It's been a decade since a new port (lightning was 2012, usb-c is 2014). So apparently, they are doing pretty well! I think my answer here would "enjoy the next decade of benefits and worry about it then?"

When this was first proposed in the EU, the connected they wanted to mandate was the "standard" at the time. USB Mini-B. Which is now deprecated and a few generations behind. And the same arguments were made at the time. "Stifle innovation" and "what innovation, this connector is perfect. No need for improvement."

> When this was first proposed

Well, it's a good thing they UPDATED the bill that eventually became law, right? I guess they could probably do that again, if necessary!

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

#769

Post by evilduck »

candiodari wrote: post #752
evilduck wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? I've plugged lightning cables into pretty much any imaginable sort of USB-A socket over than last decade and have never encountered one that wouldn't supply a charge specifically to a lightning cable. Please, be specific with what limitations you're referring to because this is counter to all evidence I've ever been witness to.

They supply a charge fine, but no standards-based fast charging.

Oh, so you're moving the goal posts to avoid discussing your lie. Got it.

But please, reference a USB2 or USB3 standard over a type A connection that enables fast charging too. This will be fun.

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

#770

Post by est31 »

leoh wrote: post #727

Superior functionality exclusively in the EU — USB-C, side-loading — is a good thing. It will remind US folks that the law is a powerful mechanism for making simple, non-controversial changes that improve everyone’s quality of life; but which corporations would otherwise refuse to accept. BTW — LAAS (lobbying-as-a-service) should probably exist.

The EU is at the side of the customers as long as the companies making the product are not in the EU. Had the EU a strong phone manufacturer industry that didn't use USB-C, we still wouldn't have that requirement. Companies always maintain closest lobbying ties to the governments they reside in (at least if both economies are equally developed), and countries care less about companies that don't give many jobs to their residents or taxation revenue.
Post reply on HN