Do you think that sideloaded apps on iOS can bypass “Do not track”? I honestly don’t know, but I’m assuming not. Just because Google doesn’t do something perfectly (or even well) doesn’t mean that it’s simply impossible for Apple to do something similar in a way that’s safe for users.
Reinstall macOS and watch the setup dialogs guiding customers to iCloud and document uploads. Blah blah come on, sync your whole Document folder to the iCloud it’s much better that way, while at the same time Apple strictly refuses to introduce iCloud encryption and holds a masterkey even to backups. Yeah, yeah, Apple and privacy… fits just like Facebook and privacy… just worse because Apple makes false statements and fool customers. They fight so hard for your privacy that the first thing they did is to hang down the “What’s on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone” Ads with the CSAM introduction.
Just a thought.. Wish I were programmer to better understand how this really worked.. Would it be best if "Side loaded" apps used a set of API's except "X" API's that would use any identifiable info? Like .. You can write your app and offer your own store.. BUT because it's not signed it won't execute certain API used to harm the user? Location, device IMIE.............
So like, a few years ago there was a jailbreak that was installable via AltStore. If sideloading was allowed generally at the time, I can see how it could potentially be used harmfully. Somebody else could use the exploit and create an app that causes harm.
I assume you’re referring to App Tracking Transparency, the feature which displays a prompt asking you whether you would like to allow an app to track you.
"So local scanning for CSAM would make Apple profit how exactly?" It's actually a very simple calculus.
Windows does this because of the nature of openness and how well understood the entire kernel is. However, there is a huge difference between a Mac/PC and a phone.
Apps downloaded from Cydia or Installer were not built using Apple's tools, rather using Toolchain. Apple's SDK was later adapted. So many jailbreak apps that are side-loaded in (installed) may or may not follow the sandboxing tools.
There's certainly an argument to be made on the opposite side. Maintaining a platform that's a closed box, like an electronic appliance (such as a video game console), makes quality control, support, user experience, etc. a whole lot easier and impactful. If you don't like that, buy an Android phone. There's a reason that Android didn't completely squash iPhone out of existence and it all comes down to the general public having had a good enough experience with it being stable and "just working". Revenue is certainly a biproduct of controlling sideloading but it's also an easy scapegoat to blame that for Apple's position. The revenue loss could be compounded by the cost to provide the same support. The checkbox option might work but I guarantee you it will still lead to class action lawsuits when someone's nudes are leaked online because they just HAD to sideload that SNES emulator onto their phone.
If you don’t trust an app or its developer, don’t install the app(s). If you’re too mindless to understand that concept, install it and find out what happens, I guess. Actions have consequences, just like on a big-kid computer. Not my problem.
So what you’re saying is that Apple should get the benefit of the doubt for future plans, even though at the moment their privacy efforts don’t actually do anything? Seems like a weird amount of trust to put into a corporation.
Does Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo allow Steam, Epic, GOG, etc. stores on their consoles? Apple is extremely hands on with their phone and their App Store, Google handles this the complete opposite way, being very hands off and providing a fraction of the support. Either way works, but being in between would be a nightmare.
