Really the only app I'd be interested in sideloading is a BitTorrent client (not for pirating lol)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Senate Panel Approves Antitrust Bill That Would Allow Sideloading
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm fine with it as long as they come locked down by default and you have to put in your passcode twice to disable the sandbox with accurate warning messages explaining the risks. I think I'm going to keep my devices locked down, except for my Mac of course. It would be nice if you could approve on a case-by-case basis for trusted developers. For instance, if you wanted to replace iCloud with Dropbox for backups and photos so that it worked in the same exact way, you could authorize Dropbox only and prevent other apps from being installed without approval. It would be nice to be able to use side loaded apps without operating as root the entire time.
Unfortunately tons of kids are going to do this to install Fortnite. Hopefully there are parental controls that will restrict kids from doing this or they could basically bypass all the parental controls.
It's going to be interesting to see how many people get their crypto wallets compromised because of this. Not to mention the nude photo leaks that will result, lol. Most people really can't be trusted with their own security, especially iPhone users who aren't used to this crap.
Unfortunately tons of kids are going to do this to install Fortnite. Hopefully there are parental controls that will restrict kids from doing this or they could basically bypass all the parental controls.
It's going to be interesting to see how many people get their crypto wallets compromised because of this. Not to mention the nude photo leaks that will result, lol. Most people really can't be trusted with their own security, especially iPhone users who aren't used to this crap.
that's a **** analogy.
lots of sideloaded apps are perfectly safe.
sideloading is basically the same as downloading programs on an desktop OS.
are you telling me that if I download a program outside the Mac App Store on my MacBook that my MacBook is at risk of physically breaks the laptop? or even just causes crashes/freezes or instability software wise?
on PC i don't think i've ever downloaded a program from the MS store. i go to the developers website and download it. Perfectly safe.
sideloading is just the same. yes there is a risk but if aren't stupid and make sure you're downloading from a trusted site then you'll be fine.
This article should mention that Feinstein and Padilla are the Senators for California...the home state of Apple, Google, and Meta.
The bill, which was first introduced over the summer, would require major changes to the App Store if passed in its current incarnation. It is designed to prevent "dominant platforms" from "abusing their gatekeeper power" by favoring their own products and services over those of competitors.
Senator Dianne Feinstein criticized the bill and said that it targets a "small number of specific companies," and Senator Alex Padilla said that it was difficult to "see the justification for a bill that regulates the behavior of only a handful of companies while allowing everyone else to continue engaging in that exact same behavior."
I guess Feinstein and Padilla are unfamiliar with our country's long history of antitrust legislation, which specifically and uniquely targets any company with dominant power as the means to prevent monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior. To wit, those laws, and the long string of enforcement precedents they produced, explicitly outline behaviors that are illegal for a dominant player but legal for others.
Senator Dianne Feinstein criticized the bill and said that it targets a "small number of specific companies," and Senator Alex Padilla said that it was difficult to "see the justification for a bill that regulates the behavior of only a handful of companies while allowing everyone else to continue engaging in that exact same behavior."
I guess Feinstein and Padilla are unfamiliar with our country's long history of antitrust legislation, which specifically and uniquely targets any company with dominant power as the means to prevent monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior. To wit, those laws, and the long string of enforcement precedents they produced, explicitly outline behaviors that are illegal for a dominant player but legal for others.
Then the next step would be to force all consumer operating systems to be Open Source.
This would be an interesting approach by Apple. I could see them trying to justify this by saying only apps signed by the App Store are allowed to access certain APIs for security reasons i.e. no access to contacts, photos, or precise location
Not sure this approach would fly in the courts though...
Oh, the irony! Lawmakers ??♂️ While the last portion highlighted is not part of the quote, it still fits well.
So it’ll block the Democratic Party itself? Genius.
But the main point is whether or not it makes sense for the government to force Apple's iOS/iPadOS platform to allow that. There's been a lot of insinuation that Apple is doing something anticompetitive, but when it comes to court cases that involve anti-trust issues, Apple has not been found to be in violation. So, again, why try to force it on iOS/iPadOS?
Personally, I would just stick to the Apple app store. But people should have choices. And if they get hosed on security, that's their right to make that decision.
Why doesn't Apple have the right to control its own operating system? Have U.S. courts found Apple to be in violation of anti-trust laws? No.
What the senate panel is stressing is that the App Store in its current form is (or soon will be) illegal.
The App Store in its current form is Capitalism Gone Haywire.
Invented by Steve Jobs.
The App Store in its current form is Capitalism Gone Haywire.
Invented by Steve Jobs.
That’s exactly what I’m saying. Apps can and have bricked devices. Physically rendering them inoperable.
Not to mention ones that will install keystroke loggers. Or give attackers access to your photos. Or cameras/microphones. Or your crypto wallets. Emails. Everything.
All of this is not only possible with downloading apps from untrusted sources, but probable.
You can do what you want, I’m not willing to risk it. The difference largely in PC vs phone access is that the average user has way more metadata, incriminating and personal data on their phones, including texts, calls, voicemails, dick pics, etc.
Agree completely. This whole issue is related entirely to developers trying to bypass paying money to Apple. They can pretend all they want that Apple does no to internet but collect a percentage of their revenue. But that just isn’t the case. As always, if this bill goes through… the consequences will likely be far different than what was hoped for/anticipated.
Soooo this means I’ll be able to have the PlayStation store on my Xbox right? And the Nintendo store too?
Oh wait, they’re not big enough to get noticed and have this apply to them… just Apple I guess. ?
Oh wait, they’re not big enough to get noticed and have this apply to them… just Apple I guess. ?
What about the Epic lawsuit? That was specifically oriented around the way Apple operates the App Store and the judge did not find Apple to have violated any federal anti-trust laws.
I'm a hungry troll. Also, one can feel bothered with certain aspects of a platform while still appreciating it. Like any relationship, you don't have to ditch because somethings are disagreeable. I have a lot of issues with Apple, and I think that Linux, Google, and Microsoft all do [some things] better, but my iPhone and MacBook are easily my preferred devices.
Edit: Oops, all do some things better.
Last edited:
Because existing law doesn’t match how business has evolved over the past several decades. Apple and other Big Tech companies may not be violating the letter of the law, but as today’s Senate Judiciary Committee vote shows, at least 16 of 22 legislators on the committee believe they’re violating the spirit of the law. (The only committee member who explicitly doesn’t believe there’s a competition issue in Big Tech — regardless of whether they support this specific bill — is Sen. Feinstein, and she probably doesn’t know what year it is at this point, so.)
I see sideloading working basically like this (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204460). If you are unfamiliar with enterprise app sideloading or installing beta apps via test flight it would be good to look into how that works. Apple already supports several ways to get apps onto your device without going through the app store but each seems to have some limitations or drawbacks preventing large scale deployments.
Apple seems to think these methods are safe enough to support and have been for a while, they even bought test flight to help distribute beta apps a while back. I'm confident if they're forced to allow it by other means it will remain a decently safe optional thing that some people can elect to do.
There are some legitimate apps that exist that aren't allowed on the app store for no other reason than apple says so. They aren't security threats and they aren't malicious. They are often on the play store, the only thing preventing them from being on apple's store is a line in their app store policy, eg, they do not allow apps that connect to remote virtual machine sessions. Meaning you cannot install an app that allows you to use another operating system in the cloud like Windows. Its a really odd limitation to me and I have yet to see a good reason against it. From apple's guidelines 4.2.7
Apple seems to think these methods are safe enough to support and have been for a while, they even bought test flight to help distribute beta apps a while back. I'm confident if they're forced to allow it by other means it will remain a decently safe optional thing that some people can elect to do.
There are some legitimate apps that exist that aren't allowed on the app store for no other reason than apple says so. They aren't security threats and they aren't malicious. They are often on the play store, the only thing preventing them from being on apple's store is a line in their app store policy, eg, they do not allow apps that connect to remote virtual machine sessions. Meaning you cannot install an app that allows you to use another operating system in the cloud like Windows. Its a really odd limitation to me and I have yet to see a good reason against it. From apple's guidelines 4.2.7
- (e) Thin clients for cloud-based apps are not appropriate for the App Store.
Way more so than Android, yes.
That was a very underhanded bill. Incredibly nefarious things buried in there having nothing to do with the original bill.
But this isn’t the place to talk about it.