New EU Law Could Force Apple to Allow Other App Stores, Sideloading, and iMessage Interoperability

[Holmes108]

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

This idea that "sideloading" is a negatively charged word and that's why you object to me using it to describe installing software on MacOS from non-store sources, that's a you problem, not a me problem.

Personally, I don't think "sideloading" is a negatively charged word. I honestly find this conversation quite bizarre because you seem to have gotten really offended by me using a word that I didn't even know was offensive. To me, sideloading just means installing software from outside the OS developer's official store, such as an installer downloaded through a web browser.

 

Agreed, definitely no negative connotation to that term. I'd almost understand more if you wanted to argue that something like jailbreaking is a negative word. I still wouldn't necessarily agree (other than potential warranty issues), but that would be a little more understandable. Sideloading is just day to day business to me.

[HenrySalayne]

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Define sideloading:

Wikipedia:

Quote

When referring to Android apps, "sideloading" typically means installing an application package in APK format onto an Android device. Such packages are usually downloaded from websites other than the official app store Google Play. For Android users sideloading of apps is only possible if the user has allowed "Unknown Sources" in their Security Settings.^[1]

 

When referring to iOS apps, "sideloading" means installing an app in IPA format onto an Apple device, usually through the use of a computer program such as Cydia Impactor,^[2] Xcode, on the actual device using a jailbreak method or using a signing service instead of through Apple's App Store. On modern versions of iOS, the sources of the apps must be trusted by both Apple and the user in "profiles and device management" in settings; except when using jailbreak methods of sideloading apps. Sideloading is not allowed by Apple except for internal testing and development of apps using the official SDKs.^[3]

Expand  

If we remove all the specifics regarding the platforms (such as "in Android apps are installed through APK formats"), installing a program downloaded from a developers website on MacOS fits the description perfectly.

Are you serious? This is the very first paragraph on your source without cherry picking:

Quote

Sideloading describes the process of transferring files between two local devices, in particular between a personal computer and a mobile device such as a mobile phone, smartphone, PDA, tablet, portable media player or e-reader.

How does this fit in regard to Mac OS? Not even a little bit? Exactly.

 

You're writing a wall of text just to redefine a word that is not applicable for what you were trying to communicate. Using even more sources with blurry and bad explanations doesn't make it any better.

Historically sideloading was the basic principle to get applications onto Android, iOS and even Symbian. So the term is still in use (mostly incorrectly) to refer to alternative ways of installing applications on these platforms.

I completely understand what you were trying to say. I just pointed out that sideloading doesn't mean what you think. The more people use sideloading incorrectly, the more people will jump the bandwagon. And this will lead to unnecessary confusion, especially if the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article tells you something completely different.

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

No, because no such law needs to exist.

You do not need a Google account to use Android. 

 

"any preinstalled software or app"

 

not even going to bother with the rest of what you said because you clearly did not read or understand the law and are making up things as you go apparently. 

 

There are tons of apps on android that you can not uninstall without rooting, from google, samsung, and weirdly microsoft. also unless you make a google account many phones will not leave that sign in screen upon first boot,  there is no skip button and if there is, its greyed out (varies by phone the principle is always the same however) 

 

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en#new-rules-in-a-nutshell

[wanderingfool2]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

I completely understand what you were trying to say. I just pointed out that sideloading doesn't mean what you think. The more people use sideloading incorrectly, the more people will jump the bandwagon. And this will lead to unnecessary confusion, especially if the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article tells you something completely different.

You do realize it's context sensitive?  Lawlz isn't wrong in the sense that sideloading means installing an app onto a phone, through other means than a store.

 

The word is not being used incorrectly, even google definition sideloading, it shows up as installing an application first.  Words can have multiple meanings, and likely sideloading got it's origins from the fact of transferring a file over.  Words do evolve to have multiple meanings, it's not really that confusing.

 

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

No, because no such law needs to exist.

You do not need a Google account to use Android. 

Actually there are a bunch of apps that are on the phone where you can't uninstall.  With that said, I don't necessarily agree with having a law that says a company must make it removable as I do find that it creates the larger issue with some of the concepts

 

e.g. If Google knew that Android would be allowed to remove all tracking, and remove it's apps would Android itself still exist as the free open source thing it is?  That's the problem really, that if you limit what a gatekeeper can do to make money there is no incentive to offer it free anymore.  Instead they will find ways to charge you, or the manufacturers more.

 

With that said, I do dislike the concept of multiple apps on my phone that I cannot remove...and if I update playstore I get the newest flavor that Google wants to put in...or the phone carriers app that is non-removable.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Are you serious? This is the very first paragraph on your source without cherry picking:

Words can have multiple meanings...

 

 

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

You're writing a wall of text just to redefine a word that is not applicable for what you were trying to communicate. Using even more sources with blurry and bad explanations doesn't make it any better.

 

Historically sideloading was the basic principle to get applications onto Android, iOS and even Symbian. So the term is still in use (mostly incorrectly) to refer to alternative ways of installing applications on these platforms.

So let me get this straight. You agree that the term "sideload" could refer to alternative ways of installing applications, such as downloading and running an installer. But you only think it applies to Android, iOS, Symbian, and some other platforms (I presume you also think the term applies to things like the Nintendo Switch, Xbox, etc).

Basically, your argument is that sideloading means "installing an application from outside the store on any platform except MacOS". Doesn't that sound a bit silly?

 

Also, when you have to essentially say "everyone is using the term incorrectly except me" then you also sound very silly.

 

 

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

And this will lead to unnecessary confusion, especially if the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article tells you something completely different.

Your issue seems to be that you don't read more than one paragraph. You did so with my previous post and now you are doing it with Wikipedia.

If you read the other paragraphs on Wikipedia you'd see that "sideloading" has multiple meanings depending on the context it is used in.

It's not "cherry picking" to read the definition of a word that is most applicable to the situation.

 

If someone talks about a mouse on this forum it is assumed that they are talking about a computer moues, not the animal "mouse". Are you going to go around and laugh and act superior towards those people and say they use the word "mouse" incorrectly because the first definition on Wikipedia says a mouse is "a small rodent".

 

So far the only person who seems to have been confused by my post is you. You are not helping anyone by trying to (incorrectly) "correct" my wording. Especially not since this whole conversation has been completely unnecessary and just distracting from the topic at hand. 

[dalekphalm]

On 11/6/2022 at 10:30 PM, Arika S said:

this reminds me of a scene from the Obi-wan Kenobi show where Darth Vader has been chasing Kenobi half way across the universe, finds the planet he's on, lands his ship right next to him, walks up to him and asks "have you come here to kill me?"

Minor nitpick, but you are misremembering that scene

 

Vader is already on Mustafar (having been sent there by Palpatine to slaughter the Separatist leadership and issue a stand-down order to the droid army).

 

Padme, then, shows up with Kenobi in tow.

 

Strike all of that, missed one crucial word in your post  (show) - I thought you were talking about Revenge of the Sith. My bad.

[Holmes108]

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

 

"any preinstalled software or app"

 

not even going to bother with the rest of what you said because you clearly did not read or understand the law and are making up things as you go apparently. 

 

There are tons of apps on android that you can not uninstall without rooting, from google, samsung, and weirdly microsoft. also unless you make a google account many phones will not leave that sign in screen upon first boot,  there is no skip button and if there is, its greyed out (varies by phone the principle is always the same however) 

 

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en#new-rules-in-a-nutshell

I'm confused, what you were referencing (and Lawlz responded to) was a post about requiring a google account. What does that have to do with unremovable apps (a certainly annoying, but completely unrelated issue.)

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

So let me get this straight. You agree that the term "sideload" could refer to alternative ways of installing applications, such as downloading and running an installer.

No, even by reading through the web you somehow missed the important details of sideloading. Is this a generational thing or didn't you tinker with stuff like 10 to 15 years ago?. In contrast to downloading and uploading, the original meaning of sideloading was to transfer something directly to the mass storage of another device.

If you download a file on Mac OS it is not sideloading, it's downloading (who would have thought). Or do you connect another device up to you Macbook and write the file directly to mass storage (you actually could do that in the past but I think Apple got rid of this function)? If you ever rooted a phone (or jailbreaked it) you should know the process and the differences (yes, I know, at some point there were sometimes applications doing this as well).

[wanderingfool2]

29 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

No, even by reading through the web you somehow missed the important details of sideloading. Is this a generational thing or didn't you tinker with stuff like 10 to 15 years ago?. In contrast to downloading and uploading, the original meaning of sideloading was to transfer something directly to the mass storage of another device.

If you download a file on Mac OS it is not sideloading, it's downloading (who would have thought). Or do you connect another device up to you Macbook and write the file directly to mass storage (you actually could do that in the past but I think Apple got rid of this function)? If you ever rooted a phone (or jailbreaked it) you should know the process and the differences (yes, I know, at some point there were sometimes applications doing this as well).

The way @LAwLz is talking about sideloading is correct.  You are completely misconstruing what Lawlz is saying sideloading is.

 

Sideloading the way Lawlz is talking about it is downloading, and running/installing the program.  You say cherrypicking, but that's exactly what you are doing in regards to the wiki article and cherry picking by eliminating the context that Lawlz is refering to being able to run it not from the first party (ie. Apple)

 

Here is a definition for you, if you type in define sideload

Quote

gerund or present participle: sideloading

    install (software, especially an app) obtained from a third-party source rather than an official retailer.
    "when you sideload an app from the Web, you're installing an unapproved app from an unknown developer"
        copy or transfer (data) from one device to another directly, typically by means of a link such as a USB cable or wireless connection.
        "you'll need to connect your tablet up to your PC and sideload the file"

It doesn't matter what the definition use to be, the fact is that it also has a new meaning as well.  Just like the term hacking has changed overtime.  I don't necessarily agree with all that Lawlz says, but the characterization of what sideloading is is spot on.

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, Holmes108 said:

I'm confused, what you were referencing (and Lawlz responded to) was a post about requiring a google account. What does that have to do with unremovable apps (a certainly annoying, but completely unrelated issue.)

it wasnt really,  read my post, he just picked some stuff he thought would be wrong selectively leaving out any context. i also asked some questions, which are worth discussing,  especially regarding enforcement,  which just like GDPR will probably be lackluster. 

 

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Here is a definition for you, if you type in define sideload

that definition is weirdly wrong btw, unless it's geared towards Apple users (then maybe it applies,  i wouldn't know, i never touched a apple device) on most other operating systems like windows, android, etc "sideloading" works differently...

 

*download* (the connection method is irrelevant) 

 

*click install*

 

*yes*

 

congratulations,  you now have installed a game or other app of your choice (hopefully) 

 

 

obtained from a third-party source rather than an official retailer.

 

what does this even mean, you can download, i mean "sideload" and install  the Huawei app store directly from Huawei on any android phone for example (at least in the EU) how is that not an "official retailer"?

 

retailer of what? free apps?  who decides who is an "official retailer"?

 

i would say very obviously *anyone* can be an official retailer in fact. 

 

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

when you sideload an app from the Web, you're installing an unapproved app from an unknown developer"

unapproved *by who*?

 

How is a developer like Huawei,  Epic or Tencent "unknown "?  Unknown  *to whom*?

 

 

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

you'll need to connect your tablet up to your PC and sideload the file 

on which planet?

 

 

etc.  that "definition" is a joke .

 

ps: btw i apologize if i took anything out of context,  that wasn't my intention,  im only referencing to the "definition" that was posted and the idea that "definitions have changed" they didn't really at least in the last 20+ years at large (definitely not sideloading and hacking) 

 

[wanderingfool2]

10 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

that definition is weirdly wrong btw, unless it's geared towards Apple users (then maybe it applies,  i wouldn't know, i never touched a apple device) on most other operating systems like windows, android, etc "sideloading" works differently...

 

10 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

etc.  that "definition" is a joke .

It's the definition as presented by "define sideloading" with google.  It also closely matches the definition in Wikipedia (the second paragraph).

 

You are arguing about the semantics of the word, yet are too blinded by the tree to see the forest.  It boils down to this.  Did you get the app/program from a third party non verified source? If you installed it with a third party then it's considered sideloading.

[mr moose]

16 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Words can have multiple meanings...

 

 

 

At this point the problem has moved well beyond definitions, as it was explained several times exactly what you meant by "sideloading"  the fact that it's definition keeps coming back means they can't attack your argument so they are trying to change your message instead.

[HenrySalayne]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

At this point the problem has moved well beyond definitions, as it was explained several times exactly what you meant by "sideloading"  the fact that it's definition keeps coming back means they can't attack your argument so they are trying to change your message instead.

You missed the point entirely. It has been pretty clear from the very beginning what  @LAwLz   meant. I merely pointed out that the term "sideloading" is not applicable there.

And I know how this misunderstanding happened. Sideloading (in the original sense) has been out of fashion for some time. And people hear that term being thrown around, don't know what it means and fill it with a new meaning extracted from context. In the early days sideloading was the only process to get apps on mobile devices running Android or iOS. You had to hook up your device to a computer to make it work. That's why it slowly became a term describing any way to get apps on a mobile device without using the default store: repetetive wrong use.

I think it's a far stretch to generalize this to devices which haven't historically used sideloading.

 

But if you think this is a widely accepted consensus, you should update Wikipedia to reflect this. I don't need essays that state your opinion on the matter while it is clearly defined otherwise. On Wikipedia it will be reviewed by the community and they will decide if this forum is just a bubble which use it incorrectly or if I just live in the past.

[Holmes108]

3 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

You missed the point entirely. It has been pretty clear from the very beginning what  @LAwLz   meant. I merely pointed out that the term "sideloading" is not applicable there.

And I know how this misunderstanding happened. Sideloading (in the original sense) has been out of fashion for some time. And people hear that term being thrown around, don't know what it means and fill it with a new meaning extracted from context. In the early days sideloading was the only process to get apps on mobile devices running Android or iOS. You had to hook up your device to a computer to make it work. That's why it slowly became a term describing any way to get apps on a mobile device without using the default store: repetetive wrong use.

I think it's a far stretch to generalize this to devices which haven't historically used sideloading.

 

But if you think this is a widely accepted consensus, you should update Wikipedia to reflect this. I don't need essays that state your opinion on the matter while it is clearly defined otherwise. On Wikipedia it will be reviewed by the community and they will decide if this forum is just a bubble which use it incorrectly or if I just live in the past.

 

Don't think anyone is missing the point, they're just saying some disagree with your strict definition, and/or find the point irrelevant.

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, Holmes108 said:

Don't think anyone is missing the point, they're just saying some disagree with your strict definition, and/or find the point irrelevant.

Obviously we turned completely semantic-fluid and nothing means everything and anything word could just mean anything. Because I could swear this means something else than "irrelevant": "the fact that it's definition keeps coming back means they can't attack your argument so they are trying to change your message instead"

 

[Holmes108]

29 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Obviously we turned completely semantic-fluid and nothing means everything and anything word could just mean anything. Because I could swear this means something else than "irrelevant": "the fact that it's definition keeps coming back means they can't attack your argument so they are trying to change your message instead"

 

That's exactly what that sentence means to me, in a wordier way. I'm not even weighing in on the original argument itself, but continuing to drill down on something that wasn't the main point is pretty much irrelevant, especially when it's been well established that the term is at a bare minimum colloquially correct, as much as that may drive language nerds crazy.

[divito]

Not sure the confusion on "sideloading."

Normal operation would be "loading" or "installing" an app. Thus, "sideloading" is an alternate way of acquiring an app, typically done differently than the intended or primary way (ie. APK vs. app store). Sideloading also typically involves ignoring/disabling/bypassing security features.

 

 

[dalekphalm]

18 minutes ago, divito said:

Not sure the confusion on "sideloading."

Normal operation would be "loading" or "installing" an app. Thus, "sideloading" is an alternate way of acquiring an app, typically done differently than the intended or primary way (ie. APK vs. app store). Sideloading also typically involves ignoring/disabling/bypassing security features.

 

 

Exactly. The other thing about "sideloading" is that, what it actually means is different depending on the OS/platform.

 

For example, Android, sideloading would mean installing an app outside of the Google Play Store (Or whatever the default App store is for non Play Store variants, like the Amazon variants), generally through the process of installing an App Package (APK, etc).

 

Whereas, on Windows, one could argue that installing via an EXE is the primary method. So, perhaps, copying over and using a portable app might be considered sideloading. Or, perhaps, you could argue that Sideloading doesn't apply to Windows. Even though it has an App Store, you don't need to change any settings to install from an EXE.

 

On MacOS, I would argue sideloading definitely applies to the modern versions of MacOS, due to the fact that installing an app outside of the App Store requires you to specifically enable a setting that allows this. Thus, the default experience out of the box for a new Mac is to install from the App Store.

 

@HenrySalayne, please, I beg you to drop this narrow subject about the definition of Sideloading. Definitions change and adapt over time. This is a fact of all languages. In modern 2022 vernacular, "sideloading" means installing an App outside of the "normal" method, which varies depending on platform. You can argue whether the term applies to Windows or Linux, but it definitely applies to iOS and Android, and one can argue strongly it can apply to MacOS as well due to my aforementioned points above.

 

The subject of the definition of sideloading does not need further clarification, IMO. Even if you disagree with these points and you're still going to choose this hill to die on, at least acknowledge that this is the definition other people are using, therefore you should at the very least understand the context in which they are using it in.

[Mark Kaine]

14 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

If you installed it with a third party then it's considered sideloading.

well, yes. that was my point... the stuff this definition adds makes no sense, you don't need a pc (typically)  the connection method is irrelevant... i don't think it's semantics, just sus all that stuff that isn't necessary or mandatory was added (and as implied i think i see the motivation behind adding all that stuff)

[Kisai]

8 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

 

 

@HenrySalayne, please, I beg you to drop this narrow subject about the definition of Sideloading. Definitions change and adapt over time. This is a fact of all languages. In modern 2022 vernacular, "sideloading" means installing an App outside of the "normal" method, which varies depending on platform. You can argue whether the term applies to Windows or Linux, but it definitely applies to iOS and Android, and one can argue strongly it can apply to MacOS as well due to my aforementioned points above.

 

The subject of the definition of sideloading does not need further clarification, IMO. Even if you disagree with these points and you're still going to choose this hill to die on, at least acknowledge that this is the definition other people are using, therefore you should at the very least understand the context in which they are using it in.

Side loading basically only has two definitions:

- If the operating system has a package manager or store, it's any way of installing (or compiling) the software without using it.

- If the operating system does not have a package manager or store, then by definition side-loading is the defacto normal means of installing software. The store or package manager may exist, but it's not something the operating system forces you to use.

 

Windows 8/8.1/RT/10/11, Xbox, Epic and Steam are "different stores" but you also have GOG which doesn't even require you to use their store to install it. So on the Windows platform, sideloading is the defacto norm. Microsoft missed the boat with it, and there has been no uptake for "Windows apps" by anyone that would matter. It's largely been Microsoft's own software.

 

MacOS and Linux, are still defacto sideloading. With MacOS having a store, but you still install most software by downloading a binary and running it. There are third party package managers for installing other OSS software. Linux primarily operates using a package manager, but you can "side load" software not in the package manager by downloading a source tarball and in 99% of cases just "make install" and off you go.

 

Only Mobile platforms really operate in a way that requires defeating or disabling the defacto installed store/package manager in order to install something without it.

 

As for how the EU expects to do anything about it, I don't see any reasonable outcome. Epic basically wants to get their store on the iPhone without paying Apple for any of it. Which, fair enough, but Apple can't engineer a solution for that that still protects the safety of Apple-installed software and Apple-payments. Basically you would be creating a balkanized storage partition, one where Apple software can run, and anything installed by Apple operates as per normal, and another partition where anything not installed by Apple can see each other but not the operating system/apple partition. 

 

It's been past experiences with what "jail broken" devices do that suggests that what won't happen is "Epic being an alternative store" but rather some "homebrew" pirates would just write something to break a hole in the partition scheme, and loot the Apple software, and thus a black market becomes easy to access. That's exactly what happens with every game console, and why emulators for everything exist.

 

Now ideally, what would happen is that Steam or Epic would submit an app to the "App store" that facilitates a secondary store for the device. So instead of a free-for-all sideloading model, it instead bridges the payment system so that when you buy a game on steam or epic, it presents the option to pay with Apple Pay, or pay with Steam/Epic's card on file. Then when a "game/application" is bought on the Epic or Steam store, it gives the Apple store a download ticket to have the device download the sandbox for the game or application, and then when that sandbox is first downloaded, it downloads from epic/steam. This solves both problems

- The sandbox can be inspected by Apple that it doesn't have security holes in it, and what is downloaded by the sandbox is exactly what it is, and how much storage it needs. Basically it would be similar to a "run in persistent sandbox" that can be wiped out if needed without impairing any other app.

- The sandbox can not ask for access to the Apple filesystem, camera, microphone, GPS, or anything else without the user's consent, and the Apple filesystem will always be refused/restricted to cloud storage.

- The sandbox can be updated by Epic/Steam and re-reviewed by Apple without having to re-review the software it installs.

 

That said, I really don't see anyone who really wants side-loading on iOS. The people who largely complain about it are a handful of nerds who hate Android and like the iOS hardware, but don't like ceding control over their device, and Epic games.

 

 

[YamiYukiSenpai]

I honestly believe that Apple should be able to do their own thing since they don't even license out their stuff to other companies.  It's their success, and they control their own platform.

 

If this was Google or Microsoft because of how their business model is, I'd say go for it.  I'd hate for those 2 to become a monopoly or a duopoly through their partners who just essentially just become their extensions instead of being able to do their own thing (i.e. tweaking Windows to be their own thing instead of Microsoft still having crazy amount of control).

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, YamiYukiSenpai said:

I honestly believe that Apple should be able to do their own thing since they don't even license out their stuff to other companies.  It's their success, and they control their own platform.

 

If this was Google or Microsoft because of how their business model is, I'd say go for it.  I'd hate for those 2 to become a monopoly or a duopoly through their partners who just essentially just become their extensions instead of being able to do their own thing (i.e. tweaking Windows to be their own thing instead of Microsoft still having crazy amount of control).

 

You do realize if you allow any entity with power to 100% control, you end up losing not only all choice but all competition?  It does not matter if it is apple or MS or Amazon or alphabet, etc.

 

Also apple is just as powerful as MS or Google on the consumer front,  make no mistake about that.  There is a reason they are the worlds richest company. 

 

[Mark Kaine]

8 hours ago, YamiYukiSenpai said:

If this was Google or Microsoft

this is going through this whole thread people not understanding this law and thinking its a "apple thing" (of course thats mostly the fault of the article) 

this law is much bigger than "apple" and indeed effects google and microsoft as well.

 

maybe read it up? the law has been announced pretty much a year or two ago and has been talked about *since then*. this isn't new, its newsworthy because it just came in effect,  but it isnt some kind of new information. 

 

in short, its about gatekeepers,  and it *is* extremely necessary to regulate those, and in fact this law comes much too late, but still better now than never indeed.

 

Regulation 2022/1925, commonly referred to as the Digital Markets Act is an EU regulation that aims to make the digital economy fairer and more contestable.