I think jedberg is saying he wants to be able to load whatever software he wants on a device he owns. Is this really controversial? There's no good pro-consumer argument for making it impossible. It's OK to make it technically challenging to prevent malicious software from getting on lay people's devices, but blocking it full-stop? If I own a device I should be able to put whatever I want on it. It's mine. Ownership means something. I'm not licensing my phone's hardware. I own it. I can smash it to pieces if I want, why can't I change the bits inside?
So make iPhones like Pixels. If I want to root the device, make it simple, make it factory wipe the device, and flip a bit that opts me out of software support. (I know Google doesn't do this last one, but I'm not opposed, I know what I'm doing.)
But no. I have to buy a $1200 mini-computer and then accept the arbitrary whims of Apple on what code I can run when.
I don't think it's controversial to say opening up ways to load apps outside of the app store will make it far, far harder for Apple to make any performance, security and stability guarantees about their devices. So if you choose to bypass Apple's ecosystem, you are on your own and can't blame Apple for anything that goes wrong.
I did jailbreaking for a while. It means being on an old OS all the time because it takes time for the jailbreaks. And I shouldn't have to jailbreak to side load apps. There should be an officially supported channel.
> make it far, far harder for Apple to make any performance, security and stability guarantees about their devices.
You mean like my laptop? Somehow they manage to maintain guarantees despite the fact that I can load any software I want.
To be fair, you can sideload apps on to your iPhone, it just that if you are not part of the Apple Developer program you'll need to resign them every seven days.
I am an Apple Developer, but that still requires me to use open source apps, since I have to compile it myself. Also it's a lot of effort.
It would nice if I could just go to a web page, click a link, and say "load this app, I accept the performance/security risks this entails". Like I do with my laptop.
> I don't think it's controversial to say opening up ways to load apps outside of the app store will make it far, far harder for Apple to make any performance, security and stability guarantees about their devices
Why would this necessarily be the case? Apps on iOS are already pretty restricted as to what they can do - they can only access files they create (or have to ask for permission), they have to get permission to use the camera/microphone/etc, they're throttled pretty severly when they're in the background, and they can't modify any parts of the system UI. Even if you did install a malicious app, what would it be able to do?
> So you support apps like this Research one being made available to teens ?
I 110% support that. Freedom is good. Hopefully their parents are involved enough in their lives to have explained the dangers of such things to them. Or perhaps Apple provides a parental control to allow that, but at least it would be possible for the parent to allow.
The argument isn't whether specific parties should produce malicious apps. Obviously any rational person would say no, depending upon what your own definition of malicious is (many have argued that a consenting party being paid $20 per month in exchange for data collected from their device is not malicious).
The argument is whether Apple should be the arbiter of what is considered a proper use case for an app or whether an individual should be. This argument is as old as the hills. Should the government be able to dictate to me what the correct size of a soda at McDonald's is? This is roughly the same argument. Although in Apple's case I think the restrictions have more to do with creating a reputation for consistency and quality.
I can install most any software I want on my PC but because of that you could argue the overall experience on a PC is sub-optimal compared to an iOS device. It's all about what's important to you. Personally I think Apple should be able to enforce whatever restrictions it chooses for its apps and customers are free to pick a different device with fewer restrictions. The developers are the ones who don't have a choice in this because they have to make apps for iOS if they want to get the largest possible user base so they have to abide by Apple's rules. I think the antitrust case for developers against Apple is pretty strong at this point, but I think the argument that I should be able to install what I want because it's my device is pretty weak.
