[iMore.com]

Apple is rumored to be ready to open the iPhone up, allowing apps to be installed outside the App Store. But developers aren't sure whether they'll benefit from it. Full story from the iMore Blog...

[Wotchered]

I should think that they would be the last people that big advertising were thinking of ! They didn’t spend all that dosh,putting pressure on, for a few developers wellbeing !

[Up_And_Away]

We aren’t hearing from DEVELOPERS, we are hearing media say “developers” (10 pout of 5000?). What “developers” are saying is (fill in media spin). There is no doubt that a lot of developers are very good with the App Store system. No substantial infrastructure is needed and the customer experience will be high. But one thing (fill in media spin) never spins but it 100% true. Smaller developers will become easy pray for copies otherwise that wouldn’t be allowed.
See the Facebook alliance is not worried about and don’t have to worry about copies. As big players they won’t have copies. Their only concern is to find a way to circumvent privacy protections, full stop. There’s many billions out there if they can get at your phone beyond the confines of their own app (get at your gps or contacts list etc).

[Just_Me_D]

We aren’t hearing from DEVELOPERS, we are hearing media say “developers” …..

You took those words straight from my brain…LOL

[Annie_M]

It seems as though the majority of them seem to enjoy stirring the pot!

[Lee_Bo]

I just hope Apple can detect side-loaded apps so when all the “I installed an app and now my phone is bricked and it’s under warranty so I want a new one” issues start happening Apple can deny them. LOL

[Up_And_Away]

I just hope Apple can detect side-loaded apps so when all the “I installed an app and now my phone is bricked and it’s under warranty so I want a new one” issues start happening Apple can deny them. LOL

Interesting question. A product they offer, IPhone, is eventually designed to allow sideloading. Can they simply void a warranty when someone bricks their iPhone due to a sideloading event? I have my doubts but maybe.
Due to how Apple works, if you buy an iPhone you must get an Apple account. That account receives operation & telemetry data from the iPhone. So sideloading is something Apple has the ability to know if it was done. Imho Apple does not need to include this in their privacy campaign. If you sideload then privacy means little to you, so we’ll record that info to your name. Apple can sell the data to Google for some extra revenue .

At the end of the day sideloading will be done by a minuscule of iPhone users (expect hyperventilating YT channels-tech media to be a notable portion of that). Me, hey I’d like to see Apple add sideload iOS mode (SL IOS). If you choose to sideload then normal iOS disables and SL IOS kicks in. Most iPhone users take great comfort in using the best secure sandbox there is with iOS — leave it just as it is for us actual users of iPhone. it’s dirty politics forcing it on us. So Imho put sideloaders in their own (non)sandbox and keep the stench of what can come from it away from the overwhelming mass of today’s iPhone user base. .

[Just_Me_D]

Unless every app developer will forgo the App Store, I don’t think side-loading will be a problem. In addition, I doubt a large portion of Apple’s customers will even care about side-loading.

[Annie_M]

... Most iPhone users take great comfort in using the best secure sandbox there is with iOS — leave it just as it is for us actual users of iPhone. it’s dirty politics forcing it on us. So Imho put sideloaders in their own (non)sandbox and keep the stench of what can come from it away from the overwhelming mass of today’s iPhone user base. .

Yes, yes, and YES!!!

On a silly note, the term "sideloader" reminds me of "sidewinders"

[Ed7789]

If you sideload then privacy means little to you, so we’ll record that info to your name. Apple can sell the data to Google for some extra revenue .

While I agree with most of the sentiment, I doubt very well that Apple will be allowed to drop their warranty or sell our private information as a result of sideloading.

Consumer protection laws govern the warranty, regardless of what Apple wants and they require any piece of equipment works for a reasonable amount of time given the paid price for the intended purpose (i.e. make phone calls), and personal information protection laws govern what they can or cannot do with our personal data (e.g.: sometimes, they can access our personal information for the sole purpose of offering the service, and they are simply banned from selling that information for the purposes of advertisement). And those will not change as a result of this sideloading situation.

[Ledsteplin]

Many users still jailbreak and use Cydia for apps and whatnot. I keep up with that some on Twitter, and haven't seen any mention of issues with Cydia. I don't think there's nefarious app developers like there once was. Most want to make money. And they know scamming people only hurts them. I don't see it happening in the US and Canada anytime soon. But if it does, I wouldn't have any issues with it. I've used a few enterprise apps over the last few years, and had no problems with those. There's a degree of risk anywhere, even in the App Store.

[Up_And_Away]

Yes, yes, and YES!!!

On a silly note, the term "sideloader" reminds me of "sidewinders"

Funny Annie

[Up_And_Away]

While I agree with most of the sentiment, I doubt very well that Apple will be allowed to drop their warranty or sell our private information as a result of sideloading.

Consumer protection laws govern the warranty, regardless of what Apple wants and they require any piece of equipment works for a reasonable amount of time given the paid price for the intended purpose (i.e. make phone calls), and personal information protection laws govern what they can or cannot do with our personal data (e.g.: sometimes, they can access our personal information for the sole purpose of offering the service, and they are simply banned from selling that information for the purposes of advertisement). And those will not change as a result of this sideloading situation.

My previous post may not have well announced that is was tongue in cheek regarding the privacy/selling data comment. .

I also thought the sideloading->limitations of the warranty was pretty unlikely.
However, and understanding there are consumer laws in place, warranties are subject to limitations. There is the obvious under warranty (it is unblemished but it won’t turn on) and obvious not under warranty (there’s a crack down the screen and won’t turn on). These obvious areas converge in a more finite middle gray area that can get slightly murky for consumers. Regardless, I still think if Apple designs iOS to allow sidewinder (in reference to Annie ), the act of using the iPhone in a way it was designed for would be an extremely tough no warranty coverage sell.

Regarding data protection and “simply banned”, I don’t remember the website that heavily breakdown EULAs. But suffice it to say, we will have to agree to disagree on the consumer data protection regulations. Where your data goes is quite gray area, negotiable and is governed much more by the EULA.

[Ed7789]

My previous post may not have well announced that is was tongue in cheek regarding the privacy/selling data comment. .

Agreed… Still, it's an interesting discussion point.

Obviously, not a lawyer or judge, so the usual "this is not legal advice" disclaimer. This is just my reading of the legislation, for the purposes of the discussion

These are bits that apply to my situation, and every region will have their own laws, customs and regulations. And Apple, as a company, has to abide by them when they operate in the given region.

I also thought the sideloading->limitations of the warranty was pretty unlikely.
However, and understanding there are consumer laws in place, warranties are subject to limitations. There is the obvious under warranty (it is unblemished but it won’t turn on) and obvious not under warranty (there’s a crack down the screen and won’t turn on). These obvious areas converge in a more finite middle gray area that can get slightly murky for consumers. Regardless, I still think if Apple designs iOS to allow sidewinder (in reference to Annie ), the act of using the iPhone in a way it was designed for would be an extremely tough no warranty coverage sell.

I actually looked up the Consumer Protection Act for my province. Article 38, 40-43 of chapter P-40.1 of the Civil Code actually does state the reasonable portion: https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/e...s/P-40.1#se:38

I guess that article 44 would allow them to remove from the warranty if side loading is enabled, as long as it is explicitly mentioned in the warranty included with the device at the moment of sale (contract). Obviously, if the phone doesn't turn on because a new battery will not charge after 2 months is a completely different scenario
Ref.: https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/e.../P-40.1?#se:44

The Consumer Protection Office, a government agency, has written a nice summary of the legislation: https://www.opc.gouv.qc.ca/en/consum...al-warranties/

Regarding data protection and “simply banned”, I don’t remember the website that heavily breakdown EULAs. But suffice it to say, we will have to agree to disagree on the consumer data protection regulations. Where your data goes is quite gray area, negotiable and is governed much more by the EULA.

Ref.: Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (See https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/P-8.6.pdf, pages 49 through 53).

Especially, item 4.3.2 basically doesn't allow the extremely convoluted EULA to be used to get my consent on data collection, as it needs to be in a form that I can freely and knowingly consent. Basically, it would require a separate, easily readable form.

Also, my information cannot be used for any other purpose than the ones I consented for (items 4.3.3, and 4.3.1).

Basically, should they want to sell the data off, they would require me to consent to that action. And I don't see how they could justify requiring to sell data to third-parties as a result of allowing side loading.

[BOX]End of quotes[/BOX]

I think that we can both agree that there are many complicated hoops that Apple will need to jump through if they want to make some money off side loading on their devices

[Up_And_Away]

Agreed… Still, it's an interesting discussion point.

Obviously, not a lawyer or judge, so the usual "this is not legal advice" disclaimer. This is just my reading of the legislation, for the purposes of the discussion

These are bits that apply to my situation, and every region will have their own laws, customs and regulations. And Apple, as a company, has to abide by them when they operate in the given region.


I actually looked up the Consumer Protection Act for my province. Article 38, 40-43 of chapter P-40.1 of the Civil Code actually does state the reasonable portion: https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/e...s/P-40.1#se:38

I guess that article 44 would allow them to remove from the warranty if side loading is enabled, as long as it is explicitly mentioned in the warranty included with the device at the moment of sale (contract). Obviously, if the phone doesn't turn on because a new battery will not charge after 2 months is a completely different scenario
Ref.: https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/e.../P-40.1?#se:44

The Consumer Protection Office, a government agency, has written a nice summary of the legislation: https://www.opc.gouv.qc.ca/en/consum...al-warranties/


Ref.: Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (See https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/P-8.6.pdf, pages 49 through 53).

Especially, item 4.3.2 basically doesn't allow the extremely convoluted EULA to be used to get my consent on data collection, as it needs to be in a form that I can freely and knowingly consent. Basically, it would require a separate, easily readable form.

Also, my information cannot be used for any other purpose than the ones I consented for (items 4.3.3, and 4.3.1).

Basically, should they want to sell the data off, they would require me to consent to that action. And I don't see how they could justify requiring to sell data to third-parties as a result of allowing side loading.

[BOX]End of quotes[/BOX]

I think that we can both agree that there are many complicated hoops that Apple will need to jump through if they want to make some money off side loading on their devices

Oh we definitely agree on much of it, certainly the part where Apple would have to jump through multiple hoops to legally finagle a warranty void for sideloading. It’s probably not absolutely impossible but it’d require quite a number of EULA backflips that would almost certainly bring out law firms/class actions that Apple would likely lose.

And I have a bad habit of projecting my American world onto everyone. My apologies for that showing itself again (what?? The whole world isn’t an American reproduction?? …fortunately not).

My one modest disagreement would be data “protection”. I realize there’s regulations in place but imho it’s trying to enforce jaywalking in Manhattan. I’d point you/anyone to just your Google account - the free copy of your data. It’s likely to be over a couple hundred thousand pages and be a retell of quite granular actions that you/we will have forgotten on many many numerous memory layers. I’d also point to the comments by Google/Facebook themselves (formers, accidentally off the cuff) that pretty much indicate the sheer massive size of their server cloud farms (replicated across more farms) and a mega-mega AI program that is multiple times daily taking numerous dozens of data points on several billion individual people, these setups are doing things Google/Facebook are not quite certain of (including what data it even draws in). Consider that, the companies aren’t sure what the giant cloud is definitely doing. Just IMHO, data gathering is far beyond simple regulation in law books and cutting that down is beyond the ken of government. Imho it’s at least semi modestly beyond controllable or at least would take magnitudes more action that realized to rein in (most read that as tinfoil hat stuff, I hope they’re right but I’m fairly sure they’re not).