• OrangeCorvus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Reading the comments from that article is a prime example of how a cult functions.

    In reality this will have a 0,002% impact. Most phone users are tech-illiterate and have no idea how to use their devices. You expect these people to go to a different store? On Android you can have other app stores, why don’t you have? Because Play Store is default and all app developers want to be where most users are, not on a 3-4% user share store.

    It will most likely be background noise in the first months and everyone will go back to the App Store. The only people that will use an alternate store will most likely be the same ones that use F-droid, so 0,002% of the users.

    But hey, it’s better to scream how this whole thing is making their devices less secure, because Apple told them so.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s always about the minority. Just because something fits 99% should not mean this is the only thing in existence, when other ways do not disturb. And one not fulfilled minority there, one not fulfilled there and soon we realise that almost everyone fit in some unfulfilled minority that is not dealed with.

    • TurboLag@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think that’s exactly the problem. The real user benefit will be very small, but in order to enable those changes, functionality will be implemented on everyone’s phones to support sideloading. In my eyes, this increseas the attack surface against iPhones. Time and time again alt stores have been used to distribute fake apps and malware on Android, and the victims are often those users who haven’t asked for sideloading and are unlikely to use it intentionally.

      Yes, maybe this will enable an F-droid equivalent on iPhone and it will be great to have direct access to open-source apps. But is this niche addition worth potentially reducing the security of all iPhones? I’m not convinced.

      • thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        But here’s the thing - side loading, even on android, is an opt-in feature. The user has to actively go out of their way to sideload an app. Even if an app tries to do it behind your back, you must first enable its ability to do so.

        Yes, this doesn’t exist when ADB is involved, but in that case you have to go out of your way to enable USB debugging (and be stupid enough to plug your phone into someone else’s computer). The vast majority of iPhones will never have sideloading enabled by their users. The EU isn’t grabbing their balls and saying that all users must have it enabled by default, otherwise they’d be going after Android too.

        • TurboLag@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Sure, I get that. The issue is that as soon as you introduce the ability to install apps from outside the App Store, it becomes possible to trick unsuspecting users into clicking buttons they don’t understand. By designing a web page to look like an actual Apple page, a malicious party could convince users to “opt in” to outside sources, in a similar way in which phishing websites harvest users’ online banking credentials. Currently, this kind of attack is entirely impossible on iPhone.

          • RedwoodAnarchy@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Doesn’t this argument essentially boil down to “people are stupid and we should take away their freedoms to protect them from themselves”? I’m not going to say that most people would make use of being able to install 3rd party apps, or even that it won’t give malware more chances to get people. But people can get themselves hurt or compromise their electronic security in any number of ways taking away people’s choices until they can’t make bad decisions anymore just doesn’t seem worth it to me

  • cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I have no idea why so many of those commenters are anti consumer rights. Android proves that it’s not a security issue. Why are they so brain broken that they are actively against opening up their walled garden, like it compromise their apple product purchases in some way.

    • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      except it is a security issue for those not tech savvy I had to enable parental controls on some family members phones cause they enabled side loading somehow and managed to royally fuck up their phone

      • Pluckerpluck@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        While not impossible, you have to try fairly hard to fuck up your phone like this. I’d be actively impressed if your story is true (particularly as you used the plural), and if so I’d like to know what they were specifically trying to install that fucked up their phones.

        It’s just statistically more likely they downloaded a malicious app from the Play Store than had any chaos side loading.

        • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The plural is I just do it now cause i don’t wanna have to deal with it again and I don’t trust them but it was a obvious scam they clicked on and guy over a phone talked her through it