Is there a better word than "sideloading" for running programs chosen by the user without the manufacturer intermediating? I almost want to call it "running programs", as in "Apple plans to support running programs on its computers" ... but obviously that's not quite accurate.
No, that's quite accurate. Apple is now giving you permission to use the device that you own and paid money for, and before today, you couldn't use something you owned and paid money for.
This will cut revenue. If twitter-class apps move, and if Apple cannot contract enforce the 30% cut on some component of payment. So, I expect some reaction in terms of future earnings from this.
This will weaken the defences of the walled garden, unless Apple mark-sweep the 3rd party stores. If you value a walled garden, and some people do, then the walls got lower. This isn't necessarily good.
I expect to see ringfences go up: Safari and Mail and like apps may well stop doing open file on content from side loaded apps, if they can't prove they are safe. (proof.. whatever that means)
twitter class apps on android can be sideloaded today. What %age of users actually sideload them vs getting them through the play store. i.e. how many of these apps actually provide an apk to install directly.
I sort of get what I think is your point, user behaviour here is probably modelled on what happens in a domain similar to the one under discussion.
But Apple experience has been far more constrained and it's single source with almost no prior of sideloading. They're a different set. I am less sure how any sideload in Android or install alternate marketplaces is informing, maybe it's the best information we have.
This is interesting! Just indifferent about this right now as this could cause store fragmentation, but also gives users the ability to install apps that are not available in their region.
That seems to be the most common fear, but I can't see devs moving their apps off the default app store - that would be a terrible move for sales.
The only apps that are going to be available on third party app stores but not on the official one are going to be apps that would have never been available on iPhone at all in the first place if not for this change.
We already have a real world example of this exact situation with Android, and there's no real store fragmentation there.
How could it cause more store fragmentation? You mean, like giving people options to do things that will likely be hidden behind flags and warnings will cause more apps in the Apple Store or a third-party store? I wouldn't hold my breath for Apple to provide much freedom here. I don't think you'll have to worry about fragmentation either. There aren't any apps stores for Android that have any major exclusives.
This hasn’t happened on Android. What we will get is an alt store for foss apps, an alt one for stuff banned like emulators and sex games, and another one for 3rd world countries filled with cracked versions of paid stuff.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33974265 (678 points/753 comments)