>Mandating sideloading would remove consumer choice.
How exactly are you affected by an optional thing that is off by default and hidden away. Apple could force you to watch some videos that explain why this is dangerous and make you read all the warnings.
Some smart developers and designers could design this so grandma is not tricked to install malware, you could even require you take a quiz online.
You also have the Mac OS example, it is not locked down and the viruses and malware are not rampant.
Honest question , can you take 1 minute and consider thins, is there a large monetary incentive for Apple to lock down iOS?
There is a good incentive for them to do it, just like any other business decision they make. There should also be a large monetary incentive for someone to create a more open platform if people really cared about it as much HN does. The problem is most people could care less. I will never hear my mom say she wishes she could download apps that aren’t on the App Store.
My son was playing a new video game. After he finished I asked him about it and he told me that was good but some buttons were inverted and he had to get used to that. He did not know or asked himself if maybe there are options to change the buttons/controls.
Same with your mother, she will not even know or consider the side loading app idea, this will happen only you are hit with things like your application or books are removed from your device, or a popular application is not approved because of political or moral issues.
Other example is ad blocking, my relatives do not ask me randomly , "hey is there something that can block ads?" , I need to notice they are missing an ad blocker, then explain why should install one and install one for them.
Btw my parents don't play video games, so since you decided if parents don't need something then is useless let's get rid of video games.
The incentives for people to trick grandma and anyone else into downloading malware would outweigh any benefit.
Frankly, Google and Facebook would probably be the first to release their own App Store apps and then use their platforms to tell everyone how this was safe.
>he incentives for people to trick grandma and anyone else into downloading malware would outweigh any benefit.
What is your opinion on Apple Pay then? if Apple has such a large user base of user that follow every instructions they read on a webpage and put their password in random inputs then Apple Pay is even more dangerous
So the Apple users would read some instruction from Google to go into a hidden area of the Settings, tap some button 10 times, then lick Apple log 10 times, then enter into an input "I am aware that this is extremely risky and Steve Jobs will hate me" and then enable the different app store and later get infected AND they would complain to Apple "Why did you did not protect me from my stupidity, I did not knew what I was doing" , Really are this iOS users that stupid ? how could they use MacBooks without going monthly to a shop to remove viruses ? Or only iPhone users that don't have laptops are stupid?
You lost the point too, this kind of systems are already used,
do you even know how you enable side loading n Android? or disable secure boot on a PC ? have you seen the warrnings that appear when you allow a webpage access to your webcam ?
Apple has designers that can create a UX that will stop 995 of idiots to enable a dangerous option without knowing what they are doing. You did not responded why is not apple protecting the laptop users from their own stupidity.
Here is the exact problem we are talking about, happening today on Android.
The mechanisms you are talking about have been proven not to work.
As for laptops - they are. It’s not ‘stupidity’ that causes most people not to understand these risks. It is a lack of time to develop the expertise. Many people would like to pay Apple to manage these risks for them. For those who do not, there is Android.
I prefer the risk of some people installing some bad apps then the risk of Trump forcing Apple or Google to brick my device that I own.
You are still avoiding to answer why is Apple not locking down the MacBooks ? I mean is for the users safety, are this users in danger and Apple not caring enough abut them?
The answer is simple, you can make it safe by default and let the user unlock their device(from BIOS or from a setting s) Apple can afford to hire a UX designer to make the warnings clear for average person, can afford a lawyer to put some disclaimers there, can afford some developer to implement this unlocks. The reason they do not do this is not for your safety is for money and when they will be forced to implement it I am sure you will praise them on how a nice job they did when implementing it.
If you prefer to take the risk, then you are free to buy an android phone. For those who don’t, they can choose an iPhone. That is the current situation, and it is good. Taking that choice away by force is not.
You are proposing to have the government start mandating software features, which is absurd given your claim not to want the government controlling your phone.
I already answered your question about your MacBook but you chose to ignore it. The answer is that they are locking down the MacBook to protect users.
As for the ‘hire a UI designer’ argument. That has been proven not to work, but again you are pretending not to see this.
How exactly are you affected by an optional thing that is off by default and hidden away. Apple could force you to watch some videos that explain why this is dangerous and make you read all the warnings.
Some smart developers and designers could design this so grandma is not tricked to install malware, you could even require you take a quiz online.
You also have the Mac OS example, it is not locked down and the viruses and malware are not rampant.
Honest question , can you take 1 minute and consider thins, is there a large monetary incentive for Apple to lock down iOS?